The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About02-17-1987 Planning Packet1 I / PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 17, 1987 7:30 P.M. 1275 BROHN ROAD SOUTH > COUNCIL CHAMBERS COUNCIL REPRESENTATIVE - J. Diann Goetten ATTEMDANCE PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. 7:30 p.m. 11109 James E. McGowan, 3175 Jamestown Road - Preliminary Subdivision 2. Comprehensive Plan i\mendment. No. 2 - Continuation of Public Hearing ACTION ITEMS City of Orono (formerly John McDowell), 3750, 3820, 3830 . 3860 Bayside Road - Rezoning - Continuation of Public Heai ing Zoning Amendment - RS District, Par)cing Lot in Residential District Allowed With Conditional Use Permit Howard Eisinger, 3245 Wayzata Boulevard - Conditional Use Permit - Public Hearing Gregg Perl, 309 Westlake Street - Variances - Public Hearing Thomas Hitch, 1180 Lyman Avenue - Renewal Variance - Public Hearing 8. 11106 R.F. Potas, 2190 Shadywood Road - Variance - Public Hearing W. Lewis & K. Trettel, 475 Linden Avenue - Renewal Variance - Public Hearing Curtis L. Johnson, 2024 Shadywood Road - Variances - Continuation of Public Hearing Variances - Public Hearing #1111 Steve Pauly, 3980 Dahl Road - Var^anc£S - Public Hearing Conditional Use Permit - Public Hearing to be Continued! to March 19, 1987 Planning Commission Meeting ADDITIONAL ITEMS 14. Planning Commission approval of January 20, 1987 Minutes. 15. Planning Commission approval of February 3, 1987 Minutes of the Highway 12 corridor Study/Comprehensive Plan Amendment. 16. Planning Commission to select a repkesentative to attend the March 9, 1987 Council meeting. ADJCHIEmEilT 3.#1080 4,#1102 5.#1103 6.#1104 7.#1105 8.11106 9.#1107 10.#1109 11.#1110 12.#1111 13.#1112 N3 I < Q> ? ? o ^ ^ 0 ^ t p-c. IM PUBLIC ATTENDANCE CITY OF ORONO MEETING DATE PLEASE FILL OUT THE INFORMATION REQUESTED BELOW FOR OUR CITY RECORDS. NAME (please print)ADDRESS NAME OR NUMBER PRESENT FOR (from agenda) 1. / ^ ^ /j^< Pc ^________________ V '' f ' ' 3. P'llc K 5ifo pD 1 ir* ' y/ u '7 7 ‘V* JSy^*'//y> rx 6 • V \ V)' \■ L"iX)r*.T ^Aa M 1 7 rilh\iU /V (LryduuL^t'U .•^ 7 /TO j^/ t<L ^Zaci-^ ________________ 8. UlZ 4 /^(ix P T\^ iuj 7 , / , MhK^ ^ tS ^ • t •* f ^ ♦ / »,1 ,o 1 . ^ 10 . O Cvr' »/ K T'CJ <2 “P 70 1 4=-/< ^ y / , 11. lA? A ^4’ / /,'>>7 X/ '('’/ . -i Ac/4 ijy. , / , f' ) '/ 7'"i^ i}(jf ) /£ll KZi. tjCt Cl - i /JL /!(:'' 1 2 « iUtk 1 lA ^ ^ )Vi QJ i i*A (/ /. x' ^ -- 1 ^/ ticy /UZL.(2 ___ r 14. Z/^/fr/i' /v6 tw _____p/pz) \ .ll ; •/* ' -r / ■ 15. /P ■ 'il}(J? --• ^* f 16 a ^iirt ! 4-?yV>> A/W/. D*. ^ _ _I a- ’ ’ p/'^ M A C f 1 i, a ( r C /'^ it 1 ' - r • 1 V i) A'7ii fioteur mntabN 6>9p/AkGV/^7K r// 19 • ^^JLL lt 4 " . V'V S''^-/ , ..yf _____:^12________ iy ''y J ;20. '/wfs/ ^ H.4L ______*// Vt Jl/------------------ I I » 1 [. PUBLIC ATTENDANCE CITY OF ORONO MEETING DATE 3)/7ln7 PLEASE FILL OUT THE INFORMATION REQUESTED BELOW FOR OUR CITY RECORDS. NAME (please print)ADDRESS NAME OR NUMBER PRESENT FOR (from agenda) 1, ^\^\\'\ Dale -1 /2... y' L 1 ^ n / n ! ■'?7C'0 /?A v <a A/'V -> 3. IilW.pojuJL J/ ,6^1^7t/ s/yv/ff -).‘i' . 6. V f?/^ ^ A' /#VA :>'•>■ V"’ ''tf ' ^ 7. 8. 9. ..................... 10. 11. 12. • 13. 14.• 15. 16. 17, 18. 19. 20. To: From: Date: Orono Planning Commission Members I'.ichael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator February 10, 1987 Subject: #1108 James & Mary Ann McGowan, 3175 Jamestown Road - Preliminary Subdivision - Public Hearing Application: Divide 5.2 acre lot into 2 lots of 2-plus acres each. Zoning District; RR-lB 2-acre unsewered List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Exhibit B - Exhibit C - Exhibit D - Exhibit E - Pertinent Facts: Application Plat Map Property Owners List Survey Survey With Staff Notes I Lot A - 3.19 Acres Lot B - 2.01 Acres (see Item II below) I. (See Exhibit E) A drainageway cuts across the eastern corner of the property. This is a gully draining approximately 10-15 acres of land, and leads to a 30" culvert under Jamestown Road. Staff feels that a 20* wide drainage easement should be taken over this drainageway. II. The drainageway does have the effect of creating a parcel of non contiguous dry-buiIdable land, and makes the proposed lot less than 2 acres contiguous. The proposed dividing line must be relocated to keep 2 contiguous dry acres in the proposed lot. Accomplishing the above will require an even more "contrived" lot arrangement than that proposed. The existing house and septic system were not placed on the lot by the original builder with the intent to do a future subdivision. III. Lot "A" as proposed requires a variance to lot width at the 50* setback line (approximately 108* width proposed, 200* required. IV. Both Lots A and B require a variance for frontage only on a private road. V. Sepr.ic testing has not been submitted as of this writing. Staff notes that test holes were found on Lot B during a site inspection on 2/10/87, but none noted on Lot A for an alternate site. Given the above facts, staff would recommend holding the public hearing, then tabling until the following have been submitted and reviewed by staff: •K r of s of Be Is this non lot ^steni It to Zoning File #1108 February 10, 1987 Page 2 of 2 a) Septic testing for primary and alternate sites for Lot B and alternate sites for Lot A. b) Revised survey showing location of 20' drainage easement centered on the drainageway. rv5g9!€iSn7se;tlrtytte:\o%‘r\^^ envelope for Lot B). d) Applicant must sign the application form ^^ B 50 i on >B on blic ► • ^ J id // c ')rCITY OP ORONO JJ, SUBDIVISION APPLICAT^bji VoRM V-- '\Date Re-'dBy ,_ _V. g - - --Fee Re< d j .Ate f'. i j>' 14 ;i ^ t h' / Y applicant Name * f^AK.j~Al,~r~IM~YlOuOAa'^ Mailing Address Telephone V7<* -/Vz,^ Rd,.;—iH/U S~sS5-c, PROPERTY Name 3•APv^/^ « n aa ^^ - - -- OWNER —H aia } n^(7 0tD Mailing Address (Attach list if more than one) 'elephone V73'3 ood (d) PROPERTY LOCATION Street Address 3115: 3Air«i<»^A Ua/Cc Property Identification Ho. (p.i.d.) .3a-;,g - tt - - - - - - -Complete^Legal^Description to be attached to application existing land use Number of Tax Parcels Development Size Present Use (check) Present Zoning District S Acres Dry Land Acres Wet Land Acres Total, all parcels Residential; no. of units Other (specify) PROPOSAL Division for Tax Purposes - - - Lot Line Rearrangement Only (no new building sites) n/ Subdivision for New Building Sites Number of Building Sites; Proposed Gross Density Minimum Lot Size; Proposed Use; (check) -J_ _Existing Units - \_ _ _ New Unite* - -A Total Units 87,SS5.oo y Units per J2-3 Acres Square Feet Dry Buildable Land Residential Other (specify) (OVER) ii-ilUrtTiRlfi 1^3 =0 MINIMUM MATERIAL NECESSARY FOR COMPLETE PRELIMINARY APPLICATION1. Application Completed2. Preliminary Plat information on Certificate of Survey. 3. Certified Property Owner's list of owners within 350' (this list can be obtained from the Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Government Center 348-3271) 4. Stamped , legal sized envelopes ( #10 ) pre-addressed to each of the names on the above list with no return address. Certification by Zoning Department that Preliminary Plat Application is complete. Zoning Officials Signature _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Date MINIMUM MATERIAL NECESSARY FOR COMPLETE FINAL PLAT APPLICATION 1. Payment of fees (par)c feeSf filing fee» sevrer and water assessments) 2. Signed certificate of survey or mylar copies of formal plat. 3. Title opinion. 4. Easementsr Covenants, etc. 5. Developers Agreement and acceptable form of security. Certification by Zoning Department that Final Plat Application is complete. Zoning Officials Signature _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ Date . ... . .— FEES Sketch Plan Review (Class I, II & III)$150.00 Preliminary Review (Class I & II Subdivisions) $250.00 Preliminary Review (Class III and all non-residential) Final Plat Review (Class III) •(Plus any legal or engineering charges) $300.00 plus 20.00/lot $150.00* Applicant has read the above and hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, City Engineer, City Attorney, Planning Conunission and Council necessary to process this application and further agrees to pay all additional fees established by ordinance. Applicant's Signature Date Dateowner's Signature . Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days ^fore the Planning Cofnraission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are usual y the third Monday of each month. an be ninent on bbe CNJ mJ <S| ON o Z 3 o o Z O >0 K>o q: W Z Z lA Lu uj a ^ > o o o > o ui •«o^ < tr) tr> <<r < < ID in M M Q LD <Z K> Ki X -• -» a Z o m^J »- -J -i z CJ h> LU -i uj in 1 X < < >- 2 1 X I <> Wwmfmmmrni o 'D 3 r> T O o» n 3 o> r* O r> =r «-• 0 c 3* 01 CT 3 '< 3 r* B •- ^ O 3 3 O 3 Q» 3 3 !-► 3 ^ \A O ^ t -3 3 CW 3 3 3 ^ Oi .— r* o* X r*> »-♦ *- ■ ►- 3 l/» O •— r* 3 i/» 3 — IX^ O U1 CLr* Ot 3 3 tti ^ r-» 3 3 3 C O ^ •— C 3 I- CX 3 o. o> Ct • 3 •- n i) O ui 3 3 0,0^ O -H«3 r* i/t r- O 3 9 ^ O 3 r* •— 3 • t X9 V» e 09 « 1 —• :•' %j o - • O o» 3 ^ •— *- O . • • 3 O r- o v> •— -% 3 3 O ^ • 3 3 m v« a — r> o O 3 Oi 3 - - o 3 3 fti •*3 0 a fix 3» n 3 r» • 0 3 3 3 ^(a a la a Wa o •- 3 O V* r>* 3 »-♦ %9 O - WTi A'orM o vt > ri I • fS» I • I JUteatft o•n X r c f^i c, a» 8Bm •* — x» & 03 o o O o C J>l z c cr m o 31 C > -* •< o — X — ^ OJ •? Z X/ m -H O >* o x> 3f ^ 'y» 130 o at o k: j> 3* 4 I ‘ k'* « I .m f-r- i c ^ y v> ON SITE SEWAGE TREATMENT INSPECTION REPORT ORONk Oti the S'oilh Shore of I.akc Mhnn-toiikti POST OFFICE BOX 66 1335 S. Brown Rd. Crystal Bay. MN 55323 4737357 OWNER iv'/t/V ADDRESS 7/7:0,trs7?>v'./ ?D PERMIT NO.'S.DATES .?" rV- 7ff-CONTRACTORS __ City Ordinance No. 210 requires that each on-site sewage treatment lystem In Ofono be inspected on a regular basis. The on*eite sewage treatment system at the above address has been inspected and appears to tail into the category checked below. is JBan e □ 2 (This is JLd^ an existing system D new construction) Meets or exceeds current Cit tandards in all respects relating to design, construction, and location. Appears to be operating □ 3 properly. Does not meet alt current City standards for new construction (1 )78 Code) but in most respects appears to be designed, located, and constructed generally in accordance with previous code.*'. System appears to be functioning properly; no maior upgrading of the system is required at this time. Does not meet current City standards in many respects relating to design, construction, or location. Appears to be operatirsg adequately at this time, but has a relatively high potential for future problems. No major upgrading cf system is required at this time.□^ System may or may not meet current City standards for design, construction or location, but is failing to properly treat and dispose of the current input, and is endangering a water supply, or it a source of pollution to surface or groi;ndwatfrs. or is creating a safety hazard, or is otherwise creating a public nuisance. Please contact the City Inspector to discuss system repair/ replacement procedures. If drainfieid replacement is necessary, soil testing will usually be required, and a design and site plan must be submitted for review. Your contractor must obtain a permit before work is started. SYSTEM CONDITION ( CB Checked items may require your action) Tank inspection indicates: Pumpout not needed at this time. D Solids accumulation in tanks indicates they should be pump ed out this year to help prevent future problems. □ Solids accumulation ir tanks is at a critical level. Tanks should be pumped out as soon as possible. D System is discharging to surface. Tanks must be pumped within 48 hours to eliminate surface discharge. O Inspection risers missing—tanks could not be inspected. Inspection risers (4" dia. pis>e) must be installed in each tank at next pumpout. If tanks have not been pumped out within the last three years, they should be pu nped out now. SITE CHArACTERlSTtCS: Limitin'.! Site Factors □ Slope [j Soil □ Nigh water Ubit n Lot sire □ Lake, wetland, or stream D Drainage G Inspection pipe it located diff W r^t tank baffle. (Does not give accurate measurement of s* . . iccumulation.) If tanks have not been pumped out w ' ^ th. last three years, they should be pumped out now. Drainfieid inspection indicates: O Drainfieid is dry. no surfacing evident. G Some evidence of surfacing, no* critical yel. G Drainfieid is saturated and visibly discharging untreated effluent to the surface. This condition may require replace ment or adoitions to drainfieid. Contact the City Inspector immediately. Repairs must be completed within 90 days. DramfiPid extent and condition unknown. ' O pCtSjtmtJ Ai:LA JCi7 Potential for System Failure (defTcnds on soil types, water table, and system condition) □ Low G Medium G High G System is causing visible surface discharge. Site Capabii.ties for Future Expansion Q Ad‘ quite G Fair G Poor G Ifiadequiti COMMENTS: Date of Inspection J SeptK System Inspector Note In the event that this Inspection report is used to satisfy the requtrer^ents for a mortgage or other trar^sfer of property, be advised that thf| report does not guerentee or certify that en e«istir>g sysiem will continue to function ptosierly. but is merely an opmsoiiof Iheadepsiacy ol the system under current corufitions based on the aveilirtsle tnlofmatiOfi. This report must be kept Ofi the premises with system lpcaticr« and pumping records.. WHITE COPY / Imptcior s F ile GOtO COPY / Hr me owner saet.i \ a N V V 'v ^ X ^\;p V 0 o > cvi hi t \% To Mayor Grabek Orono Council Members Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson From: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator Date:February 13, 1987 Subject: Comprehensive Plan Amendment No. 2 Continuation of Public Hearing Outline for Final Review by the Planning Coc^ission List of Exhibits Exhibit A Exhibit B Exhibit C Exhibit D North Brown Road/Alternatives Pflaum Letter/Exhibits Dated 2/12/87 Cici Letter/Exhibits Dated 1/30/87 Eisinger Letter of 2/10/87 I. Presentation of Final Items For Discussion - Mark E, Bernhardson A. North Brown Road Alternatives - Review Alternatives (Exhibit A) B. Area 4 - Sid Rebers Property - Review Exhibit B, Material Submitted Since February 3, 1987 Meeting C. Area E - Requirement to Extend Municipal Services Review Exhibit C D.Engineer's Report - Concerning existing capacity of Long Lake water system and impact of proposed Orono use at 600 sewer unit level - report to be submitted at your meeting. E. Eisinger - Written request to withdraw request for sewer for consideration with the current Comprehensive Plan Amendment - Exhibit D. F. Further Discussion of Areas 1, 2, 3, and 5. II. Public Comment.'^ III. Planning Commission Comments IV. Planning Conunission Recommendation PROPOSED MOTION: Moved by ___, seconded by ____, to approve the Comprehensive Plan Amendment No. 2 as amended. Ayes Nays ___. .....aai EXHIBIT A TRANSPORTATION CTRCULATIOH NORTH SIDE/HIGHWAY 12 WILLOW - NORTH BROWN PRIORITIES 1. Access to developing properties without direct Highway 12 access. 2. East - West traffic movement north of 12 to limit local traffic's use of 12. 3. Improve safety at North Brown/12 intersection. OTHER ISSUES/OBJECTIVES (MOT PRIORITY ORDER) * * Limitation of existing curb cuts on Highv/ay 12 Reduce safety concerns of North Brown to County 6 Not adversely effect abutting Long Lake businesses Buffer single family residential from frontage road Locate outlet for North Brown at safer location I - =».. ■* ■ • MR** - • I i I r 1 .1 ■ V '1 * • 1 ii r I* r hcxfm K •w*> fiadm' ■‘^3 ^ ft 1 1 - . . t .v1 /. -n i : i i i ! Jk I1 LAW orncES LEONARD. STREET AND DEiNARq A PAnr^FimHio including PWOrKSSlONAL COPPOWATlONS SUITE 1500 , 1 \\ fbizbbt ftiONtY LORBtH* ilONCY •Annoys* HAROLD O niLD J# • ALLCN I SACMS* THOMAS 0 rt'NBtmi* MORRIS M SMCRMAN* GCORGt NCILLV* OAViO N COM* BTIP mCN R RFLAUM* CMARtf S A MAYS* NANCY C DRCMtR* LOWELL J NOTE BOOM* GEORGE r McG^NNiCLE jR fNEDRiC T ROSENBLATT* BYRON C STARNS* STEVEN D Ov RUYTER* JOHN W bell STfRHtN . OAV'OSON* mm STEPHEN R 4.ITMAN* OAVIO C ZALH* COWARD M moeRS^E.OCR* ROBERT LEW’S BARROWS* HUGH M MAYNARD* MICHAEL A NEAICH* MARTHA C BRAND* David ► maynes JAMES V ROTH* ROBERT u OfMAT ANGELA M BOHMANN ROBERT P Thavi S JAMES G B ullard JOSEPH M flNtCY LAWRENCE J riEtO Richard rapson MARA 6 WE>T2 lOO south fifth street MINNEAPOLIS. MINNESOTA 55402 TELEPHONE (6121 337 i500 telecopier (612) 337 1657 OAVIO L LILLEh AjO OAVIO W AILLEY OCOROt B wyeyh LOWELL V STORTE J BRAOrORD GOSS DOUGLAS a ORECNSWAG MICHAEL G TAYLOR w OC^S'NOCR JOHN T CROSS Thomas p Sanders JAMES A BARNUH El'Zaretm m h 'mmq GREGORY C RRC wn BUSAN M mc GOlORiC a ROGER OUNEAACKC VIRGINIA B CONE DAN C l t smith CAT marin E BOSC h CE GEORGE B LEONARD t R7t »»•) ARTHUR L H STREET i e'7 »B-t BENEDICT OE'NAROi <»SSt AMCS 8 DEiNARO^ RRB BBS t i IRENE SCOTT M PATRICIA SCHArrC" O* COv MMb February 12, 1987 WRITER'S DIRECT DIAL NUMBER (612) 337-1546 Mr. Mark Bernhardson City Administrator City of Orono P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Re: City of Orono Comprehensive Plan Amendment to the Communrty Comprehensive Management Plan (Highway ll Corridor Study) Dear Mark: This office represents Rebers Construction, Inc. ("Rebers, Inc."). Schoell & Madson, Inc. ("Schoell & Madson") are serving Rebers, Inc., as consulting engineers and planners. i After the City of Orono Planning Commission meeting on Tuesday, February 3, 1987 ("February 3 Meeting"), you requested that Sid Pebers submit a letter to the City of Orono summarizing the points made by Sid Rebers, myself, and Larry Hanson (of Schoell & Madson) on behalf of Rebers, Inc. at that meeting. This letter is written to respond to your request. At the February 3 Meeting, we made the following points in review of the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment to the Community Comprehensive Plan (Highway 12 Corridor Study) dated January 26, 1987 ("the Corridor Study"). I began the presentation by observing that Rebers, Inc., wished to go on record as being generally supportive of the Corridor Study, both as to the general goals and changes in land use for the entire area and as to the specific changes recommended for so-called Property No. 4, which is a tract of land consisting of approximately 45 acres, all but three acres of which is owned by Rebers, Inc. <4HR I Mr. Mark Bernhardson February 12, 1987 Page two I and Larry Hanson then proceeded to detail the parts of the Corridor Study which directly impacted on the Rebers, Inc., parcel and Rebers, Inc.'s reaction the same.These observations may be summarized as follows: 1. We commented that the proposed land use under the Corridor Study retains B-1 zoning (business/office/commercial) for approximately ten acres of Property No. 4 abutting Highway 12 and RR-IB zoning (rural residential single-family/2 acre minimum lot size) for the 35-odd acre remaining portion of the site. Rebers, Inc., does not object to this zoning with the limited exceptions elaborated below. We suggested that the boundary line between the B-1 and the RR-lB zoning be moved slightly to the north to permit better development of the service road and lots within the commercial area, as is discussed in more detail below. 2. We commented that we were aware the proposed termination of North Brown Road short of Highway 12 would be controversial, but that Rebers, Inc., could live with, and would work with the City for, either of the two alternatives discussed in the Corridor Study, namely: (A) To terminate Brown Road north of Highway 12 and to reroute the same through the Rebers, Inc., parcel to join Highway 12 approximately opposite Brimhall Avenue, or (B) To keep Brown Road open, but build a service road connecting Brown Road to Brimhall. We suggested a third alternative was to run a service road directly from Brown Road to Willow Drive, but not to terminate Brown Road. We suggested that the rerouting of Brown Road (and/or the construction of a service road) be through that portion of the Rebers, Inc., parcel that was zoned B-1. Our logic in so suggesting was that we anticipated a relatively heavy traffic volume on this segment of the road, and wished to insulate the residential area to the north from such traffic. Further, we suggested that the road be routed in such a fashion that commercial lots could be utilized on the north side as well as the south side of such service road or rerouted Brown Road, in order to further insulate the residential area from the traffic. 3. We comn^ented that Rebers, Inc., was prepared to cooperate with the City, should the City desire to connect the proposed Rebers, Inc., residential development on the northern r Mr. Mark Bernhardson February 12, 1987 Page three part of Property No. 4 to the Ringerswood subdivision to the west by an extension called "Pine Ridge.” We commented that we shared the concerns, however, of the residents of Ringerswood that connecting the two subdivision roads would create an additional throughway route, which would adversely impact on the residential character of Ringerswood as well as the proposed Rebers, Inc., subdivision. 4. Rebers, Inc., additionally volunteered to provide an appropriate ponding facility on part of the property zoned B-1, to help control storm water runoff and to help prevent flooding and degradation of water quality. 5. We indicated to the Planning Commission that Rebers, Inc.'s principal concerns with the Corridor Study as the same impacted on Rebers, Inc.'s parcel had to do with the issues of (A) availability of municipal sewer and water service and (B) lot size permitted on the residential portion of Property No. 4. These concerns are enumerated below. (A) Larry Hanson commented that the topography of the site and its soil conditions, in the opinion of his office, required sanitary sewer service to minimize the environmental impact of residential development thereon. He noted that the land in question consists typically of heavy gray clay (as does the surrounding area) which is not conducive to on-site sewage treatment facilities. (B) He noted further that the entire area is subject to periodic high water tables as a result of that clay base. (C) He commented that to construct the private sewer systems on the lots permitted under the existing zoning code would require extensive tree removal, first to construct a primary private sanitary sewer system, for each lot, and secondly to construct an alternative sanitary sewer drain field, should the firnt field fail after ten-plus years. (D) He noted, finally, that the appropriate private sewer system might very well be the so-called "mound system," which had the further drawbacks of being unsightly and subject to the need for constant maintenance and repair. Mr. Mark Bernhardson February 12, 1987 Page four (E) Larry and I commented that Sid Rebers is known throughout the area as a very high quality individual home builder. He does not wish to put his reputation at risk by constructing a subdivision which risks having periodic sewer maintenance problems in future years. He does not want to create dissatisfied customers or residents. (F) In contrast to the private sewer alternative, Larry Hanson and I noted the availability of municipal sewer service, inasmuch as municipal lines (from Long Lake) are currently at the boundary line of the property. These sanitary sewer lines can be extended to the site; there are apparently sewer units available for allocation, both by Orono and by Long Lake, significantly in excess of the number required for this parcel. 6. A parallel but lesser problem is the current Orono requirement for the construction of private wells on each of the residential lots. It is our understanding that municipal water service is available to the site, from Long Lake. Use of municipal water requires far less environmental damage and is far more economical for the indxvidual homeowner. The developer should be permitted to obtain municipal water service from Long Lake and thus preclude the requirement of the construction of individual wells and private water treatment systems. 7, The availability of municipal water and sewev raises a related issue: the 2-acre lot size requirement under Orono's current zoning code makes the installation of such municipal services uneconomic. Larry Hanson stated that he had done a preliminary cost analysis of providing sanitary sewer, water, and streets to a subdivision of 15 2-acre lots as suggested in the guide plan, on a preliminary plat plan of the site. He computed sanitary sewer, water, and street costs at $112.71 per lineal foot. Thitf converted to a total project cost of $361,000 (assuming a -lineal-foot street system), divided by 15 lots, or a cost (or special assessment) of $24,000 per lot. Alternatively, a hypothetical 21-lot layout of mixed lot size (1-acre and 2-acre lots) could be laid out under a preliminary plat he prepared with 2,450 lineal feet, at a cost of $276,140 which, when divided by 21 lots, would produce a lot cost (or special assessment) of $13,150. The numbers just quoted show the significant difference in cost to the developer, which cost has to be passed on to the homeowner, of a pure 2-acre lot density plan. Sid Rebers is 1 ! i ■1 Mr. Mark Bernhardson February 12, 1987 Page five already prepared to assume the significant development costs implicit in the Corridor Study plan as a cost on Property No. 4. However, this particular cost is a very heavy burden to be passed on to homeowners, and forces pricing of the lots and the subdivision to a very high level, which is not necessarily in the best interest either of Orono or of Long Lake. Attached for reference are copies of Figures 30 and 31 to the Corridor Study and a xerox copy of a theoretical subdivision plan incorporating Larry Hanson's suggestions that he presented to the February 3 Meeting. Sid Rebers has asked us to reiterate his willingness to work with the City of Orono on the implementation of the Corridor Study as described, his willingness to subject his property to the roads and other improvements called for by the guide plan, and his willingness to bear his share of assessed costs of the same, all in the manner described in the Corridor Study. He would like to work with the City of Orono to address the issues raised at the February 3 Meeting (and reviewed in this letter) by the Corridor Study, and is eager to move forward with the City toward a prompt resolution of these matters so that he will be able to commence the development of Property No. 4. Sid's goal IS to be able to commence development activity on the residential portion of the site during the fall of 1987. If you desire any further clarification on the matters discussed herein, please do not hesitate to call the undersigned. Very truly yours. LEONARD, STREET AND DEINARD SRP;ma Attachments cc:Sid Rebers Larry Hanson 4 i ^.«(. v« «. -M •*•*•*•*•*• ••V.’ V •V.‘.<— ••vr 5 j Figure 30 i I m 0-- j *-tt t ij j ti •• J^Fh^ 7f •1 » •'• • •• H • • — ^ • . «% . «i 'O 1 ‘ ^ •. ‘.*o • i1 •1 ' * ^ ui i • i • f •• li' 4P • Figure 31 46 B 31 PeePABep_ScUO€LL d- MaqSOJ^, Inc.—SuKvpyoes PcANNPQ^ _MimeroMtra ]60086 005 \ V / / m I.n \ ' / \T \ / le N ' w _______ }^{ \ /! /. \ '/i >: >'-------< y \ a V» __f ' » 2t y/ * ^ ----V \ /''“ . \‘ <s ** i / . ^\ / X. / //lA ' •'1/------//IT uDiTg •~~r-/Ar' // V ft J! •f I / ^'B?i Ai,Wi§ I^=-!i = p '1 11 ill iir; E Jkisui - J \ ^teirApWCTr^.^I' ^ ‘ill ,i"' y 1^ r~-^~..~ - -^ ~ .... ^f- — ^ , r— iiriii SIDNEY REBERS OnONO. MtNNiSQTA yK .•^ORTH .-—-J Uti Imuiil,^ !« I CONC£PT PLAN b I ^ % __ . ^ J 850 West Wayzala Boulevard • Wayzala. Minnesota 55391 "busy "beaver January 30, 1987 ^ City Council Members City of Orono Orobo, Minnesota i©rs(i\'7 sj JANSOBBT f • ) I > ; I RE:Proposed Building POSY BEAVER DAY CARE CENTER Deafr Orono City Council Members: Busy Beaver Day Care Center, a well-known and established community service provider for eight years, offers Long Lake, Orono and Wayzata^ residents a safe and nurturing environment in which parents feel the^r children are safe and secure. Seventy-five percent of the families we serve reside in this area. We have recently purchase a parcel of land on which we plan to build a new facility. This building will be located at 875 Wayzata Boulevard in the City of Orono; the legal description is: That part of the southeast 1/4 of the SE 1/4 of Section 35, Township 118, North Range 23. W of the 5th P.>cipal Meridian described as follows: Beginning at a point on the H line of eaid SE 1/4 of the SE 1/4, 29.7 feet North of the NEly line of the right of way of the Great Northern Railway Company; thence N a.iong the N line of said SE 1/4 of the SE 1/4 to the S line of the right* of way of the Electric Shori. Line Railway Company; thence Ely along the South line of said Electric Short Line Railway Company to the SWly line of State Hwy 12. formerly No. 10; thence SEly along said SWly line of said Highway to a point distant 385 feet measured at right angles from the S line of Section 35; thence Wly parallel with and distant 385 feet measured at right angles from the S line of said Section 35, a distance of 1011.05 feet to the point of beginning. ALSO, all that part of the SW 1/4 of the SE 1/4 of Section 35/118/23 lying S of the SEly right of way line of the Electric Short Line Railway Company and NEly of the NEly right of way line of the Great Northern Railway Company. As you can see, this property is located at the most northeasterly point of Orono. The property borders the Luce Line Trail and the City of Long Lake to the north; Highway 12 or Wayzata Boulevard to the East; the City of Wayzata to the South; and the City of Orono and the Burlington Northern Railway to the West. The site and building plana received approval from the City of Orono on November 10, 1986. We respectfully request approval from the Orono City Council to connect our new Busy Beaver Day Care facility to the Lonj Lake City Water and Sewer system. If we could receive approval to access the Orono City Council January 30, 1987 Page 2 phonograph depicting water and sewer connectrons.photograpn - - - C r^auest and look, forward towe appreciate your consideration of our request hearing favorably from you.hearing lavoiaux^r ^ — Should you require any 3^5245, or*tl"'hnml"(420-2189) . hesitate to call me at work (473 6245) or Sincerely, Ingeborg M. Cici President & Chairperson cc; City of Long Lake enclosures .-r •1 BASE BID Grading Septic tanks & Drainfield Paving 2" Bituminous Domestic Water Well 500 G.P.M. Pump Well ALTERNATE BID Grading Pavina 550 LF. 4" F.M. 80 LF. FM (Jacked) 550 LF. 6" W.M. 80 L.F. 6- W.f/. (Jacked) Grinder Pump Station 2" Bituminous City Sewer Connection Charge City Water Connection Charge Sod Restoration $34,150.00 12.292.00 21.775.00 751.00 6,000.00 65.000.00 TOTAL ESTIMATE: $1 39.968.00 $24,000.00 21,775.00 6,600.00 5.200.00 7.150.00 5.200.00 15,000.00 751.00 3.000.00 2.500.00 •L500.00 TOTAL ESTIM_ATE: $92,676.00 i 4 ^ r I ^ X-.. r I i ' X 1 'll v»# mi LT- V.V T::2-:v •] > * x»,< » • H .,r V;'({'?<51u t-' « T »: V. 1- r ^ 1 Hk -vAV' \«I *' *f>!y ■a#'‘ *■ f,^ :6. ;.K« * irt. /tii t' ^ ‘ • i.V.. '/ f' ' Vi m0m-^^-y% |4i <t '•«*a .«*«- ♦/1.V--:<:5 ^: ; t ) .*:4< ?«■vr;» ^ ' •V iV / i* * 'j * 'v 4Ti *i*s' t < n -*» ';} f >« .vt - \ 7 ‘i7%. ♦ I.st“0 Jijt'i fe.-*• f. y p* *'X ■>'y.^, V- f;./. , i t 'v: - * ■ w- ^■‘■M-;i -■ t , r I».^ * VT» ^ ' 'U‘ H"’' ,»3•'C'V . w4 I • *^* i - -r «-' 7^ » - »-■ »••. ^\i. * \Ai • .V . ^ ^.t.. W-y>4: ' >' <• * i »'. i'l'* •■ m is.t.M S%mmm^ * » » ^ ' .;:r,ir-t!'Xf:.' ■" if ' W$i'^ & ?WE^.# ^r±..VXC-S<‘^!IP fejhfLA'^ ■I i,' r ’ P 'i February 10, 1987 City of Grono p. □. Box 66 Cr y 1 a I Bay, MN K,J 4m •—* '• o whom it. may concern: “ srstt: hookinq up to the sewer trunk line past our property, at February 3, 1987 Highway 12 corridor meeting. Sincorely, Howard F. Eisinger, Br. 324b Waysata Blvd. Long Lake, MN bb356 T^[f©iDWll FFB 12681 To; From: Date: Subject Mayor Grabek Orcno Council Members Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator February 11, 1987 #1080 City of Orono (formerly John McDowell), 3700, 3750, 3780, 3820, 3830 & 3860 Bayside Road - Rezoning - Continuation of Public Hearing Current Zoning - RR-lA Proposed Zoning - LR-IA Approximate Area - 25.01 Acres; ]4.44 Dry; 10.57 Wet Review of Application: At our last meeting the former applicant, John McDowell, was advised that the original rezoning application would have to be modified to include only the areas of the various properties v/ithin 1,000 feet of the shoreline of Lake Minnetonka. In review of the factual findings, the pertinent sections of the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Code, written and oral comments of surrounding residents, the City staff was not able to recommend the rezoning as proposed. The Planning Commission tabled the application providing John with additional time to review his position and evaluate the effects on his future development plans. Since that meeting, staff has met with Mrs. Miner and her agent advising them of the Miner's legal rights regarding the potential sale of the three existing parcels in their present configuration. Mrs. Miner may sell all three without the need for approval from the City as each has an established residence with independent legal descriptions (the three properties were never legally combined). Both agreed that this Miner homestead lot was severly substandard even in consideration of the proposed LR-IA standards. The Miners will be filing a lot line rearrangement application with the intent of increasing the dry burldable envelone fur review at your March meeting. John McDowell has released all interest in the current rezoning application as amended by staff. The application to rezone the areas specified within the enclosed plan is recommended by the City for the Planning Commission's final consideration. Staf£ Recommendation: To recommend that the land within 1,000 feet of the shoreline of Lake Minnetonka involving *:he James Maus property at 3700 Bay^'ide Road, the John Burger property at 3750 Bayside Road, the Hazel Anderson property at 3780 Bayside Road and the Miner properties at 3820, 3830 and 3860 Bayside Road be rezoned from RR-lA, Rural Residential Zoning to LR-IA Lakcshore Residential Zoning, based on the fojlowing findings: Zoning File #1080 February 11, 1987 Page 2 of 2 Section 10.10, Subdivision 3 - Required findings for Rezoning - The proposed rezoning "would be in the best interest for the physical development of the City.” 2. Per Section 10.23, Subdivision 1 - The Intent of the LR-IA District - The current use and development of the properties are consistent with the desired low density residential development and limited agricultural activity. The controls of the district will strengthen the City's ability to protect and preserve an environmentally sensitive area. 3. Per Comprehensive Management Plan 3-18, Environmental Protection Goals - The proposed rezoning will assure that the Environmental Protection Goals of the City are realized. 4. Per Comprehensive Management Plan 3-20 - Policy Statement No. 8 - The proposed rezoning will provide the appropriate regulations to reasonably control building density, land alteration and lakeshore encroachment. 5. ^ The current pattern of development of the subject properties and adjacent properties suggests more the pattern and use of an LR district rather than the five acre rural densities and use patterns of the northwest section. 6. A survey of 112 developed lots within the LR—lA zoning district surrounding the Stubbs Bay area revealed that the six properties considered for rezoning fall within the upper 25 percent, ranging from 1.5 acres to 5 acres. Only 23.6 percent or 27 of the 112 lots surveyed met the required 2 acre standard. 7. The rezoning of the subject properties would not result in an increase in density because of the 2 acre dry contiguous land per building site standards, and since the area is currently not sewered, wetland area credit is not available. 8. If the properties were to receive sewer, based on dry land configuration, location of existing improvements, wetlands credit and the required standards of platting, there would be no increase in density. A PRD is the only mode of development available that may result in an increase of approximately 2 to 3 units. 9. The northern dry land corridor of the properties remains under the RR-IA Rural Zoning requiring a minimum of 5 acres per building site. ^A letter has been sent to all six property owners advising of the City's intent to complete the rezoning as amended. Maps of current and proposed zones and copies of the LR-lA Zoning District have been enclosed with each. Property owners have been encouraged to ask questions of staff and to appear before the Planning Commission on the 17th if they have any concern. t . ''’ > NO.I35) -L f ; 3£? Bnm Ku ■t- V* m/mIT'* m ^/ / i ♦' mQ/ /^/ V :♦ «# I. <M *- i O I**. *■ * • *. •?* r: / }t 'i. "4~.(^o^: r f*lx - ST <".i . ... ■'i^'j_ ^ 10 « S5^ >v *»/'' “ir 1 I*' {» ■ «> <*I'' » . -» > ^ W%11 ,-*• V’lFs-AV'/i ' ra A'i?-// 5 t • • .*5 I . C-.:;/ f- - I <1 O' tn.5^. V<ifl [♦TiTTTTTM' •% Or -■5-I.-V O I* ^ • - .| ... u : ■« -f w yj... >V • % o ^ I ^ v/^ 's ' '-6. /NCt— •• ' , ■ "D S, ' r~ — r* •. - *, I :: • • \ \’o c.'> c 5 »r’ #/ -V^ i'J C / ty,‘ 1^ --!• z/IX:'r:jrx;v.-^;'=--O'•w/ .S' .« _ •.. 4- • ♦ KC»rH ^ ' V 2J< -iH' • .<*- .V «T l*A 3 "'*4'*^* ^ ^ ^RIk t/ »v«! M»«V — ill# -T-^i v)'A / ' 'V itM IfN . 1 I P 0 V — / ?l3 CA (iov ' / ------------------------ M 0» ---------------------------- ^ D n ' .■ f i i f.. •!. 1 .' ■ -. V- »■ j 1 CTt 3 Ii -yP. .f0t ^4 . r V---------/20 Ch Go^ * i._7 ^J/J o D D. s* « » \ ^———' / i‘J^' ^ - N kT - %/ T> fN A- •• . -C-- “’ “ • • I t T ' » ♦ i • . r-K - O'mX t, I”*; *y Vj/ cXi^i 'H' I:. " ' \ ST 1 1 r 7*C ^ ^ \ • rT>* ll5 Cv N0C»4i t .-i f ji|; *' ^ '* r-^ !---------'• ' X V ir . • • '■ '. r • ...............-. •! 4' ■ T"“" • rv- *'" % 3- * 4 I, *S; •^. .- L -i... (6 . # ■ ^ 'S4 !9 - . !S7Sl rl ,1^* -m tQ ’*> /K y jA* y /8 < r?/% « Jl «^ m'-y / . ; »' » ;/r r*w f'*^ ■#f» J \ / ‘ \ I i \i ' A >i ’ '- -/^ V / 1 To:Mayor Grabek Orono Councj1 Members Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator Prom:Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator i Date February 11, 1987 Subject: #1102 Zoning Code Amendment - Second Review Review of Amendment: Council approved the off-sale liquor store use and public service stuctures amendment as approved by the Planning Commission at their February 9, 1987 meeting. Staff has reviewed with the City Attorney the lega? issues raised by Mr. Klint in his letter of January 16, 1987, regarding proposed amendment to the RS District that would change findings of fact recorded against each record lot. The City Attorney has suggested that we delay action on this "housekeeping ” phase of the amendment and schedule a more comprehensive amendment of the RS District that would clarify the intent of the City and specific ambiguous sections of the code. If Mr. Klint's inter pretation of the code is correct, the City would not be able to record any of the new facts reported against record lots - the City is asked to disregard the fact that Deering Island consists of 2.5 acres of area rather th .n 6.5 acres recorded at the time of the amendment. The parking lot amendment has been drafted per your directivet: at our last meeting. Please review and make any changes or additions. Staff would like to schedule the amendment for Council action at their March 9, 1987 meeting. rI k; y '« i L_t Parking Lot - Parking area for the exlcujive use of the daytime customer parking of an adjacent authorized use. The properties shall not be divided by a public right-of-way and shall be legally combined under single ownership. The parking lot must have direct access to a public road. A 10 feet wide buffer of natural screening, preferably evergreens, shall be planted along all sides of the parking area adjacent to residential used or ) zoned properties. A fence, not to exceed 3 h feet in height. shall be installed around the entire parking area just to the inside of the landscape buffer with a device/barrier to control access when lot is closed to public during non-daytime hours. The lot shall be used solely for the parking of passenger vehicles (having a capacity of not more than nine persons per vehicle). Trucks, boats, trailers, and other motorized or non- motorized vehicles shall not be parked or stored in the lot. Overnight parking is not allowed. Design standards for the parking area shall be determined by the principal use served except that signage shall not exceed a 3 feet height. 4 Douglas E. Klint, P.A. ATTORNEY AT LAW January 16, 1907 SUITE 231 1421 EAST WAYZATA OCULEVARD WAYZATA, MINNESOTA SSJDI TELEPHONE IS 121 473-1943 TWX: 910-S76-3438 City of Orono Attn: City Council F'l arming Commission P.G. Bok 66 Crystal Eiay, Minnesota 55323 Res Deering Island Dear Sir/Madam, I represent Paul Scherber who owns Deering Island and I understand that the City of Orono is considering an amendment to its Zoning Ordinance which would change the record lot classification for Deering Island from that of a conforming record lot to that of a nonconforming lot of less than 5 acres. When Mr. Schcerher purchased this Island he was adviseo that the Island was a conforming record lot of 6.5 acres and he relied on this record lot classification in making his purchase. Any reclassification of this lot to that of a substandard nonconforming lot would deprive Mr. Scherber of a valuable property right which was conferred by this Ordinance without compensation in violation of the Constitution. Moreover, the City is estopped by its own Ordinance from making any changes in record lot classifications e);cept for Council approved subdivisions or combination of two or more record lots. Section 10.31, subdivision 6, A, 3, provides in part as follows: "The Record Lot Inventory shall be considered accurate and final for all properties except those found on appeal to have a demonstrable cause for change or adjustment." The appeal referred to is the right of each property owner to appeal a record lot classification within 6 months of the effective date of tlie Ordinance. Since there was no appeal, the record lot classification for Deering Island is "accurate and final" and the City does not now have the authority to change this classification, especially where valuable property rigfits are involved. For the above rea«"cns wo respectfully request that there be no change in ttie record lot classification for Deering Island. If the Citv does change the record lot classification, Mr. Scherber intends to commence litigation tor injunctive relief and damages. our r.V«.*r , . . __ _ __ D5Mg?^,AU L. Attorney at Law To: From: Date: Mayor Grabek Orono Council Members Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator February 12, 1987 Subject: #1103 Howard Eisinger, 3245 Wayzata Boulevard Conditional Use Permit - Public Hearing Zoning District - RR-IB Pertinent Section of the Code: Section 10.03f Subdivision 19, 20 - Conditional Use Permit for fill and grading in excess of 100 cubic yards. Sectxon 10.09 - Conditional Use Permit Procedure. Section 10.55, Subdivision 5 (B) - 26 feet setback from designated wetlands. Area to be filled 12.15 acres Amount of Pill = 80,000 to 100,000 cubic yards or 10,000 dump truck loads. List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Application Exhibit B - Plat Map Exhibit C “ Property Owners List Exhibit D - Acknowledgement Forms Exhibit E - Park Construction Company Letter Exhibit F - U.S.G.S. Map Exhibit G - Survey/Topographic Exhibit H - Cross Section A Exhibit I - Cross Section B Exhibit J - Hydrogeologic Study Exhibit K - List of Reviewal Agencies Exhibit L - Engineer's Report Bistcry of Property: Mr. Eisinger purchased the property in 1955 and in 1958 through 1970 operated a sanitary landfill (received garbage and refuse). The applicant obtained an annual license from the City each year of operation. In 1974, the applicant applied for a demolition land fill license frcm the City but was denied. Zoning File #1103 February 12, 1987 Page 2 of 3 Staff asked if the applicant has any idea how much fill exists today over the dump and he estimated anywhere from 6 to 8 inches to approximately 2 feet of fill. After a day of dumping it was Eisinger's practice to place 6 to 8 inches Ox clean fill over the new dump area. The weather is fine for a site inspection - park to the west of the Eisinger house at the old access to the dump site. Access to the dump site begins at the drive. Review of Application: Mr. Eisinger plans to fill the 12 acre former dump site with approximately 100,000 cubic yards of fill obtained from the 1-394 upgrading. The contractor has submitted a letter (Exhibit E), advising of their willingness to assist the City in the review of this permit. The fill will be placed 26+ feet from the surrounding wetlands. The engineer has preliminarily discussed The use of an erosion control barrier installed at the 26 feet setback line a minimum 5-10 feet wide zone. Review Exhibits G, H, & I, fill will be placed up to the 990 elevation (same elevation as Highway 12). Fill placements will range from 8' to 4' depths. Debris and building materials must be removed from site prior to filling. As the contractor's letter states, filling period will extend through the winter of 1987-88. In 1974, with the application for a demolition landfill (dump for building materials, etc.), Eisinger submitted a hydrogeologic study, soil borings, surveys, topographic survey, etc. This material has been submitted to the City Engineer's office for review. Per the engineer's preliminary report. Exhibit L, Lynch advises that five agencies must review the proposal prior to City action. That list has been enclosed for your information (Exhibit K). Staff has asked Mr. Eisinger what is his intent or proposed use of the fill area after completion outside of the obvious financial gain. The applicant's response was that he would like to either use it for agricultural purposes or possibly a "driving range". Staff explained that the area would not be adaptable to rural residential development nor the roads associated with such development. Unfortunately, the engineer's preliminary report has not referenced the materials submitted by the applicant. As a lay person in such matters, staff will expect specific directives from the engineering staff once the various reviewing agencies have completed their review. ! Zoning File #1103 February 12, 1987 Page 3 of 3 Staff has enclosed the hydrogeologic study. Exhibit J, for your review. Although the report was coimnissioned by the applicant for a proposed demolition dump use, much of the study and reporting on existing conditions is excellent background for this application although conducted some 14 years age Note the 1974 application would call for dumping in the surrounding wet land area. Staff has enclosed a portion of a U.S.G.S. map that designated the original dump site as a wetland area. Our current wetland maps do not. The Planning Commission will table all action on this application until all agencies have had their opportunity to review the proposal. Our task for this meeting will be to listen to the comments of the neighbors and affected landowners, to define the scope of the application and to answer any questions of the public or applicant. Issues to be resolved: 1. Impact of fill proposed on drainage retention and downstream drainage to Stubbs Bay? 2. Will the fill have a negative impact on the existing ecology or intensify seepage? 3. What special design features should be considered in the review of a final grading plan? berming, ditching, slope ratios? 4. Hov do we coordinate a fill project that will last a year and a half? a) b) c) d) Inspection schedule - staff - engineer Staged fill areas - need to stablize ground cover Erosion control Testing - soil borings 5. Need to discuss execution of a developer's agreement and letter of credit to assure completion of grading and seeding. 6. Planning Commission comments. J it rrr\^ r»L > i •it • nrf>*^:r^%'i 4’\iy>.. - V' J5-, CITY-OP'6ROMb •/,t‘ // \s/( rt\- GENERAL LAND USE APPLICATION PROPERTY LOCATION Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) -/! ^ CCC / Please check one - Is the property ^ abstract or (for Conditional Use Applications only) torrens? Please attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. APPLICANT Name aIKD f,0l*>i/Y R Phone Mailing Address . \y A TA /3 OWNER Name ^ j, //> r? £. > > /n C rT Phone 1 ?X Mailing Address ^ 2 \a, v t a /? ^ tT ^-/•/VcT- *■ r\r(f^ A/\N Date Property Acquired __SP_PT (month/year) I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. PEES - CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS $100.00 a) Residential accessory Use $150.00 b) Institutional (church, school, etc.) $150.00 c) Duplex Credit/Bldg _ _ _ $250.00 d) Commercic1/Industrial Use $200.00 f) Land Alteration Grading and filling - lol cu. yd. or more Seawall, retaining walls within 75' of lakeshore PRD/PID - see fee schedule OTHER APPLICATIONS _ _ _ _ $150.00 Commercial Site Plan Review (+ consultant fees) $250,00 Vacation $150,00 Easement Vacation $ 50.00 Easement Vacation With Subdivision - j i OTHER APPLICATIONS - CONT. _ _ _ _ $250.00 R^zoning $200.00 Appeals Other - see fee schedule PRESENT USE OF PROPERTY Present Zoning District Present Us'' of Property /OC Residential Other (specify)__ DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Describe request in detail: REQUIRED SUBMITTALS 1. Completed Application Form 2. 3. Certified Property Owners List of owners within 350* (you can obtain , this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Government | Cernter 348-3271) | I stamped, legal sized envelopes (#10) pre-addressed to each of the names | on the above list with no return address. 4. Certificate of survey. 5. Construction plan, if applicable 6. Plat Map. The aoolicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your application is not complete if the above informatron has not been included. __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ "f'a'^Itant°”hfrfbv agrees to provide all information required or requeJ^t^ed by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay all iees and/or unusual expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. Applicant's signature ' \OWNERS SIGNATURE Date The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this applicati^on and further authorized reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, agents, commission members, and Council members p P investigation and verification of this request. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 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. Owner's signature tain nent antes ise has or /or hat her :her nts, of the the o it) K> in M CL HiID<a g UJ CL CUJ H* o <o : O O o o s CQ m CM I CO mK» in in >- 1 I CM K> N O in CL UJ “ 2C UJ -ir D •J u. £ z U M CL CO £< H < N UJ >• iC < < 3 -J O O K ID o 2in o gg o -J CDCM •-« < K K> < CM K{ I >- CO < ^ 3 ft O o o H H SB H- ZUJu ICMro o CD cO to K) O r r < < M Mft I—I w ^-J -J z £ z <r CLOz N. JO<r in in M M f« (0 3 3 0-1 in CL X z in z o o o O<o CL < H K> <t CM N I >- CO < 3 -I < HUJ < CD O inro in in in in <c < sBa o < KS2g fi UJ UJ ICMro o CM CM CO ro ^ o h- J- CL CL UJ UJto n o o CL CL U UJ O ^ —I -J ° o in z o o <r -i ro Ul ft ft Z O o L.J ^ IX U o Z Ul < ^ N. X tf 1 ft < ID n iij o T"LJ H CD U. MJ U. JL. O Z X -c f f-f—<,fler^*lif O -J CD 2 < K«IS CM Nl I >- CO < ^ 3 -J < UJ aLJo inro in in CLUJ & M inM UJ CM ro in *TCM (0 ro ro o M u. to M o ID X < Ul 3o X X to Z ID CM to H- O CL -i ^ ao CL o o >• _ < ro CD ro CM I CO to CD -I -I Ul Ul CD CD Ul ID M M CL ft M> inro in in ft in a ft I CMro o <r CO o ro o O U M M CL CL ID Ulo oUl ID CL ft U. U. ^ £ c^ ^ ID Xo CD o CL ^ ro o o o o ft >-<a < h*ID ro CM I CO to COeH* (O a CL o o ft CL X X *o in ro Q in ft in < < .D -J < CD fi -i -I ICM ro o <0 O' CO o ro o CL ft ID Ul H r- -j —I < < 3 3 CO CD §r- to UJ3 o CO 'J' <0'»o ur CL X o < o z < a UJ o z n: Sc a o ftID CLoo < NlUz<< z I- ♦••I Ji o o o o DC O >• in < ro CO in in ro CMI CO in cn CD CD <r-to 2 gg in 10 ftu CMro < Z o o o <0ro D Z < >- CL -I in CO omJ rj o O o > o —I CD r-» < Hro CM N I >- CO < ^ 3 -I <►— ID CLID ID MJinro in in Z CD CLUl i? ICM ro in CMcp ro ro o inM Ul CL < u. 3 O X X in o <T ZCM o to —I ID CL CL r a D < ft CD U Z Ul < < >- CL < UJ •L UJ r. z ft o r- /V >t\ f' VI %-J % ooo ro oo u CD -I or- ooo CO ft oo CMro or-<r- 5“in op Ul2 z < M ro ft ID 0. LDin < z CJ ID -JM r- £1 H < “) < Ul <CO < X o iNl Ul f<3 in o z u. >- iC 2 -1 r- < <1 Z O X O 3 J ro < a o inro inin £ o *n < X CO ro ro o fta or^M OID inr-u <u. Z O M Ci -J O >- UJ U. H CD Z Z M b Qo z U. U < Z M o O CL CO X M Ul ID P H Z -J < Z 3 >- H Ul O U Z X Z M ID ^ r- in ft ID Ul CL O IL Ul M CL r- <o K< •M U. O u. o ft D O < ^£3 ft O ftCL IDz CL ID >- ft < UJ CL o r- fto sUJ Z< Z r c.c ( /' rH:. 4 V -i.; V t -. t A •Vi . > •*c„. ’ V - J /-.vi ;.i Vl. v) •«k. ^ Adjacent Property Owners* Acknowleugement Form I (we) have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement ^or proposed use of the property located at •:• ‘i ' ■>'-j I also referred to as Land Use Application No. _____. I (v/e) understand that in executing this acknowledgement, I (we) am (are) not asked to declare approval or disapproval of the i , property or use but merely to confirm for the City Council that I (we) am (are) aware of the improvement plans and that the pro posed neighbor's project or use requires City Council approval. ty Owner X Property Owner Date If you have any information that may assist the City in the review of this Land Use Application, please submit your comments to the Building & Zoning Office at least 10 days prior to the scheduled meeting date. P J r-i r) P Adjacent Property Owners' Acknowledgement Form I (we) have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement also referred to as Land Use Application No. - - -• I ,„e) understand that in executing this acknowledgement, I „ ... ... .....V .o «"<»'■ «• ““ .. c........ .<». »*•"• •”*' “• 7° Date Property Owner Date Property Owner If you have any information tliat may assist the ^Crty^^^^^ review o’i this I<and Use Application, ^^^3 ^,ior to the to the Building 6 Zoning Office scheduled meeting date. f A ■ COMMERCIAL. AND INDUSTRIAL EXCAVATING ■ ROAD BUILDING ■ PILE DRIVING ■ SEWER. WATER installation established 1916 CONSTRUCTION CO. • „,.«a.Pous,...nhso .. ■ bridges ■ GOLF COURSES ■ SUB DIVISION AND land development ■ EQUIPMENT RENTAL ■ ENGINEERING AND DESIGN January 14t 1987 Mrs* Jeanne Mabusth "BiKd!n.°rzonin. Administration ci^^tarsty. Minnesota 55323 I Tr , r' p : •" r- : .I'.' W.'r: *“ s JAN I 6|987 i » Dear Mrs* Mabusth, This letter is to provide in^r^tion^that^the^City of^Orono Sstnger property located in Orono. Minnesota. that we are doing for Mn/Dot* park's tentative schedule is to ^egin Placxng ^p““d.°"The ;r «;£ss‘;s s-:.:'.-";™;*- ■ with the excavation operation*WXXn viic -- - - - - - - * ^ r\ n Af P..k construction «i^i,P;rs"iSitir'or°th^ swl^ping of°?h4 streets required, and assume responsxox y etc. If you need further information please contact me at 544-6440. Sincerely, PARK CQNSTRUOriON John Gannon, P*E Project Manager JG;gp equal OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER ■i if i. ^.4 • . I. *• , .*• *. ■ »■ •* * * • ‘'i * < *. • * ••>r* ' ■’•-/• - f. viv^ •'; ..* * • • .•» * • ■ ••• .^\' -• •,;•..*«* •I *1;. • H.* • . .* •I * • * . **• N, f .• • t .• • •■ . •■ V i-- . » •• J ♦ ^ » ?• * . 1 . - .* . ^ i . ,^ f ■♦ - t* •• • • \ .i •. J. .1 \ I > l:- • * # • •* 1 '.V •.- •/’fw.. r.‘ < {. ■ •*• ‘ } • *. • •^ • * • • . t . • • 1 • • ) . . .* H ♦ ••.. • * •' ♦:f o 8 o 0n) EEI #■- O <r V » • r 3 0^ » .i ii) V; t J* 1 . •. .T * •. .• r . ; •* • ^ , V • . V* » I » • » j . . ! yLvu I * *< « t» • f * A.* * • / w *) < <■: C f- Uu \n •» V ♦ f * 4. • • '1 » I ' ,l I i < I “7 o *. -I I m , -ZJ ^ •t .f*- f ^ ^ ^ - - _ f* t Report to Mr. Howard Eisinger HYDROGEOLOGIC STUDY OF THE EISINGER LANDFILL F% P i?!-’^*r Gerald M. Sunde Consulting Engineer Bloomington, Minnesota May 1973 r ^ m rfliifMlHifi I'lii I Ml'C'; >4t ■ • ' -• > x,T;'. ^ V 1 •. >'/ , > ' >I hydrogeologic study of the eisinger landfill INTRODUCTION In April of 1973, Mr. Howard Eisinger of Orono, Minnesota, retained our services to perform a hydrogeologlc analysis for his proposed demo lition landfill. The site is located approximately li miles west of Long Lake in the SWi of the NEi of Section 32. T 118N, R 23W. Over the past sixteen years, demolition debris and solid wastes have been placed In the site. The site was closed in 1970,by the owner. This study includes an analysis of soils adjacent to and beneath the site, ground and surface water conditions, and the probable effect of additional demolition fill placement on ground and surface waters. GEOLOGY AND TOPOGRAPHY The project is located in a rolling hilly area north of Stubbs Bay on Lake Minnetonka. This is a moraine area formed during the latest glacial advance which in this location was the Des Moines lobe of the Wisconsin glacial period. The area is poorly drained with many depres sions containing swamps, marshes, and lakes. The fill site is located in one of these marshy areas. Figure 1 shows the location of the site. Bedrock beneath the site should exist at approximately elevation 760 (about 210 feet below the marsh level at the site). Information from Schwartz^ indicates that the uppermost bedrock layer should be the Jordan Sandstone Formation. Soils information was available from several sources. On April 26, 1973. three soil borings were taken at locations shown in Figure 2. Logs of the borings are shown in the appendix to this report. The borings indicate that peat and muck varying in depths up to 35 feet exists beneath the proposed landfill site. Underlying the peat and muck are silty loam to clay soils, gray in color, and most likely glacial till similar to that seen in nearby surface exposures. Seventeen rod soundings taken in the east marsh on the Eisinger property indicated that, except near the adjacent upland areas, peat and muck depths are over 18 feet. The Soil Conservation Service indicates that the typical upland soils adjacent to the Eisinger marsh are glacially derived loams and clay ! mm FIGURE I DRAINAGE AREAS EISINGER DEMOLITION LANDFILL Scole: r’s2000* - 2 -G. M. SUNDE CONSULTING ENGINEER i;::x;:x:::::;:x:x:x:::;::x:::::;:i:::::::;:::x::;x »iirt:-x::??x:::x;x'x::wmm 'vx:v:v:x:: V::x-x:x::k::;:x:x:x • • • « • V \ my^. 17, ' 'V %■■ i-/ ^ -L :. ^ ttlmmm •t't 'mS; 'iSSiSS ' •Is are visible near Highway 12 just northloams. Exposures of these soxls are vxsx of the proposed landfill sxte. gravels The presence of datively free seepage path for land- beneath the £1U couH provtde^a^ ^ nil leachatea away Item la o£ such extremely permea y ^^e as follows. Topographic maps s ow gislnger property is a P-;;-;- -:;reing up to 33 feet in depth southward about H P „,<tion of the morainic soils, indicate that l^ediately fol^rng^ ep the lake bottom was .trough a ridge which serves let for the large mars o control takes the form as the water level ""i^h has degraded to its present of an eroded channel g „„at been level of approximately 965^ ^ or below 965 during postg ac . streams should be swamp. Therefore no granular ep draining seepage ptesent beneath the site and the potentral for paths is remote. ». ..-nu ... ■- *• ■•Tbe drainage areas affect Area A is the A and B comprise the take Classen south limits of the Ian ^ ^ ^^.,„cary to take Creek drainage area. Areas fl, Minnetonka's Stubbs Bay. including the construction Filling of marsh areas for P 1 Afn\ will have an effect on tne ofa demolition la pcocesses are changed: surface water runo . rainfall 1. the filled area thus will infiltrate into the sol ^ reducing the total volume of runo snowmelt (Mote: this will not necessari y nr if the filled area is paved). rain will fall on water areas and will go - 4 • i.••.A P J . • 2.Rates of runoff from an area will be dependent on the vol ume of storage available in lakes, ponds, or other natural depressions. Reduction of this available volume will generally cause an increase in water elevations in the stor age areas and in runoff rates. The hydrologic analysis considered the effect on marsh water level fluctuations and runoff rates when the proposed landfill is constructed. The 100 year storm event was considered as the design case. Two marsh areas would be influenced by the proposed demolition landfill. The east marsh is located to the east of the present landfill and includes the area to be filled by the proposed demolition landfill. This 29 acre marsh receives runoff from a drainage area of approximately 90 acres. The limits of the drainage area are generally Highway 12 on the north, the Burlington Northern Railroad tracks on the south, and Old Crystal Bay Road on the east. The marsh outlet is an open ditch along the south limits of the Eisinger property leading to Lake Classen Creek. With the fill constructed, the marsh will be reduced in area to 18 acres. Ultimate development of the drainage area was assumed as R-lC residential (minimum lot size of one acre). Our analysis indicated that the landfill construction would increase the east marsh levels by less than 0.3 feet for the 100 year storm event. Also, discharges through the open ditch would increase on the order of 1 cubic foot per second (cfs). The second drainage area is that included in the total area incident to the railroad culvert for Lake Classen Creek (shown in Figure 1 as Area A). This area includes 462 total acres of which 156 acres are lake or marsh. The drainage area includes residentially zoned (R-lC) areas and. also Orono High School. Our analysis predicted that the filling proposed at the landfill will cause an increase in lake and marsh levels during a 100 year storm event of less than 0.05 feet. The discharge at the railroad culvert should be increased less than 1 cubic foot per second. The proposed landfill will have an almost negligible hydrologic effect on the remaining marshes and on the ’.00 year flood flows in Lake Classen Creek. This is because of the large area of marsh in the drain age area in comparison to total area. The actual percentage of marsh 4 - 5 - '*>3PM r ?^jr ^ : *■ - filled based on the total marsh area included in Area A is seven (7) percent. GROUNDWATER ANALYSIS Groundwater levels in the landfill area are reflected by the presence of surface water in the adjacent lakes, ponds, and marshes. The topographic maps show that the landfill will be an extension southward of a small relatively high area along Highway 12 which is actually an island surrounded by water at or near the ground surface. 3 Seepage from this ''island'* will be both downward and laterally. Hickok indicates that this is a recharge area for the Jordan Sandstone formation, the uppermost bedrock formation. Therefore groundwater will move down ward to the deeper layers. Lateral seepage from the "island" including the proposed landfill will occur if infiltration at the surface exceeds the deep seepage rate. Because the depth of glacial tills should be considerable and the materials have low permeabilities, the downward seepage rate will be low and there should be some lateral seepage to the adjacent marsh areas. It is unlikely that seepage from the landfill will reach any areas north of U. S. Highway 12. Closer seepage outlets are available in the adjacent marsh areas. Because the present and proposed landfill area is underlain by up to 35 feet of organic soils, it would seem that free seepage paths would be available through the poorly consolidated materials. This is not the case. Peat and muc’x when surcharged will consolidate. We calculated that the organic soils will settle as much as 10 to 15 feet when the proposed fill is constructed. Figure 3 shows a section through the' landfill and indicates the probable settlements. This settlement will result in a decrease in the permeability of the organic soils. MacFarlane^ indicates that peat consolidated under fills similar to the proposed landfill will have permeabilities similar to clays. In summary, the groundwater movement at the site should be both downward to the bedrock aquifers and laterally to the marshes south of Highway 12. Infiltration rates will be low due to the heavy soils used for cover and the grading of the site (see Wm. K. McKie s site plans). However some lateral seepage will likely result. - 6 - oo w 01 JCo < j ^ 1 GO -J rO ^ Eo ii. %•- U1 Z i2 oo ♦- 0) Q>U. 2 H u. o iLi 1 <x><r> < ‘ ' W\TER QUALITY The reason for separating demolition and construction wastes from normal sanitary landfill materials is that the pollution potential of the former is much less. Normally a demolition landfill would receive the following materials: Concrete and bituminous road materials Building demolition debris - wood, bricks, concrete, etc. Trees Waste soil materials The present 16 year old landfill includes unsorted solid wastes. The previous Groundwater Analysis section indicates that some seepage is possible from the landfill to the adjacent marshes. To check on whether there is leaching in significant amounts, water quality samples were taken on April 30, 1973. The location of sampling points is shown in Figure 2. Test results for these water samples from Lake Classen Creek are as follows: Chloride (Cl) mg/1 Nitrate (N) mg/1 Total Solids mg/1 Suspended Solids mg/1 BOD rag/I pH Sample W-1 20 0.41 167 14 1 7.1 Sample W-2 50 0.47 264 8 6 7.1 The tests indicate that there is an Increase in chlorides, total solids, and BOD. However, caution should be taken when assuming that these increases ore directly the result of the existing landfill for the following reasons: 1. One sample series based on surface water "grab" samples will not necessarily be representative of average conditions. Other potential pollution sources exist in the area between the sampling points. Among these are the property to the west where some filling has taken place and also Highway 12. The highway could be the source for the higher chloride values. 2. - 8 - •1II4»I«] [irmr*] [ilsHt [iranw r«ra«v:* ij ■■■’4 ft V • 1 1 NEW LANDFILL SELECT FILL material OETAIL, Fia ON WESTS,DE OF PRESENT EANDF,EL SELECT FILL material marsh level DETAIL: FILL IN NEW LANDFILL areas figure 4 CONSTRUCTION DETAILS eisingej? demolition landfill iS' G. M. SUNOE 1 Ik LI CONSTRUCTION RECOMMENDATIONS The construction of the demolition landfill should include work specifically done to protect the environment from the existing landfill. As was previously indicated, the Eisinger landfill operated 16 years and received a considerable volume of solid wastes. The design of the proposed landfill should incorporate protection above and adjacent to the existing fill. In the previous section, the construction of clean fill protective berms was discussed. The need for these berms is based on the assumption that there may be lateral seepage from the old landfill. By separating incoming materials, this improvement to the existing conditions can be readily constructed as shown in Figure 4. The existing ditch along the south edge of the property provides a possible seepage outlet for leachates from the existing landfill. It may be advisable to fill in this ditch to above marsh level. Drainage from the east marsh coulde be handled in two ways. A 36 inch diameter concrete culvert is inplace beneath Highway 12 east of the Eisinger property. This culvert is badly silted in however it is intended to connect the east marsh with Lake Classen. If the ditch is filled in, this pipe could pro vide a drainage outlet for the east marsh. As an alternate, pipe could be placed along the present ditch and fill placed over it. The drawback of this alternate is that considerable settlement would occur and the pipe could be damaged if not carefully designed and constructed. CONCLUSIONS The proposed demolition landfill is located relatively close to Lake Classen Creek which flows to Stubbs Bay of Lake Minnetonka. It is possible that the inplace landfill which is 16 years old may be having an effect on the water quality in the creek. Properly placed demolition fill materials will likely improve the water quality of any seepage generated from the landfill. Construction of the proposed landfill will have a negligible effect on the surface water conditions in Lake Classen Creek and the marshes adjacent to the landfill during a 100 year storm event. i - 11 - «•*! references 1.Schwartz, George M. The ^®°^°|^o°ogica^Survey, University Snesora.^^Th; VniTersity of Minnesota Press. MlnneapoUs. 1936. 2.If «r'"''s“Depa":ient ’ of Iff "uUre'Lfmnnifota Agrl cultural Experiment Station, 1969. 3. Minnesota', 1969. MacParlane, Ivan C. MusKeg Engineering Handbook. University of Toronto Press, Toronto. 1969. 5. ^ R A and Farvolden, R. N. Hydrogeology Hughes, G. M., Cites in Northeastern Illinois. , of Solid Waste Disposal Sit Illinois State Geological Environmental Protection se^cy ^ Washington. D. C. 1971. Survey. U. S. Government Printing u 6.Bouwer, Herman, Rice, R. ’^^®g®p^ndwater Recharge with Renovating Secondary Sewagy protection Agency, Washington, tratlon Basins. U. S. ..nviro D. C. 1972. - 12 - % i i _ai_=_ir.* t'. ■^' -» ' > ■’V ,V-;: --' EXHIBIT K Minnesota Pollution Control Agency 520 Lafayette Road St. Paul, MN 55155 Attn: John Moeger - Ph. 296-BJbJ Minnehaha Creek Watershed District P.O. Box 387 Wayzata, MN 55391 Eugene A. Hickok & Assoc. ” Ph.473-4224 Department of Natural Resources Division of Waters 500 Lafayette Road St. Paul, MN 55106 Attn: John Stein - Ph. 296-4800 Hennepin Soils and Water Conservation District 12450 Wayzata Boulevard Suite 205 Minnetonka, MN 55343 Attn: Joel Settles Environment and Energy 822 South 3rd Street Suite 300 Minneapolis, MN 55415 Attn: Luther Nelson - Ph. 348-4046 Boncstfoo, Bosene, AnderUk±±ssociatesJ^ 2335 W. Trunk Highway 36 S(. Pau/, MN 55113 612-636-4600 February 10, 1987 city of Orono Box 66 Crystal. Bay, MN Engineers & Architects Ono G Bonrurvo, P.B. Hobtrt W. Ku'rrtt*. P B. Jo\rph C. Andcrlrk, Bruiljord A. I.rmbffg, P-B, Hichurd E Turner. P.B. James C. Uison, P.B. 55323 Otenn R. Cook. P B. Krilh A Gordon. P t - Ihornui B hoyes. P.B. Huhard W tosur. P B. Bohert C. Sihunuht. P.B. Margin L. Sorva/a. P B. Donald C. Burgardt. P B. Jtrry A. Bourdon, P.B. Murk A. Hanson. P.B. Ted K. b e Miihaet T Rauimann. P.B. Hubert R PJHP'l*’- B.B. David O Loskoia. P B. Thomas W. Peterson. P B Mtehati C. Lynch, P B. Horen L. kkdits. P B. James R Matand. P B. Kenneth P. Anderson. P B. Keith A Bachmann. P.B. .Mark R Rolfs. P B. Hubert C. Ru^^> ^^ Jhomos B Angus. P.B. St U/l L. Young. P B. Charles A Brtckson Leo M. Pawelsky Harlan M. Olson Susan M. Bberlin Attn: Ms. Jeanne Mabuath Eufn;«”Ln«ill Application Dear Jeanne: i„£„.ation to the £ol- The applicant will have to s lowing agencies: Minnesota Pollution Control Agency 520 Lafayette Road St. Paul, MN 55155 296-8353 Attn; John Moeger - Ph. 296 Minnehaha Creek Watershed District r.O. Box 387 T Hfchoh E ASSOC. - Ph. 473-4224 Department of Natural Resources Division of Wstors 500 Lafayette Road St. Paul, MN 55106 ,,j.^800Attn: John Stem - Ph. 296 96UU ,„J Soil Conservation Service must also rco'mcta". pTe/se“c"ol^alt need any iurther assistance. roNES«ro=: ROSeSJe. ANDERUR 6 ASSOCIATES. INC. Michael C. Lynch MCLtli 1947e 30 Year Anniversary I To-' Planning Coimviission Chairman Kelley orono Planning SinCtratorMark E. Bernhardson, city Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning a Zoning Administrator February 11, 1987 _ subject: #1104 Gregg Perl, 309 ^o-structure setback, --^^Td^/reiba^crvrrL^nSIs^trcon:^^^^^^^^^^ ln^'^a“adi“tion to existing residence Zoni«rors.r4- -- -c^runsewered List of Exhibits 4. ^Exhibit A - Application Exhibit B - Pla^t Map Ixhibit C - property Owners List p’'hibit E - Survey With Staff Notations ISfbft - ous/Elevat^^’'U-h-t G - £2tl« tl Applioant 1/6/87 ISiblt H - siptic Inventory/Record Card Pertinent Pacts: ,5 (37,455 s.f.)1) Lot Area = 0.86 Acres 2)Setbacks; Rear SideHouse-to-Garage Building Height Existing 45.1’ 12' 21.5' 20'+/“ Allowed or Req'd 50' 30' 10' Proposed Variance 29' 12' 0.5-3.O' 21' or 'i2% 18' or 60% 9.5 or 95% r- 1 30'35'5 Hardcover Allowed: 95% or 13,100 s.f^ "Hfr= ^^^forel; s-.f! V- or 36.4% septic system was failing in 1978. been intermittently faili 9 s, Home occupation this. by the ®PP|^^^tto-structure setback variance. He h ^ P expansion of his to avoid a variance. <1 has been Llure lened. aping ap on sting The » set- [arage ructed anting ity in of his ch the I Zoning File #1104 ' February 11, 1987 Page 2 of 2 Two bedrooms are indicated on the proposed plans. However, the loft area and the additional basement area easily could be used as bedrooms, and staff sees this application as a major increase in the potential intensity of use of the existing septic system, which is intermittently failing. Note that this property is within the Stubbs Bay Sewer Study Area and would be potentially served if that project ever occurs. The applicant has not, however, addressed how he will solve the septic problem for the interim. No site evaluation has been submitted as was required of the applicant. jj^0view of the plans, staff also notes that based on existing and proposed grade lines, the proposed structure has a defined height of 35 requiring a 5* variance. The home occupation use of this property is still an unresolved issue. Applicant has not indicated how he intends to solve the problem of storage of commercial materials on his residential property. Although there are no recent complaints on file, staff does not see this issue going away. The intensity of use of this property for commercial storage and the associated gravel areas do have a bearing on potential septic sites. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends tabling this application subject to: 1. Applicant providing a site evaluation and design for interim septic repair/upgrade to handle the proposed house. 2. Applicant providing an acceptable justification or hardship reason for granting the structure-to-structure variance, or revise plans to show house attached to garage; fstaff recommends denial of this variance as proposed and feels applicant should re-design to maintain the required 10' setback, or attach the garage. 3. Staff suggests that the side setback variance is justifiable given the addition is no closer to the line than the existing house. 4. Staff suggests that the rear setback variance is reasonable, given that the side lot line limits expansion to the left, septic system limits expansion to the front, garage and building height limitation limits the expansion to the right or upward. 5. Staff recommends that applicant be requested to address how he will handle the home occupation problems on this property. 6. Applicant must provide a to-scale set of plans or revised plans for future review (existing plans filed are 1”=4.3', not workable sea and must provide an updated survey verifying the location of the garage. 7. Applicant must provide acceptable justification for the height variance or redesign to eliminate same. I and ' 35 ’ 5sue. )rage :e no The lated sptic sason IS to iance i the 3iven given ^stem ation will is for ilel), e the ' I ____- ^ uaue Kcc' u /" < ;f ^ M ' ■ ■> f c,_ I i Receipt Initials \-v_ -i//iA\K^ CM^FiCor^ 'application f-i *7^ '“7 ^^7 //c 4 ■'isa>' cOS: CITY OP <^)Rt)NO - VARIANCE Initial Application Pe^TsiSoT^ ($50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $75.00 (no change from original application) After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) PROPERTY LOCATION Address ■? 0^ U/g-jT l^ t'Cr ST-----------------------------------Site ac-/ /I - 2 3 2360? /Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) . Please check one - Is the property _ __ abstract or - - torrens? Attach legal description to application if not Phone (home)_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ Phone (work) I 6 *7_ APPLICANT Name Address (2 P ^_ _ _ __ n uJ e''^.r g = _ _ _ _ Phone (home) i ^ C> 1OWNER (if different than applicant) Present Zoning District Present Use of Property DESCRIPTION OP REQUEST Describe request in de'^ilJ Estimated Construction Cost $ l^^ddO_20P^ U.nijJfr O'/J y eajuy^ 4: - A >-■ ' ! ( ■ !< ’■ ’> VA^^MANCES REQUIRED Lot Width ______ Hardcover Front Side Lot Area Setback Variances (_ _ __ Other 3*r>aAA Rear) eight V7 '' i ■' I HARDSHIP . rUfficulty resulting from strictDescribe undue hardship or practical ditticuxry _____ enforcement of zoning regulations; - - --—- ’ description op ONOSOAI. “rt?tio°s®oreventing compliance with ZoningDescribe unusual property ggnd^tions preven^U' s ^,Oeof- Code Requirements:—f T 5^ V'.a, -■ &A -rnvhw , r r--N ^" T 3,0 05 M. ^--kbquired submittals C 1J completed Application Form . 348-3271). I a I»aal lized envelopes (#10) pre-addressed to each of the © nameron the abo^ list with no return address, ^ certificate of survey including hardcover calculations as required. Plat Map. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ r^LmEfr“that ySur ’^vafipL^apriicafiorfs not%o^ple?ri£ the above information has not been included._ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Departmenrthat Variance Application is complete. Date_ _ _ _ __ _ _ zoning Official's Signature__- - - - -- - - - - - - - - --- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE n.-nvide all information required or srs “sas »«h. »••« •“ knowledge. Certification by Zoning Applicant's Signature .4»^Date //i sh 7 ?TeTwn"rT™e“y acbowledges and^agree^s to^thi^s appli-Uon agen^sf Com;^isI?ofmlmbe"rs7 and Council members for purposes of investiga tion and verification of this reques.. ^ ^XUU -- - - -- - - -- , ^ Date Owner's Signature __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ A;ru«n;-;;;;-;;;r©-7mT^^^^^^^ Planning Commission Meeting. be present at all scheduledthird Hlnday of each month Applicants^^^ Council, and, if an f ^'^^ragenf a«o\1 fnl^l' pl° c^’e^inY t”o"aV\^S"?re Sirlling a^zInln^'Smce of this change prior to the meeting. P ■ % :t :he ther ints, :iga- e the a the [uled ,f an ange- e the A ^Q. f 57 om 1 I > 1 1 1 « e H ^07 i 4 ■m^W ■ 63 sesi J62.7 —Hf7 iAL S2Si> ~^srnr^(i«)52/15 Sit.Ci 4S1 S/4V TnT 8 5/0 <1 alley II a3a hf*’’■J;TT 46 5. g 1° « HA 3)"-|a 1 ^rziH ,, j — ^ lO Alki iL -44S.r# //t V i(A-1. . 1 • -*i 16 e M (i3>‘1 *T 1/ (l4^■'■ " 1 (/S') Mi ■• Tf 1 506. TO '<<*5V ’S^_6j (il') ^ --------------T-~J/ (j«D ;* _____I ^ _ • 2ii? 55 ..If .1 ^ V ■• • V». 4-^* % 4l • • . ■4.^ __m tA .A.__ C'jrti Icate of Survey for Gregory Peri in Lots i--3, lock "Hillside Park" Hennepii County, Minnesota N I hereby certify that this is a true and correct representation ■' a survey of the boundaries of Lots 1,2 and 3j except the V/estc A07 feet of said lots, Block 2, "Hillside Park", accordinc; to the recorded plat thereof, and v,hc location oi^ an existing house thereon. It does not purport to show other iriprovenents or en- .•.roachrnents. Date ; Scale: o : 10-19-5^ i»=50' Iron marker GOPDOM R.COFFIN CO..INC Mark S. Gronberg Reg.No. Gordon F?.Coffin Reg.No. rJngineers & Surveyors Long Lake , Minnesota 12755 606^1 Date: /^7 Name: Addrasf,: 3 0 [a /^TV^J n 'S‘7^ Advirc!aS: « i The Building and Zoning Department is in receipt % building permit, which was received by this office on -^5^- -iT / • retiet of the application finds that the following information needed for review is missing: Signed Application Form Site^Improvement^plan (Driveways/Landscaping/Sidewalks/Decks/etc.) Grading and Drainage Plans Specific Building Plans Exterior Elevations Details and Sections;_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ Mechanical Designs Energy Calculations Specifications: Additional Sets of Plans Required (- -) stw^grirertLnriylt^rsiL Evaluation or Design Report Hardcover Calculations Other (specify)_________________________—------------------------------------------- r-riVariance/Conditional Use Permit Application Required - Contact .J^-Izoning Department Immediately at 473-7357 Review of your application will not continue until the noted received! '^Failure to submit required items immediately may result in delays in issuance of permits. Please contact the Building s Zoning Department at 473-7357 if you have any questions. Sincerely, rlytJxl Jdanne A. Mabusth, Zoning Administratec Bl’ILDINCA /ONIN(; - 473 7357 ASStSSINt; Thomas J. Jacobs, Senior Building Inspector AUMINISTUA I ION & FINANCE - 473-7353 rllBLIC WORKS - 473-7359 # dei!i u! p.eo „aAA ’P8||UQ - }U|Od8AUQ ~/T“ ------, *>3 *^*''*'^ "ISUOQ wodau l|3M o«»S —v^ToTi^ piai)ui8jp ui04^s>fuei ojldas ujoj^ aous^siQ JCucs♦-* I 1 a s bs I I «-* E K «•- O o*-> CO Q •s a <» .2 o Q d X §$ X (/I O •D C D J3 <C I oCD Q. r< ^ Z O <0 -D ^ 1 §€ w 2 o Q I a 2r cnc 3 CD 0 - V) s £ Otc o«-* X a Q>TJ ;o *5a□ ui < 0 ^ 0 0 v5 2J <0 (iri Z < H O h- d. ID (/) O)c 3 X «-• 1/1ou COoc 8c (0 4-tui Q 6 TJ ii H J. V ^1 <q N <3: 5i ^ (0 CD a n> T) c CO CJ T3 3 O w % Vo «> 3 III ^ <0 t <■^3 E =^.S3 «J (Qz I"c\ O O M h- C c E ^ 1 0>T3C 9 o«-• E uw. JO I S i 5 CO soX CO E o ♦-*♦-*o X Jd c(TO at I s o Xa-* C7I C 0) & & o 0 9) N v» £ i— So ACaw «*• O X •-aaoO +1 = T M - ST o H cii -j IJL z < GC O n>e (Q Co E CO E*- C o SJ 10 cr*25 X vJ E (0 0)c E o « CO 2 5 *•» c ‘5 i_ X I.S o o X ♦-»a 2 I o a < CJo •J 111 CO f- 1/3 5 o »A 3 O £ K On o ■i| I? 5 .a S O TJ - C *0 -O o vT o 5 ^ \:z o 5 ra ra « -O -c 6 c ° •« Q •- CN 6) *o =uc D OC O O LUa: H D O CLs D Q. C/>zo -J -J <a tu H < O az UJoz < a S Oo o iI crou. Zouz 0 z 1 z oa:oo LU GC zo I Q CC < Qz < h" (/) CD D U) I to I- L) s h- O UJ CL to 2| UJI- <o ctn- QC. « } do I 0 z 1 OCo LLzoo I o • 1 ' A n t i ■, I i TO: FROM: Mayor Grabek Mark Bernhardson/ City Administrator Orono Council Members Planning Commission Members Michael P. Gaffron, Assistant Planning & Zoning Administrator February 6, 1987 #1105 Thomas and Joanne Hitch, 1180 Lyman Avenue Variance (Renewal) ~ Public Hearing Zoning District - ' RR-IB - Two Acre Minimum Application ~ Lot Area Variance Lot Area Required - Lot Area Existing - 87,120 square feet 68,171 square feet less 3,018 s.f. in cul~de~sac= 65,153 s.f. ^1.496 acre) Variance - 21,967 square feet or 25% List of Exhibits - A - Application B - Plat Map C - List of Property Owners D - Survey & Site Plan E - Resolution #1849 The applicant is requesting a variance for construction of a home on this lot at the end of Lyman Avenue. The lot exceeds the minimum 200- lot width. No other adjacent i® wm^n Access to the lot is over a private roadway off the end of Lyman Avenue. Copies of the access easement documents are on file. On-site testing was done on the lot in The results of the testing indicate at least 3 siteo are available on the property for suitable drainfield systems, trench system, 2 mounds). A system has been specifically designed to serve the proposed house (see Exhibit D). On September 9, 1985, Council granted a lot area variance to Norman and Christie DeWitt for this property - please review th. Resolution #1849 that was filed against the J ® approving that variance. Note that a variance had previously been approved in 1977 and 1983. 1 Zoning File #1105 February 6, 1987 Page 2 Staff recoitimends approval of a renewal lot area variance per the following findings: 1. This parcel was created prior to the creation of the RR- IB zoning district. 2. No additional land is available. 3. No other variances are requested. 1 4. A lot area variance for this property was approved in 1977, again in 1983, and again in 1985. 5. There is suitable private access to the property. A variance to the requirement for frontage on a public road is appropriate to be granted. 6. Suitable drainfield sites have been located on the property. A suitable septic system has been designed for the proposed house. 7. The building envelope is adequate for construction of a residence without further variances and is consistent with surrounding development. 8. A quit-claim deed for future right-of-way purposes has been granted over a portion of this property to the City. j*. ►^1 . I tV . y>/y i 0 t • / *• 4’.'- ‘-i’ f^ty7 — Date Rcc'd_ Foe /',?y. I h‘>li' 7 Receipt Initials CITY OP ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION IrjitiaX-App-lri-ca.^on F^e—^1:5A^0 ($50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance'^e^^75.00 ^no change from original application) S^fter-The-^acrlr-P^s TOouble'^pplication fee) PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address \ 0 O VVA Cl wv \r^ Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) -^'51 IS' P _ Please check one - Is the property _ _ _ abstract or torrens? Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. APPLICANT Phone (home) Name ^ ci-v\ ^ \ t c. vh______ Phone (work) Address! ejaijinj. irj. City; frOt/S^YL_ _ Zlp:.g33/ OWNER (if different than applicant)s Phone (home) Name Ql vva-0 Phone (work) Address:City:Zip: Date Property Acquired (month/year) I (do) (fd^notj^also own the adjacent parcels of land PRESENT USE OF PROPERTY Present Zoning District Present Use of Property a c a>\ V a >'\Residential Other (specify) DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $ IOJT. QO Q Describe request in detail: 0(^T/^)Ni Pgv~tv\^T VARIANCES REQUIRED \/^ Lot Area Lot Width Hardcover Setback Variances (Front Side Rear) Other ^ II wn :e) =ns? d survey. a Ml i itial r. ooo HARDSHIP Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty resulting from strict enforcement of zoning regulations:_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code Requirements:. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . .. . . . . . . . . (UIRED SUBMITTALS Completed Application Form Certified Property Owners List of owners within 150' (you can 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. Certificate of survey including hardcover calculations as recjuired.. Plat Map. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your variance application is not complete if the above information has not been included. Certification by Zoning Department that Variance Application is complete. Zoning Official's Signature Date APPLICANT * f SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay all fees and/or unusual expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. Applicant's Signature Date OWNERS SIGNATURE The owner hereby ackowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents. Commission members, and Council members for purposes of investiga tion and verification of^this reques^. Owner's Signature f Date Applicant must have All submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning ConuTiission 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, and, if an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, to please make arrange ments to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. j_ > Strict Zoning obtain Center of the red. (/ ^ '• •i r-S V -t"' Adjacent Property Owners* Acknowledgement Form T (WPJ A«o TVc. of .lt«»0 ------------------------- 1 print nanTeUn [print ad'dresJ]— have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the property located at l\^>0 _______ also referred to as Land Use Application No. _ _ _• 1 (we) understand that in executing this acknowledgement, I (we) am (are) not asked to declare approval or disapproval of the property or use but merely to confirm for the City Council that I (we) am (are) aware of the improvement plans and that the proposed neighbor's project or use reouires Council approval. Please above Lete. red or and/or es that lis/her Property Owner Owner I- \b-6*7 Date /- /e -ez Date If you have any information that may assist the this Land use Application, please submit your comments to the Building Zoning Office at least 10 days prior to the scheduled meeting da . urther Itants, Bstiga- 1 ^ ' i . (' t;\ » ore the on the eduled if an rrange- Lse the p f •”.*r . r; v,h' / • ' " t I i . -# •• ' Adjacent Property Ovmerf;' Acknowlcd .ci.ient Form I (we)/;I f ! ' ’•/-)niJll ! /'''^",l'\\'.'Li: ot*' ;• -■ :-•> / ■ I print nair.e( s) ]print address] have reviewed the plans for the proposed i„,provemont or proposed use of the property located at /-I U C^-also referred to as Land Use Application No.______• I (we) understand that in executing this ac) r.owledgement, I (we) am (are) not as)ced to declare approval or disapproval or the property but merely to confirm for the City Council that I (we) am (are) aware of thi improvement plans and that the proposed neighbor s project or use requires Council approval / -/.r- ^7 Propert:^ Owner Date Property Owner Date If you have your^commen't^'" to^^th^^^^^i Idin S ^^ni; ro"f^i“ at"^^a?t"lo"da"ys%\Tor“to” th/ scheduled meeting date. • • f ! F '3^ exhibit a S: =:.^v&v-i 5 CO § M 5h r CO a M o -J li. ZC CO M a Ui ?:§ q ; o LJ a V O Hgsa o q: Q l >- H § Ou z Ma. UJ § UJ X oK1 o o o to to CM I <0 I 10 Ki <o to o o u o to CDr z M M UI UJ X X UJ UJ Z lO lO UJ H 10 O o X >o >-vO -J —« Q. \ to cot N.«-# <M N. O UJ h- O DC-» a o O CO . < tu to O Z M to O -J CM Z UJ I o z CO a HI o X I CO lO m o «0 o CM X CO ^ . to O f- Ui > M) M CO VC to O CO lO CO o UI O UJ Z -J o « go gg >- CM X -• o o 5 !; CD UJ a QC X oo < cr o Q Z UJ < < >• \ a < UJ CL yj 0. Xo Z So: X < Z O. O h- M X 3 UJ UJ CL 5*“-i< o z X a^ Ui < X Q. CJ >-•H UJ «0 ,oo to to CM I CO ro LO UJ to > < m* I to to CO to to UI o o 0 CJ Xo u (O UJ Xu z < X o o CM r-f <s >- 3 o o to ro CM I CO I to to CM UJ UJ X X33 o o z z O Q U. tk.o o >- V H H M Mu u g C3 10to to lO to X3 Oz o o a ^ t-. ',*•:•• ••V. U. Mm O O CM O O to to CM I CO I to to COto >• >• Z QL Z Z C3H UJ to X X H t- ggz z gg h- H* M H mJ -J CD OJ Ct X Q au z < tt CL to C* Sd: ^£ 5 to >- a H O 3 to tco aocc CL UI d; X o 3^9 553 O H IQdOWlUr^ UCT 2 61983 ii±iy CITY OF ORONO . • . ♦ , ♦ I' r- I •' T Tffi k S. bronBerg MnT Lic7~Ro. TZ/bb EngiHGGrs & Land l)urv0yors A/ f h > • ■y. 75F ■ '..i City of OROINO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 18^9_ _ _ _ _ _ A RESOLUTION GRANTING A VARIANCE TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.28, SUBDIVISION 5 (B) FILE #947 WHEREAS, Norman & Christie DeWitt applicant”) has an interest in the property located at 1180 ^Y^an Avenue within the City of Orono (hereinafter 'City ) and legally described as follows: That part of Tract A lying Easterly of the following described line: Beginning at the most said Tract A; thence Southerly to a point on the South line of said Tract A, distant 120 feet West from the Northeast corner of Tract B, and there terminating; all within Registered Land Survey No. 1067, Files of the Registrar of Titles, County of Hennepin, EXCEPT, that part of Tract A, Registered Land Survey No. 1067, for road P^^poses, deLribed as follows: That part of said ^^act A lying within the circumference of a circle having a radius of 50 feet, the center of said circle being the Northeast: corner of Tract B, said registered land survey (hereinafter "property"); and WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City for a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.28, Jb) to permit the construction of a new residence a lot with 65,153 square feet in area instead of the required , feet. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #947. 2. The property is located in the RR-IB Single Family Rural Residential Zoning District. 3. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on August 19, 1985, and recommended approval of the proposed variance based upon the following findings. a) This parcel was created prior to the creation of the RR-IB zoning district. Page 1 of 4 City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. -------------— I ■ No other land is available. c) NO other variances are requested. • for this property was approvedd) A lot area variance for tnis p p in 1977 and again in lyo-s* e) There is suitable access to the property. £, suitable drainfield sites have been located on the property. 1U i n1 d" ^ t"r f cV Td" development. his belfgr'fnted ov%"r a'ror“of“hfs'prorerty“to the City. •T considered this application A The City Council has _,f the Planning Including the 3^13'frco^ent" by the applicant fnT\he°ehrcro%^ ^.L'^^^^ofofed' variance on the health. Safety and welfare of the conrn-unxty. 5. The City Ccancil finds 1foVtpply “a^^^^^^^^ to^other^'property in this fi^ conditions, variance would not _g^j,a2ard or other danger to liahtf air nor pose a fire merely serve as a neighboring is necessary to alleviate convenience to f faculty; is necessary to pre- a demonstrable °^^,tv right of the applicant? and serve a substantial prop ^ and intent of the Zoning would be in keeping with the spi^^ Code and Comprehensive Plan o CONCLDSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon the above secUon°10.'28t ^ubd^vS^^ EB-rlr-atel ^n"lte2£?5 -,:irld°r7!l%^0 "sg^u^arf^L^l s^biect to the following con ^tr 1. satisfy the requirements of the on-srte code site sewage treatment system. y of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL MO 1849 » - •* 2. Authorities J^'^but are^perinissive only and property not with „„ for ^a building permitmust be exercised ^y application^^fj^r a^ :iriince°"wiU elpfre'on that date (September 9, 1986). ' . with any of the terms and 3. Violation of or constitute a violation of conditions '■'^^^gu^omatically terminate any authority^ranreS^rerlfn^^fd^siatnrpunishLle as a misdemeanor. ^ 4. The undersigned appliaant^has^read^,^ understood by aQr00S to th0 terms necTnn*? h0r0by agr00S to ^bbor^^^g^S^^ihirSu^ro^n irtr/ch*'aYn%^f t\tle of the property. Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 9th day of Sep/Lember r 1985 atAe ^ithy M^liin/City cierk Mary C.' Butler, Mayor Tool. Frahm, Acting * ;yor (1) Propert^j-;^tHier Page 3 of 4 if >• i City of OrtOINO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. __________ STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this day of ____R)^^g f-^,- ..v..^;rted the foregoingappeared Bi<tc<r-F \ 'j^'7 cirr-'~"-^ the foregoing lnstrCen??'ind\%\no^^^^^^^ that he (they) executed the sa^e as his (their) free act and deed. •■• V(r J .. esoiA' ■•••.; ■ :. 11/ MV CO"'"' •...... notary public (...,- // my commission expires STATE OF MINNESOTA ) )SS. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this a this _ _/_ _ __ y _ V e^i'd County^ persona 1 ly appearedNotary Public ^uth^ ^d for said to be the ^ Y jK -------------- ---------- -------------j «e*-»-nTn<ant. and acknowledged that he (they) (their) free act and deed. .y, /937^. my COMMISSION EXPIRIES Page 4 of 4 f 1 City of OliOIVO r I . . •', ^ »«». -. . . - .^, .j RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 1849 'y.V'. ’.»«**.*. < STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this /<a AL.day of S erP7~<£-7M <5e7C 1985 before me a Notary Public withinand for said county, personally appeared _ _ _/VAJ l>01t7^_ _ _ known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. y - )Loue // . /1^6y MY COMMISSION^ EXPIRES STATE OF MINNESOTA ) )ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this 60 day of 1985, before me a Notary Public within and for said County, personally appeared known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowlodged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. MY COMMISSION EXPIRES '■ iSr ’ir 1. ‘ ' -3 0 From: Mayor Grabek Orono Council MGwbers Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator February 12, 1987 Subiect: #1106 R.F. Potas, 2190 Shadywood Road Variance - Public Hearing Application - Hardcover, average setback, side setback variances to construct deck and room addition. Zoning District - LR-IC, Jj-acre List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Exhibit B - Exhibit C - Exhibit D - Exhibit E - Exhibit F - Pertinent Facts: Application Plat Map Property Owners List Survey With Staff Sketch of Hardcover, Etc. Hardcover Calculations Lot Area: 0.73 acres Hardcover: 0-75' (0% Allowed) 75-250' (25% Allowed) 250-500 (30% Allowed) Existing 150 s.f. (2.0%) 8,573 s.f. (46.7%) 2,561 s.f. (42.0%) Proposed 150 s.f. (2.0%) 9,237 s.f. (50.3%) 2,561 s.f. (42.0%) Setback Encroachment Existing: No average setback encroachment proposed: 1) Vtbtik'uniV^Inl vTa^ta°r^^ rrait" be\:ern=ad?acent decks (B), 2) Propsed deck is 7- lakeward of line drawn between adjacent decks. Ko:-.. staff site inspection on 2/12/87, notes that some s?delwindow views of house to the south may be encroached Upon by the rooin ji.“id it ion. Side setback - -f-"-in°g rhe'!o°"mirirum,”bit tL^prlpu^ed 4'^ overhang rL^side^lItwhere an overhang can be no closer than ..5 from si line per Section 10.03, Subdivision 15 (AK L«r«x»T« r«i«w r«M«] r«lnhTTi miiim r«ii«fi«i [•»i I 11 wm »X8X*1 M * • / ; f i r r ' *’•>% V. 1 1 • i y • /fli'ir-.•.) r,^- UUUG 1^*C • U / Fe e__"* 'So __________ Rece ipt <y .>'• CITY OP ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initials_-Tj -aJ Oou.. •S^ <§ri 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) PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address ^/^lO . 5 hjCld^i.0. c<l PccisL______ Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) At~s* /^kcLl / t'JjL&'/s ISH-k. , -i '.jJ~ ' •' ^ Please checlc one - Is the property abstract or _ _ _ torrens? Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. APPLICANT Phone (home) l/''? h 70 SS-Q'/ Name V,. /C Phone (work) Address : hlC ^ ^ L '':c d lQr[ - City; bOx^’2 Zip ; OWNER (if different than applicant) Name c\.(?c.v ’ Phone (home) Phone (work) Address:City:Zip: Date Property Acquired (month/year) I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. PRESENT USE OF PlvOPERTY Present Zoning District Present Use of Property Residential Other (specify) DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Describe request in detail VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area Lot Width Hardcover •»! t r ■ Setback Variances (Front Side c<t ______ Rear) CLi XSf\y y.Other Ci^vu UyiXJ, t\- yiiy^t^C ^ A ^ ^•ocvv. to.t^>'T ^ OF r\ ' •llU.Ai ith*r^ SC'TH^t^ tS ^ A3r^«^' f I k HARDSHIP Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty resulting from strict enfprcement of zoning regulations ,</ / /, n/.., 4? ^// .y;) (7 J /'f. ^ r>\~t' C . ,K /(,' ,>t ,c'. V. /.'r ^ f U--t >>'( . ^ DESCRIPTION OP UNUSDAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Codg Requirements: Tnt /'><«.«(.'. c'cttc'tvtc ^^ycV-C'v REQUIRED SUBMITTALS 1. Completed .Application Form ('2 3. Certified Property Owners List of owners within 150* (you can obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-60? Govt Center 348-3271). \-l-m- -^3. -(^CO 7 Stamped, legal sized envelopes (#10) pre-addressed to each of the names on the above list with no return address. 4. Certificate of survey including hardcover calculations as required. Plat Map. *• ** ^ *" *" * ^ ** ““ *“ “• *“ *" "• "• ^ ^ •— —“ — —* —“ •—* •• — — •“ ^ *“ •“ • •— amm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm m • mm mrn mm mm w. mm im» mm mm mm mm The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your variance application is not complete if the above information has not been included. ** •• •• mm mm mm sb «■» • • w w mmm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm aw mm mm mm ^m mm mm W* mm mm mm ^m ^m mm ^m ^m ^m ^m ^m m • ^m ^m ^m ^m ^m ^m Certification by Zoning Department that Variance Application is complete. Zoning Official's Signature Date APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay all fees and/or unusual expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. Applicant's Signature _ _ _ _ _ _ __ Date / OWNERS SIGNATURE The owner hereby ackowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents. Commission members, and Council members for purposes of investiga tion and verification of this request. Owner's Signature T^.f.Date /~ Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commxsslon 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, and, if an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, to please make arrange ments to have an authorized agent Attend in your place and to advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. V %• \ ''V^ t V'-^ vj. im ,4 r •■#1 * «# t«>«» r# (C#?y STA l fiArj V\ur% ♦wjf/r,'^- Ait>‘*4Ul :1|0 HALCrOW ■ f^v i*. - ' HO•»fV**fct .n , northern : »g*<y3.y4 nTTfr ‘ 1 (ri\ \ *^ Sir*' '•r.,*-Sip ..«. « ? = ^3• IS >1 $ |.tVINGSTON t4 f4‘) —I 'i^J lOj • i i I 7 '•in '• i'^ rr T 2 t lf>•^ • ^ • f« M ! t rr • ' ' "" ^ • . ■1 1 Vi g < m rv -I :*t : ' • ■' •' ; ’ ' i 1 s \ ■ fr^ V'' -v) r> • m ■ *♦. Adjacent Property Owners* Acknowledgement Form I (we) have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the property located at .zlYa'i-iin-zA' ir!a / < also referred to as Land Use Application No. _ _ _. I (we) understand that in executing this acknowledgement, I (we) am (are) not Risked to declare approval or disapproval of the property or use but merely to confirm for the City Council that I (we) am (are) aware of the improvement plans and that the pro posed neighbor's project or use requires City Council approval. m ^^JPtoperty Owner Date Property Owner Date If you have any information that may assist the City in the review of this Land Use Application, please submit your comments to the Building & Zoning Office at least 10 days prior to the scheduled meeting date. ;’"v ■,? , > :0.:' ^™ , •• . . • ■.■.•‘WmTO-»•* h 4 habdcover review _ ZONING FILE 1106 B.F. POTAS. 2190 SHADWOOD RO “ExIUing^'S^t-®- lSo's'l/7^312 = 2.0% (No change proposed) 75-250' Lot Area = 18,375 s.f. Existing 75-250': House + Attached Garage Deck 30 X 48 23 X 19 14 X 33 8 X 20 28 X 24 18.5 X 19 = 1,440 * 437 s 462 = 160 *= 672 = 352 3,523 s.f. concrete Driveway Apron (21^5 x 24) + HO x 13) Asphalt Driveway (35 x 15) + (20 x 2b; i- --- - Gravel With Plastic South Side Fence (8 x 60 ) North of Garage (5 ^ ^ ^ + (lo x 10) inside of Driveway (80 x 4 avg; Perimeter of House Avg (4 wide x 2ib i 645 2,345 480 300 420 860 8,57 3 s.f. 8,573/18,375 = 46.7% 75-250 Existing Proposed Addition 75-250 proposed Deck ( 4 x 16 64 ^ (16 X 32) 512 Proposed Addition (16 x 1®^_288 864 s.f. ^rslu^es ^'i-'ioSk'Sith Tlastic^’hordtr on new constrection) Net s!J."'s0.3% proposed 75-250' 250-500' Lot Area = 6,105 s.f. Existing 250-500' Garage (28 x 24) Gravel/Plastic (24 x 20/2) (6 X 60) Asphalt (13 X 53)+(10 x 60) = 672 t=: 240 = 360 = 1,289 2,561 s.f. 2,561/6,105 = 42.0% (No change prop ised in 250-500 'yr c o ON 0) AN U-l U) 4^ 03 o g in r^ I o in CM 5^ 03 0o n3 4-1 03 0. 4-4 03 o 0 in 04 1 ino* 4-< 03 w .Cto «4-( to g o 0 in 1o in CM nI^ o in ro m . > ON c: O O O fH I Oo in 03c O •H 4J O d) U •Ha c rd r-4 a) r-H XJ (d 'O iH •H :d ja >t T3 <Ux: -p 03 o p rHo p •H I 03 i-H § 0 •H 03 O O r—{ o o rH 03 u 0 ^rH X) 0 c >1 o r-H -H Q.4J ^ -H -H ^ 0 -P TJ 0 C O N H 4H •H O 0 ^ a c 03 0 "0 0 03 4H 0o x; o -P u c tP-H c x: •H aj r—I Pe 'p 0 w o <lo c a •H rH rH 0 >1^ X3 0 X Ou 0 •H rH P g 0 Co N in ro I ro r- rH 0 >o g 0u 0 03 0 0uoc •H 4J 0 C S ^P 0 X3 Cl-P 0 AJ 0 C •H U 0 u 0 -p 03 •H 5 g 0 P P P P 4J P 0 g 03 p 0 >1 a P 0 0 0 Q 4^ tT* *rH p H 4J P 0 U U Po poo o p p •rH P O 4H Cr^ P •H rH P 03 0 P >1 P 0 •H C •p >i'3 0 X w a 0 w 0 •H 0 03 0 0 0 0)X CS9 fH 03 0 Cn u x: u AJ C 0 0 0 0 44 0 4J a p 0 P a u 4-)O »4-l >>1 d X 0 o 0 0 p >1 o X3 rH 4J P p P 0 0 P U .0 0 a 44 03 QlU AJ u 0 0 PIP 0 0 4J (0 0 P P 0 •0 P 0 d P X •H -H 44 0 >X 0 O o •H P o o 0 d 44 •H CP P 03 0 p o ptr>P P 0 0 u 0 0 0 0 *H X CP •H p >1 P 0)•9 g d TS P 0 0 rH 0 a e w d 4J fH 0 X g 0 d e 3 -H P P 3 > AJ cr-H C X 0 0 fH 0 O 0 1 a 0) O X 0 0 o 4J P 0)X P tn p p 0x: 4-) H x: 0 0 HJ x: p -p 0 P *P 03 0 -H 0 ^ x: > P -P -H p rH o ^ rH o o p nd I p •H P «H 0 03 0 0 ^ 0 •H x: > -p •H ^ 4H •H 0 CU P O H >1 P •H •• 0 P4 -P tp o P -H 4J •H 0 0 •H P 0 > I I 0 P O CS3 0 P O M 0 Po tsJ P •H P H 0 > 0a 0 0 p < 4J O 0 eC Cr 4J P •H p 4J -Hw x: •H -P 0 •H 44 •H > O O 0 Oa^o w P 0 ac po 0 tp 0 4^ P 0o p 0 fu I 0 po C<3 P •H 03 0m 0 AJ P 0o p 0 PU r \ P 0 iH 0 > 0 P Xw •H CP p •H 4J W •H Xw p 0 > o o 'd D' P 0 ac 03 >1 CPT> P 0 > Ou p 0 5: p 0 >oo p g I p rH 03 O 0 CP 0 -P • P 0 U P 0 X3 O 44o 0x: AJ 0) 0 P -H H 4J •H 03 rH 0 -H CPJQ 0) 0 Xu 4-> 0 P O N 0 •H iii U 0 AJ P 0o p 0 0 0 > •H P TJ P •H AJ W •«H Xw 0 03 O O O O P P 0 04 X p 0 > o u p ^ 0 O X ?o rH p 0 >oo p 0 • X p 0 'd > 0 0 0 rH 0 5 0 Pu O O rH 0 P iH X 04 < AJ H w 03 O p 0 0 ax; X 4J 0a 03 p •H 0 0 du U) •H p •H 4J 03 •H X 0 p 0 >ou TJ P 0 X O AJ 4ho 44o UP W pH It ^ i4l "Ik- <1. ’ miiAidL J •• i ■li f m To:Orono Planning Commission Members From: Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator Date:February 9, 1987 Subject: #1107 William Lewis and K. Trettel, 475 Linden Avenuo Renewal Variance - Public Hearing Application: Renewal Lot Area Variance List of Exhibits Exhibit A Exhibit B Exhibit C Exhibit D Exhibit E Application Plat Map Property Owners List Survey Plat Map Showing Local Ownership Pattern Pertinent Facts: Lot Area: Lot Width: Required 1.0 Ac 140' Existing 0.61 Ac 200'-plus Variance 0.39 Ac Average Lot Size (of 21 neighboring developed lots within 500'); (See Exhibit E) 0.59 Ac Discussion: This is a request for renewal of a lot area variance originally granted in 1<>80. The property is surrounded on three sides by right- of-way and on the north by a large occupied tract. If Linden Avenue is considered as the front, the lot exceeds the minimum width requirement. Setbacks for the property would be 35' from 3 dedicated roads and 10* from the north line. This leaves a building envelope 180' wide ranging from 33' to 60' deep, which should be suitable for construction of a single family home without the need for additional variances. The 4 lots have each been assessed 1/4 unit for sewer, and a sewer stub is available. Development on the property will not change the existing drainage pattern in the neighborhood. However, the approval should be conditioned on no obstruction of existing drainageway from the north through the rear of the property. ^0. A m Zoning File #1107 February 10, 1987 Page 2 of 2 Staff Recommendation: Staff would recommend approval of the lot area variance renewal, finding that: a) There is no additional land available for purchase to make this a conforming parcel. b) The lot area is consistent with that of other developed lots in the neighborhood. c) The variance was previously granted in 1980. d) Sewer is available and has been assessed for a total of 1 unit. e) Ample area exists on the lot to develop a single family residence and appurtenant improvements without the need for further variances. Approval subject to: 1. Setbacks of 35* from the west, south and east lot lines, and 10* from the north lot line. 2. Payment of park fee of $390 at the time a building permit is issued. 3. Legal combination of all 4 lots into one tax parcel must be filed and accepted by Hennepin County prior to issuance of building permit. 4. Improvements to the property may not change the drainage pattern in the neighborhood. 5. Hardcover allowed (2/3 in 250-500', 1/3 in 500-1,000') may not exceed 8,360 s.f. on the property.:' ,0, *•C4".€ 't . •i J • « ? ‘.y udiLe Kec’o .7 ;'vy Pgg ■/;. j -------RecGipt _:vc ;< > 7Initials^ /7 / < i /TCITY OP ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION ' /j; Renewal V^riance^Fee'”0.00 per each additional variance) -PP^-ation, \ i- PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address ^ t^LC(jJ^Ju^iLj wAr*f *'C/»^CCr V'V^LAAO^ t^CC^- r^VVNP , TV i'SO roperty Identification Number (P.i.d.) f'6 - /tO-Tl'i- S7, C>--JiTJ2 (.ytTr Please checi. one - Is the property ..i^'^tract or torrens. ' “ a°^- included on required survey ' applicant “ -- - - - - - - - - - - -__ Phone (homel ‘^/i-c^/rxc Phone (work) /.V|. -—_ _Sf!!>s,iuA.j^-g> '^ztS T 630 ov OWNER (if different than anni4^.«^a.\ - - -- - - - - - - --✓^OWNBR (if different than applicant) Name Stg^vp aJjy'^ Address: Phone (home) Phone (work) Date Property Acquired City: ¥ Zip: (month/year) parcels of land. <lij NT OSB O? PPP JTPuniv —. M • I *^PRESBNT OSB O? PROPERTY Present Zoning District /-/C- / iS Present Dse of Property Residential / description Other (specify) OF REQUEST 1 Estimated Construction Cost $ "7 Describe request in detail ^f/o ^u'xJ^ybc- f X^yyss; . X' ' /""yVARIANCES REQUIRED 'y' Lot Area Setback Variances ( Other Lot Width Front _ _ Hardcover _ _ Rear) y,HARDSHIP Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty resulting from strict ^forcement of zoning regulations: / DESCRIPTION OP UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code Requirements i /,t^c .J ,^ul/ U Kfic^/j^ ^ i>c<0 AijaL> I BSQOIRED submittals CCompleted Application Form ^ . c_. ^ J yjtx' (Certified Property Owners List of owners within 150' (you~c^obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Govt Center 348-3271). fJerOO LIS.’T j2-eQu(/2-eT^- . . 0yn stamped, legal sized envelopes (#10) pre-addressed to each of the names on the above list with no return address. ^1 y/’• Certificate of survey including hardcover calculations as required. Plat Map. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your variance application is not complete if the above information has not been included. Certification by Zoning Department that Variance Application is complete. Zoning Official's Signature_ _ _ Date APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the^ Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay all fees and/or unusual expenses Incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. y Applicant's Signature .7 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ OWNEPS SIGNATURE ^ The owner hereby ackowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents. Commission members, and Council members for purposes of investiga tion and verification of this request. ,^/i-Date^^)^*' Date Owner's Signature \ u /Ayj. I -Hr Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission_,jaeetings are held on the ( i . t j ;I third Monday of each month. Applicants mjast b>e. presen t^^ all scheduled,!^ 5©tlnaS of fh© Pl;inninrr r nn n n PrMi •J-T areview meetings of the Planning"CbmmTssion and Council, and, if an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, to please make arrange ments to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. fOM StI-ON ^Non».*«HY05)-oyj;)ja VMVXNOl A-iNHOO—— I I I I _ I CtncsT I i n ~T ■• I 0< ’ 7\„t=r-'i"tfLrr ^ . \ S -1% 1 • Oif ..' t fv" s (VJ S K> 'A'; <i). i^> r a\ QQfsi *Tff-16(11!C 2 • ' ?2 O s ««. <T>r! c» ^4% 3nN3AV ^fOJJH 1 ?4- 1 ^m <s» Sj*G i 2 ‘ ) ro . 3AV — Vy ^ \^<y> /' ■V N30Nn:{1^1 ^ O {0\-^ iz? o/va s- (<iiiii / ,#/I iii^ ^' ”^;i' i» n O in K1 ^ M GL • Ulss UJa N \ M IM N. i 2^ * 3 ‘ H o CMo O Ul ^ _ d: UJ 3 Oa m Ul7§ K M tn q: Ul CD o o i§O <-> o Q O O 2 >- O < X in c^ in in o o <H- 25 5 3 ■-4 O O UJ -5 Z to UJ CM P rig zoin H 3 iU 3 *oin inin in X UJa •H O iso < n o ID UJ UJ IS o z CO Osr -J o o o ^ “ -J ^ < < 3 >- m «< UJ CM M I Z 3 N O UJ § O 3 K1 in in a <UJ 2 u < Z Z M ^ I UJ UJ Z < %'i CL CL O ^ I UJa in in o ^ 3 CO o in o UJ CL O in H ^ o3 m z o O UJ ^ «J <a o o K — O < Xu o z < 3 a UJ 3 < CO o ^ 3 2 CL U 3 O 3 O UJ < >- \ < UJ a X H a c ' CM CM O O UJ M ^m UJ CM o I z N M zo in 3 UJ CD I o o CO <r CO o Kl O in 3 3 UJ O O H -J U < M o z S E%n o oa m in o in o o o< Xin o o < H<Kl>- < 3 CJo O Ul •H % ^ Z Kl U CM P ^ 2 N M in H 3 Ul P in in in tn 3 Ul ta •-* UJ Ul Ul o r M X >o < •n o to o z P o ^ -J lU 3 3 X n p «< 3 o D Z UJ < < ^ \ a S a r g5a. o H f-:r.i CMoo tn CM I N •J UJ UJ o CM Ul >o > < ^ in •0 M UJ -J f.»H UJ o I o in Ul M -J 3 UJ M CO to < Ul U. M U.s o A. •-« M sg•-• in tn CMoo Kl IM I N -I UJ t UJ o rj ID *o % I%o o in «• M _ 3 tn ID M -J 3 ID M ID >• < U. UJ M U* S o in 3 3^ M g m sf CM O O Ul Kl 5 Z ^ Q 5 oI 2 O in M in 3 3 o in to in in UJ > 7 3 z ID U o CO -J in -J^ •9 z> CO o < to o 3 a 19 CO Zin o ^ -J 3 p CD < ao 3 ID fc 3 P 3 P ID < >- \ < UJ a X X << zH- r. ,.;i i O Ch CMo o Kl CM I o CO Kl CO CMo o to CM I N J ID t ID O CM Ul «o > < M I o I!! •0 M 3 in UJ H ^ S M •J 3§ ID >- <a ID M ao o in M gtn N CMoo tn M 3a o CMa ^ M > < Kl CM I •« a M I «oo «a a a in H M W 3 a a 3 a H a >• <a CO to M a o in 3 ^ a Ma OZ M 3a in 3 p o< a X ao 3a 3a f? 6 3 O 3 O a < >• \< a a X X << zH atooo Kl CM I »Co COto to o o Kl CM IN. I o SSI oto o o Kl CM I K I o Za ao Z 3 a 3 3 *8 O in to in tn 3a h£ a «« Pto o a X a 3 X < X u u 13 m Q CM Z ^ o ^ a 33 Z O 0^30o z a ^ < >• N 3 < a a a a Xo Z X < 3 2 < z a o H C 4 iC PP O o <Ka IS 3 3 -> n § p p-H r X ^ < < <3 mm P < a a __ 7 ^ M M < 5 1^ O 3 3 3 M H -« 3 3 < a I Po p CM O o p55 9o p < Xo Xt- 13 p CM Pzo a - >• S£§ P M t-4 P O H h* a - \ 3 < a a a a X O Z X -I g6i5 = c. c. t ___ o inm M Ma w § UJot r— I UJ ft O H £“UJ ft O £ SS o £o o s ft 2 C in Ch o o ill in cn inro inin UJ UJ I- Ul ft Ki in (o UJ r\j u X O -ii «0 OTxii S-Su,§X > o o ^ ft O o o it o I i0o o o ^ inM ft H -J s m in UJ ft o cu -1 IdUJ UJ ID MUJ-« O UJ in s inin Hin M I to X *co •- inin (O o o r Mcin lU I iOO N X «• O Min ft o O ft O UJ UJ a, N XS3 #a ^ M.r#f 1-1\JY CSJo oo o o Xu < to < K O UJ ftft c o O < ft Q O Z UJ < < >- N ft < lU ft lU ft O z X ft i: < ft O H ■£ fi C C C c j UJ O UJ h- M K < H £ c a^M-. >> • !? I , •* *1 ■ . * . . .; • . 1. . ; 1 . ! •: . J I ! • ■ • j • i • •: j I • ♦ • • •:.i • « ; » * • -« .I iss'Jso i; * i . .4 •o- • • #• * % 4^ ^. -» ■ • < • it » ■ • r;t ••*: * ' • * w * [ l\ •i. '. 4-i_» • • ► f* • 4^ • — .; , 4. •« 1 • ! 1 i1 1 " • - 1 -44 4 4 - 4 - 4 - .: ............•• • • ,4-1, • • • • •• » • • - .• • •• • • f 4*“—• 4 - • ' .A-fcbfc'ts; '' •" i • • . I * r • i . .. j . , ^ I .... ; • •f ...5 t i t* • -i. 4 iJ L. -1.LOI-.Tf~ - f • t - — • « ? >• -r 'f --------,.i j.... "»** - » ♦•44.4.. I .«» - , - ■ • • • 4 • M ----------------- 4-44. - 44 4 j ‘ 1 • ' ll • >• 1 1 1 i • 4-4*44»-.,. . , ....' « -4-4- 1_ ..114!.:;I4. $i • : » 1 4-4 -.-... » f 1 - 4 1 . « • - •» *-4 * T - »ri-r r • • • • ^ I • I J u/2-V-.ev . . i . j , / < • • ! ‘ • I t— «. - • • • 'j\:n___‘ • ♦ - »• •! ■ r * : * * •— ’ ^ • JL *^|...................................I• ^ —I ... • : '* f 1M ■ ♦ — 1 *1 ' I t ' I ■ •- j... . . . * p: j - r-r-- ’• *'1 T *'• . rr • r-T • • • ....- ■■?* • , ................... • - » f « • I • ^ ••• «• •— I -• -• • • •— —<—*«« ... i * ■ 'yil^'-Kinep • - - ♦ t -4 -i----- £i3iaih_Lr:: »• ♦ -1 - •—» • —•50 -.-J i ' ' 1' I ‘4-_____ -------------- • • 1 • -♦ • - 4 - ^• « • 4 .^ ^ 1 4 . -» . • • • • • • f . • - j -. — -Csi' « • «»«»•« « • •• r !'*■'••-1 1 « , : • ♦ • • 4 . 1 « • ^4 « 1 ' • i... ,4 ----------------------- . . 4. rir=- . .1 . :......... • • ■ • i .4 . 4 — 1 4 4 . .,4 f-——r 1--— :■ • ' • -♦ - 4- 4 — ^4..4 4 . • . 1....* ^ I . • » 4 »* • - . 1 uj *'f *------- rr* *“• *. r. 13: »-----« - 4 - •— • --•4-:: >-::. :1t? 4. |. • J • 4~« - t - j - f • - •d J * • <-Q i.------------------------ •• • * « . i —^ J *• •cO * 1 ‘ • 1 4 < ►<d>-*---------]T • ' 4«. ♦. « .^ 4 -4..«« ♦ • 4—»«. O-rj ..... "t:;- • ;-; ... ...|, ::.::r_L • —♦ • » 4-t • . ♦ .-r. .... 1 . .i • •‘f“* — - •-i • •- -4.-.’ — • —• •*-^..i . . 4 J • • ■• »>•«»« - * • 4 * 1«4,-., • • 4 — , . * , 1 4. - *4 4 * « » --------------?- • 1 f-.- : - b -^rl' --------------4- ^4 . .^ * -•-• *• <1 - ^ 4 ^ . i . . -44... -4 — - -4- -,-.1-4.. •• • # - • • 4 ^«.4 • 4 • • I ♦ • • . •-■■*• rr- --- ;.— 1. ............:t • 9-^ *rr------i*. 1ii.4 M.-4B —4 ■ “■ , — 4 —•.- , 4.-. . -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------; ... .. -J.,-.,. --------4 ....4 ^ . . . i . . T‘*~* • --4 •- * . i . . I «.r • 4 4 ~ »'f k —•.......-• - t • (■• T * T ----- - —- • ... -4- 4 4 . 4 -.4 -4^-------------- ■t -4. I ^-4.4 I 4.. -- 4 — • -4. -4. 4 . , -1 • ♦- i- • • » • • - ... f 9 . 1 . . 4 4 1 ; .4 .. I .4 . I t • •-1 •• •• "t r - .-i « I 4- # 4 Q;<).::-- i::Vf:: ? • • * - ! }-:.i ■r J rp : , . .- J-r , I—♦ # » -•. • - I I -- ►.J .1 4... i. ’ 'r t 4 ; . 4 I # 4« • 4 . I .. I- -•—• » i i ; ! 1 It r'o’l r Ctnctv^ Up ► • I f ^• • .. 1.j—. - * - 4^ • « X r 4 — -■>>>. :'a t • t' P . .. 4. , , i. . * • «- • f * •' i- • [ I ‘r.p.i.'or;’'!! • ?■ T- U . *• ■■•’ : ; ; . J .vi.T»:.- C'.rt/y t^.-V!h^3"r^j>:c7. , !v.y lireiT vi-: ; r* ‘ ; '. i r • Tiii J t'tjfwyor tM.T ia iC^”- r: =: -• -■•••.......1 ; « « t •• » -• , 4 i *.4 iitt. ** • •••. :—i 4*4 ft»*llllM] m ■ # •( I j r f '.» I > t. •• .•-. —I M . t . ir^ •**,• v ‘* y ; • *• *** ’* •••^- ^*- #-c •• v.=.::iS? ««/<• •S'U7, # • ON~30y- 00-) ■■“"^<- ------------------ ~ V WAvmoi 'I , lV35 w^ ■ ! 3" #,!•»<524';^:-i VO ~yf i^ I "'c! •'i/' -^: f?. 1... O jr.-* ■:«£,': -!. *» IvSw?, •5 C* ^—*, c3- j/^,tc,su ■¥ '%A 4 % 3^* ^ a ;^c>, ^/C----------- *J'3J '» ^ —: %>ro :C • e; tf4|ig 2L fvi '^'■?A- I 'C->, toOSi- \ -t. nv•j' 1*1 »• 4 \ •T . • ^ J J-am tn < iO 'X iv .y X^•i f -« I i ,5 ^' T ••••. **• ■ • ' ™'^'\r “^ * *3 • SSI t es3 t ^ ^ VN ‘-^'*C=3*CE3IE3 ' v! Mil ♦ - I Planning Commission City of Orono 1275 South Brown Road Orono, MN 55323 Attention; Jeanne Mabusth, Building and Zoning Administrator Re: 2/17/87 Hearing itei #1107 We, the owners of affected properties, oppose the issue of a variance to permit construction of a single family residence on the above parcel of land for the following reasons: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. This parcel is both of substandard size and quality. The land drops away sharply from Linden Pwenue as much as 7-12*. The rear half of the parcel is nearly alwa>i damp and soggy. The rear half of the property serves as drainage for adjacent proper ties to the west, north and east. The water that percolates through this parcel flows into Lake Minnetonka through a small culvert under Oak Street. The water pressure in the spring on this culvert is already sufficient to cause water flow under as well as through the culvert. Oak Street at this point is unpaved and privately maintained by the users. The maintaining users are concerned that a house erected on this parcel will increase the run off pressure on the culvert resulting in increased maintenance costs to a road that already has erosion prone character istics. Since an owner of this subject parcel would not use this portion of Oak Street, the cost of handling resultant increased erosion problems would be shifted onto others. A home built on grade with appropriate set back from Linden Avenue would be at least 7-9" below Linden Avenue. This would make access difficult in winter and also cause potential water seepage problems for the house. For these reasons, a builder may desire to raise the house utilizing substantial fill. The use of fill would further aggravate the erosion problem; possibly impound the water flowing from the north or redirect water onto properties to the west. The use of fill might also require the removal of a number of trees which would exacerbate run off problems. •) .'•a A further impetus to the use of fill,with its attending problems,is that if the house were built on grade, it is possible that the ground level would be below the sewer line under Linden Avenue. In order to try to avoid the above-mentioned problems, the Council could be asked for a set back variance from Linden Avenue to allow the house to be built on higher ground. Other homes on Linden now comply with the 35' set back requirement. ;pf;'':V -. .■jr -I ^»«iti|»-..<J^O ^^^■iwr wvm^ 7.Because all drainage runs directly into Lake Minnetonka, increased drainage caused by fill and ground alteration could affect lake water quality. 8.If this property is declared buildable, an innocent buyer will be faced with all this parcel's inherent problems and pressure will be put on the Council for further accommodations to relieve the buyer of "hardship." 9.If this parcel is declared to be buildable, then a siirflar variance for Block 4 Minnetonka Summit Park, which abuts this parcel on the west, is now vacant and has similar problems, would also have to be granted when applied for. For all these reasons, we urge you to decline the variance request on this parcel. X'}' ■ •SI i ih fi'' Respectfully submitted, fc^ui,v J- — / . A’<sr,Oulu. 1A « A WUJUi V// / <9«_A-ntJL ■ 1•i 4 111 i. < I'*-*•■ i'- 1 Mayor Grabek Orono Council Members Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson From Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator Date:February 10, 1987 Subject: #1109 Curtis L. Johnson, 2024 Shadywood Road - Variances - Public Hearing Request by applicant to postpone variance review until revised plans are submitted to City. On February 10, 1987, Mr. Johnson met with staff to advise that he would be unable to proceed with a proposed second story addition to the existing residence because the foundation was deemed unstable. Staff noted that this would be the time to center the structure on the property if a complete new foundation was to be installed (review the enclosed survey). The applicant also advised that he wished to move the structure closer to the lake in order to be in line with the adjacent residences. If the structure is to be moved lakeward, the survey would have to be amended by designating the average setback line and the setbacks for the ^®^oc^ted structure. Mr. Johnson has also discussed a desire for a lakeshore second story deck of approximately 12 feet in width. The applicant was advised that such a deck would have to also meet the average lakeshore setback line. Note for Review, Consideration, Comment: In light of the findings and final conclusions resulting from the review of the Schall application, it is now the policy of staff to require variance applications when a second story is to be called over that portion of a structure that is located within a required yard area. Staff would also require variances if an addition involves an extension along an existing substandard setback line. Note that a variance review would not be required if a property had already received variance approval for the encroachment of the structure into a required yard area, and, if, that approval was not conditioned on the specific prohibition of vertical or horizontal expansion. Planning Commission Action: Move to postpone review of Curtis Johnson's variance application until the applicant has submitted revised plans for amended proposal. 1 -t-. To Mayor Grabek Orono Council Members Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator From: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator Date:February 11r 1987 Subject:#1110 Robert Martinson, 1840 Shoreline Drive Variances - Public Hearing Zoning District - LR-lA (Required = 2.0 acres) Section 10.23, Subd 6 (B) a) Area - 1.98 acres as platted 1.8 acres exclusive of roadway (66 ft. right-of-way) Area Variance - .2 acres or 10% e) Width - Section 10.23, Subd. 6 (B) Required = 200' Existing = 127.5' Variance = 72.5' or 36.5% c) Side Setback Variances on two sides based on original site plan (Exhibit F) Section 10.23, Subd. 6 (B) Required = 30' Proposed « 24' at both sides Variances =6' or 20% Per Section 10.22, Subd. 1 (A) - Average Setback Line Variances for Accessory Structures (wood dack and pool) Pool =55' in front of average setback line Deck * 21' in front of average setback line Per Section 10.03, Subd. 10 and Section 10.75, Subd. 4 (A) - Conditional Use Permit required for accessory structures on through lots and all structures must meet the required front yard setback from each street. 1) Deck/Tennis Court Required = 50' Proposed = 60' Heritage Drive Pool Required = 50' Proposed = 250* County Road 15 Hardcover Facts (review Exhibit D) - No Variance Required 0-250' = 0 s.f. 250-500' = 8,363 s.f. including pool area or 26% Allowed = 9,547 or 30% 500-1,000' = 3,700 s.f. or 16% Allowed = 8,034 s.f. or 35% Zoning File #1110 February 11, 1987 Page 2 of 4 List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Application Exhibit B - Plat Map Exhibit C - Property Owners List Exhibit D - Hardcover Facts Exhibit E - hardcover Analysis Exhibit F - Original Site Plan Exhibit G - Survey Exhibit H - Amended Site Plan The applicant seeks multiple variances to construct a new residence on an undeveloped riparian lot. Access to the lake will be on Smiths Bay. The applicant must be advised that a dock (accessory structure) cannot be constructed on the lakeshore portion of his property until a certificate of occupancy is issued for principal residence. As for the lot width and area variances, staff has little concern. The lot ^ is similar to the adjacent developed lots within Auditors Subdivision No. 356. The lot is certainly larger than the developed 1 acre lots^ in the surrounding Fox Hill Subdivision. There are no apparent physical features or recorded concerns for the property that would inhibit the development of the property. Access to the property will be via a City road. Heritage Drive, requiring approval by the Public Works Department. The sharp vertical elevations of the back along Heritage Drive may create a need for retaining walls but staff sees no major sighting problems at the southern edge of the lot line. A conditional use permit is required for all proposed accessory structures. The deck tennis court meets all required setbacks but the pool and portions of the wooden deck encroach beyond the average setback line. The application notes that the location of several mature trees provides a natural placement for the house. The pool is located to the front or lakeside to get the best advantage of direct sunlight. The pool structure will not create a view barrier. Staff has not received building elevations of the proposed house but if the deck is at grade, once again, there would be no interference with neighbor's lakeside view. Applicant should confirm design of deck area. Staff recommends approval only if deck is at grade. At the onset of this review. Staff has continued to advise the applicant that the side setback variances were not acceptable. Staff cannot recall when the City granted side setback variances in conjunction with width variances for undeveloped lots. On February 11, 1987, the applicant submitted an amended plan. Exhibit H, that would no longer require side setback variances. Mr. Martinson has asked that you consider both plans for this review and notes that the amended plan will call for the removal of the majority of the pine trees to the north. I —rsmma -e on Bay. >t be :e of :ern, tors acre rent ibit sory )OOl irm Zoning File #1110 February ll, 1937 Page 3 of 4 review?d"tL"sofls\lp’’and sL^of Staff has consist of Heyder and Lester soils nr-n iraptovement. The soils permeability characteristics Th» 9ood drainage with moderate an on-site sewage treatment system ^^ finding suitable area for Commission act on the applicaLon would suggest that the Plannino not scheduling the application fo^ Coi^^nofi testing but to recommend reviewed and approved by the City staff. action until testing has been staff Recommendation: ShorllLi'^rfvrtrpermit”co^s^ the property located that the size and width of the prooe’S^^^'^J's ^ ® "®" residence finding adiaoent lots and exceeds the areas of rh» consistent with developed oerm<\°'r"'' "iHe by 40 to 45 percent ^ ®®te per lotpermit for proposed accessory structu^^^I^n L ®PPr°ve a conditional use court, finding they meet the reouir<ari qn ^ a. lot, pool and tennis yards and to grant a 55 feet sethaov setback in both front/street back line for the pool and 1 21 fe»^ » beyond the average sit- or more of the following findings: ^<^roac ment for the deck based on one r;movfl*'l| hhrm^llleTrny tret^a^l^^rllr“lf Yot^®‘’“^ adja|’enrJots’' are"®lnulp/a°le''seve’‘'®“''® structures on the development of the middle lot. severe restrictions in the 3. The pool and deck structures are bni n- , not create a lake viewing barrier for adjacent r'esIdeTce^s""^ approval is subject to the following conditions: the “cVnk'’r°nf that'^’tlfe act.' in until suitable area for an on-sitrsela"g“ trelS^ftemr^"^"" line may never be altered'^ll as^to^create*'a*’l^°"'^ the average setback adjacent neighbors. ® create a laxe viewing obstacle for prior^to\'he”creation’'lf^r lenirb lut°.” P“hlic Works Department dook.'’^Ap?r||it f®J"r?hl^dlckwrii^^^^^ for the installation of a occupancy has been issued fornew residencT ^ certificate of • Zoning File #1110 February li, 1937 Page 4 of 4 through^ lot" and* that*future°Vocesso*' P’"°P®>'ty i? considered a se?bacr??or."bo\h ‘’7ron\/sttee^"Utbacrfii^ J; J."2 “ ss" :u%,‘sx rxi-r;.;- existin';'uSdeveToped\"o\”'rLgi^^ ^SO^O® for an ■■ W" '-'.a ■■■ W ;:y i .< - - ii VLu' ■fijlio'’'- ih'^^ uate Hcc ■ a/■ J / Foe .-• J ■"XJ-Jc. .P.* fn f fc* '. 1-•^ •) • : .7 if • >• ii.v.v.v" Receipt Initials # /// CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION 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) PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address 1840 Shoreline Drive Orono Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) 10-117-23-42-0003_ _ _ _ _ Please checlc one - Is the property _ _ abstract or V torrens? Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. ** ** •• •• •• mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm w mm mm mm mm ^m mm mm m» mm mm 9m mm mm mm ^m mm -- _ ^ _ APPLICANT Phone (home) 938-3124 Name Robert Martinson & Associates Address : 6919 McCauley Trail_ _ _ •• •• •• •• mm ^m mm mmm mmm mm ^m mm mmm mm mm mm m OWNER (if different than applicant) Phone (wor)c) 944-1996 City; Edina_ _ _ _ Zip; 55435 Phone (home)537-2003 Name Donna Jack Smith Phone (work) Address; 4168 Adair Ave No y * / Date Property Acquired / JS3 City; Robbinsdale zip; 55422 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ (month/year) I 60c0 (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. PRESENT USE OF PROPERTY Present Zoning District LR-IA Present Use of Property Open Lot Residential Other (specify) DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $200,000. Describe request in detail; Pe-zoninr to permit sinple family house. VARIANCES REQUIRED X Lot Area X Setback Variances ( Other Lot Width Front X _ _ Hardcover Side _ _ _ Rear) w / - - --—^- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - r r I i*' ’ o; . . , ; • ^ ■< ‘ ; ■ 'V.: ■•••■■''HARDSHIP . .. Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty resulting from strict enforcement of zoning regulationst Front yard set back required—- - - adjacent homes would necessitate the removal of a large cluster_ _ _ _ of 30 foot spruce trees to the north.- - - - --- - - - - - - - - - - --- - - - DESCRIPTION OP UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS ... Describe unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code Requirements; Large clustering of spruce trees on east and- - - - west boundaries and north of proposed house location. —- - - - - --- REQUIRED SUBMITTALS 1. Completed Application Form 2. Certified Property Owners List of owners within 150' (you can obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Govt Center 348-3271). 3. Stamped, legal sized envelopes (#10) pre-addressed to each of the names on the above list with no return address. 4. Certificate of survey including hardcover calculations as required. 5. Plat Map. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your variance application is not complete if the above information has not been included. Certification by Zoning Department that Variance Application is complete. Zoning Official's Signature_ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _j APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE . , _ The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay all unusual expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/ner OWNERS SIGNATURE ( The owner hereby acJcowledges and agrees to this application and authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, agents. Commission members, and Council members for purposes of investiga- • tion and verification of this request. Owner ' s Signature ^ AilVr.g ___________________ _'S-ZZ Appllcln^mus^hive ’all 4b'm ’ittals into the City offices 25 ^^ys before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council, and, if applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, to please make arrange ments to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise t e Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. .^4 I . m. February 5, 1987 MEMORANDUM TO:Orono Planning Staff & Planning Commission Side yard set back variance request FROM: Robert Martinson, AIA The attached site plan titled "site plan with 30* side yard", shows the house and garage location based on 30’ side yards. As you will note, under these conditions it will be necessary to remove most of the pine tree cluster on the north side of the garage. The site plan showing a 24* set back on either side will maintain the pine tree cluster. RM/ram Enel. r m . f’. V-^ * I :"-s?r HARDCOVER ANALYSIS 2-5-87 PARCEL A. B. C. D. (l) D.(2) 127.29 X 75 = 127.29 X 175 = 127,. 29 X 250 = 127.29 X 165 = 127.29 X 15.3= c»,iaijgpi ^i. • PARCEL AREA 9,546 22,275 31,822 21,002 1,952 Total 86,597 SF AREA OF HARD COVER 0 0 8,363 3,000 700 12,063 i ri CARDARCLLE fi* ASSOCIATES, IIIC.0110 Eden Road Phone (01.-1031 Land SurveyorsEdf?n Prairie, Mil 5514•! Certificate €>f ^urUep f' ■ rCj.lQ-----------— ------------- P«jqo Fi 1<*C?38-B7 ^ mwe deck tennis north cluster pine trees garage Scalei 1--50 'Vr. i ■.: > ■ L_.. hous^ • v-'N set back line Vwood debk^ SITE PLAN .. mO I ^ ^ I w*h •««» A«I |M» li • Ii«i« »»>>»*>»■*»■ •• • »'"«r •* Lot ?a Aurlltor'W Subdlvlpjon No. 156 #1 «M •*• ,ytt, if 9»f, Irta 9^ •• 99i4 l«*4. $9n9ft4 ky a* ifcl* *.Alui >fnnuary CAJIOAllflU A AWOOAIfS. INC. STAte IFG. NO. 4301 » • • .JIA ^irak.aJ*L.lCaVkkILr . ,1^^. »■..«. ».-».-. - - - ~ ~ - ~~ -M-----~— 4^^ ->• .-------------------------------^. Ml . ^-- ------ V HCARDARELLE ^ ASSOCIATES, INC. 6110 Eden Road Phone (612) 0/1 1-10 31 Lnnd Surveyors Eden Prairie, MN 55144 Certificate Of ^iirliep (S' Survey For Robert Mnrtlnson <■ Aaaoc. Qt, ^/s, R91'i Neciauley tr., Edina, Hook ?y.30 ___T®55435 Faqc Fi 1(!C23B-B7 ^ //e/it tags \ n 95/. S Scel«i l**-50* #. i I rx I ;« , /Vi I I » I f /’ * »I I • t I f * \ t \Km y ^ I. - ^ “VC"'' \ I V SURVEY % a:* v3 ' ^ ' .'X; - " I tH0f flilt !| • liM Mi ttfr*# tt m ivrref AucH.tor‘.6_SuMlv^Bl9P -------NMMiri. ««•••«•• *>4 *1 ik. Im««m .1 Ml •• «WUt f It ■•r, tita •> •« mM I«*4. |irii|il wm *!« 22nd CA«0A)tfU£'4 ASSOCIAUS, INC STATt MCt. NO. AMI Phone (612)0/11.3031 Certificate #f ^urbei) L'Tnrl Surveyors Proirie, t-tti 55.14 4 Survey For Ro^rt . .„„„ ------fl-LMeyT., Edig?; HU ^Uis r* -S_25/K _______ Pago X. Fil(!Ci3g.87 deck tennis « driveway- 0^0 y •^■» north c:iusic^ Pine trees garage V Scale* l-«50* sy nous^ jT ® V vwood back line Pool rj; SITE PLAN WITH 30' SIDEYARD SETBACK \ Ik-.kr•»«»,iMtUiI..k^■ -toi_u-tell.t,'r-. i.i.7n m“ •**• •<------------------ „„ „ „ ^ “"r" •■,'•' w,*.„-d4«»«<-j^nu.%rv «*rf »il .. Jt '-r. CAII0AUU£ 4 ASiOClAlC5, INC. STATf ICO. NO. 4301 5144 ■i, *<w n>ll ne i- To Mayor Grabek Orono Council Members Cominissxon Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator Date: February 11, 1987 Subject. #1U1 Steve Pauly, 3980 Dahl Road - Variance - Public Hearing l^lication - Setback, hardcover varianoes to construct a new home. Zoning District - LR-IB, 1-acre List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Application Exhibit B - Plat Map Exhibit C — Property Owners List ^ " ^®tter of Request and Sketch Exhibit E - Site Plan Exhibit P - Kesflution #1700 Dated 11/26/84 Pertinent Facts - *^^°0 granted a variance for remodeling that allowed 8 9%s.a. r■“ <3etermined that the bulk of the existing house is over. ition that makes it most feasible to remove it ^and start that^nr^«^'^ proposal is for a slight increase in 0-75' hardcover over addition^:^^75 ^ this is proposed to be compensated by covtr nn ihJ removals so that overall square-footage of hard- e entire property is equal to the pre-existing state. Se^su^tey^as^l 5oO 75-250' hardcover based on clmVaritUrpurpl'sls? "" """" " compromise and for 0-75' Hardcover 75-250' Hardcover NET HARDCOVER Lakeshore Setback House Deck Existing 2866 s.f. (7.5%) 9300 s.f. (15.5%) 12,166 s.f. 36' (None) Proposed Approved 1984 3693 s.f.(9.7%) 3390 s.f.(8.9%) 8473 s.f.(14.1%) 8776 s.f.(14.6%) 12,166 s.f.12,166 s.f. Mira •j I iiTiT^ ^HtlJ sns ishm [•Kil MmTO ®Tira ima [0« ' « • IXI.. i*r •V u l^a 1 C/i . » ffT* 4 • -j ^ •» '- ” •••^ ^ «_ ^ -S/cto ' j)o5^3 ^ xx<X>i*r v1 ;i ! \O C4;ti-,OF-ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee $150.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $75.00 (no change from original application) Aftor-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address *3> ^f'f ^ , Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) _____________________________ Please check one - Is the property ____ abstract or .X. torrens? Please attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. APPLICANT Name 71=0 IS.Phone ^'7/" ^ Mailing Address 39<50 f?d, SS~3€<-f OWNER Name y} yi^ iB Phone Mailing Address Date Property Acquired "7- ^3 (month/year) I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. PRESENT USE OP PROPERTY Present Zoning District Present Use of Property Lf^-IB Mo Vvn i2i £>7^/z tA- <1.Residential Other (specify)I DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $ /5^/wv Dfcccribe request in detail: VARIAl.CES REQUIRED Lot Area L<,t Width X Hardcover Setback Variances ( X Front Side Rear) Other HARDSHIP Describe undue hardship or practicel^ifficul^ resulting^fro^^^ enforcement of zoning regulations:—------f- ( (^ description op unusual property conditions Describe-unusual prop^ty conditions Preven^ing^con,pUance with Zoning Code Requirements t /^77^^crr>>. <a —- required submittals 1, Completed Application Form 2. 3. 4. thi%^“is\%ro°/He^neprnColnty"De°^^^ 348-3271). stamped, legal sized envelopes (#10) pre-addressed to each of the names on the above list with no return address. certificate of survey including hardcover calculations as required. 5. Plat Map f£SVtha"t y^"ur*’v:rianL°:pru=arion'!s no^%oS^ielfiflhe above information has not been included APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees \^'°para?" lelf and/or knowledge. Applicant's Signature OWNERS SIGNATURE Date - - - - The owner hereby ackowledges and^agrees to^th^^ City ^'tafft" co"n^sultants, agen?s'"SonJSfssiSf mlmb\"rs7 and Council members for purposes of investiga- tion and verification of this re^^^. _ —7 Owner’s Signature- - - - ^_ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - Applicant must have alre^ he^^d on the Planning Commission Meeting. jz'iaiujxny v- third Monday of each month. I »• - - c« 1 (?*K>; (■<■) ^i¥)1L ifluS J 1 ^11 IrT/^o; ^54 e46 (j3j jj'~ 'hu \yy (L^) g-47.3 *Vr</ V tod lO-iS-i: 4oa (s,i)llj\ /r^ u OCT 2 0 1983 I i > J r.iTV OF J »^ih' \ <>.______ : I 1-20-87 SETBACK AND HARDCOVER VARIANCE APPLICATION STEVE PAULY - SITE ADDRESS: 3980 DAHL ROAD i . THIS APPLICATION IS FOR BOTH A SETBACK AND HARDCOVER VARIANCE TO FACILITATE THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW HONE. CCTXQAr'kf • 0-75" zSSr ll THERE IS A STEEP SLOPE STARTING AT THE 75 SETBACK AREA AND CONTINUING AS FAR BACK AS 250'. THESE ^TEEP SLOPES CONSTITUTE A HARDSHIP TO THE PROPERTY. THE ONLY Rt^ASONABLE SPOT TO REBUILD IS OVER THE FOOT PRINT OF THE OLD HOUSE. ENCLOSED IS A PRINTED OVERLAY OF THE OLD AND NEW HOUSE. ^^WITh'^THE new house AND DECK SITUATED AS SHOWN THERE WOULD BE AN INCREASE IN EXISTING HARDCOVER IN THE *^-75' ^^0” 2866 SQ.FT, to 4419 SQ.FT. FOR A NET INCREASE OF 15w»^. SQ.FT. OUR PROPOSAL FOR HARDCOVER VARIANCE WOULD BE A TRADE-OFF □PHARDCOVER in both the 0-75' AND 75-250' AREAS. TO REACH A PARTIAL HARDCOVER REDUCTION IN THE 0-75' AREA THE FOLLOWING PROPOSED HARDCOVER REMOVALS WOULD APPLY: 1) A SMALL WOODEN FRAME SHED OF 130 SQ.FT. 2) A CONCRETE BLOCK PATIO OF 176 SQ.FT. 3) GRAVEL DRIVEWAY APRON OF 420 SQ.FT. THIS TOTAL REDUCTION IN THE 0-75' IS 726 M BALANCE OF 827 SQ.FT. THIS BALANCE THAT PORTION OF GRAVEL DRIVEWAY IN THE 7u SETBAC . THIS WILL RESULT IN NO OVERALL NET INCREASE IN HARDCOVER. HARDCOVER REVIEW ZONING PILE #1111 STEVE PADLY, 3980 DAHL ROAD * 0-75' Hardcover (0-75' Area * 38,000 s.f.) Existing Proposed Approved 1984 House Decks Shed Boathouse Patio Gravel Drive (near house) Gravel Apron (south end) 1,400 s.f. 130 s.f. 240 s.f. 176 s.f. 500 s.f. 1,885 s.f. 1,068 s.f. 0 s.f. 240 s.f. 0 s.f. 500 s.f. 1,800 s.f. 850 s.f. 0 s.f. 240 s.f. 0 s.f. 500 s.f. 420 s.f.0 s.f.0 s.f. 2,866 s.f. (7.5%) 3,693 s.f. (9.7%) 3,390 s.f. (8.9%) * 75-250' Hardcover (75-250' Area = 60,000 s.f.) Existing Proposed Approved 1984 Garage Gravel Drive Paved Drive 540 s.f. 6,400 s.f. 2,360 s.f. 540 s.f. 5,573 s.f. 2,360 s.f. 540 s.f. 5,876 s.f. 2,360 s.f. 9,300 s.f. (15.5%) 8,473 s.f. (14.1%) 8,776 s.f. (14.6%) * Total Lot Hardcover: 12,166 s.f.12,166 s.f.12,166 s.f. m.T;4 I m Wi m mm m »mr%\ £i?SS \>o V/i N ■Ji to o:r o 0: 4^ 0) Cjo o “• \l- —■i 1 “- ^ a"D < H I « D D to rsfc V r th. v» •• (0 c o •H 4J U CJ •H Q C CJ CJ -H x: CJ JC «J +J JC •<-> *4 4J CJw w CJ CJ *H o •o JC > X5 3 -P -H 3 •H O TJ <H 0 0 C*0 I C •H f* O CJ 1 CP I a • OJ Tl 4J o CJ c o c C c o > CJ o O N « U N N a M - c CJ cc 'P -H a *H .•H CJ o *H CJ 4-1 <y r-i d) CJ -H > © *> b > o <<0000^ Ct.'O M 'D "1 w M D' ^ CJ2 ® w a:^ u &'4J CP >, C pcd ^ C <0 c ©T! 5 *'< 5 "H w ■p -H 4J © 4J OW .3 W > ,d •H 4J -H ^ .ri >< X l4 X o x: 4J (n 0 'O P iH Uc •H 1 (Uco C n 3 5^a >oo 4J o x: Q) T1 Q) •H x; > 4J •H 'U wo a 3 o >1 fU Ctn o C -H I w (U tn rO 4-> C (Uc; Q) 4^•H g I 3 iH CO O H C •H fO 4J XI O 4J •H 'O CO U C 03 •H fO > 4^ O 0x: -p M 0 > o o ao3 o p p ftj u 0 >oo 03 P fda: 0 t7^ 03 4J C 0 o M 0 C •H (0 0 •H 4J •H W fH 0 *H tr»jQ to 0x:o 4J E ^ w 03 w x: 0 > o u 03 P fd X 03 0 O S O O rH M rH 04 < 0 4J C 0o M 0 P 0 >oa 03 0 O 03 rH 0 rH 0 0x: 4J H CO to o ao3 p -00 ax: X 4J tp c •H 4J (0 'H X 0) 0co N 03 0 •rH 44 •H O 0 ato c •H to CO p oto •H 03 0 > Oo 03 H 0 X O 4J 44 o 44 o CJ Q w If: ■ r H f w^m City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 1700 HUNICIP.L ZOMXKG , - FILE #861 Township 117, Range 23 • fh« Sections 7 and a’ Sections to a point wheU a UnVi°un^^-^^°P^ between said to said Section line from same to angles will include 2 acres off Nortroart o, ,o. Z"''® »i""«tonka thence at right angles Ea<;t ^ ^ ^ Section 8- thence Northerly along said shore°to Minnetonka,' (hereafter "property"), and beginning, 2 acres; Zoning Code Sect ion iT. 22 ^ variance lO^at?^ square feet (o foot w ere no hardcover is allowed". * °' ii^ square feet (or. Minnesota: ' '^“^^^EFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, findings i- This application was reviewed as zoning file #861. Lakeshore’^RTsTd^enUa/zofing oLtrfe on September Tncf \"ec application proposed variances >^ostd “t^ot\r7ottit';'’tTnVin°gt. owner to move the entire s^trLtu//hardship to the =otb,-.ck and hardcover rettttttttts". hardthip\''t''thi°pttiVr\yt'’'' ‘r°"^titute a ■V'.^ page 1 of 5 City of OROIVO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 1700 the oTpoAtt con junction with lakeshore setbrck zone Thi<! wn ? hardcover within the 75 ' increase in hardcover “ :nd^ i^iL“r‘;^th^rcrs,:--= this^roper^^re^plluufr^o*^^^^ the conditions e:<isting on other"pr"oper"ty Tn^thll^^^n^ng ^dmr^°c""‘ Ih^a^I^rSc ^t^ ■ u^rtin^r ''p"o^e‘’r%?i -a‘i'/ic%^::iit"Ln%^: neighboring prop^elt^^ wolld'’^n^Y^rrery ‘'^ rv^Is demonsIrabL‘°hard?h"ip "oI‘ 'difk^7ltT““” n°ec"e“^''^"® ^ preserve a substantial property riaht of th» "®=cssaty to CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS grants a ®vallanc°e" \1f the''V'"‘^"^'^' Council hereby Subdivision! and lo. 55 Subdi?is\on"fto'a?I""and an addition to the existino houc;« jof construction of decks 75' setback is required anri ® the lakeshore where a to allow an increase i^hart^^^^ ^°*22 Subdivision 2 square feet (or 7 5%) to 3 390 ^nu 0-75' setback zone from 2,866 is allowed, subject to the followIng'^^coIduVonV:''’'’'''''' page 2 of 5 ¥ y.* •v'f CITY OF ORONOd City of ORONO resolution of the city council NO. 1700 Existing hardcover in hK be removed prior fo ^'250 square, f occupancy, resulhfn,? ^ ^ issuance of certfff °ver the entirf 'r^"° IS■‘°t- Items to be- reirouli .^'^f'^over 0-75• Zone amoved include: Concrete Block Patio Shed Near Lake . Gravel Driveway Apron 176 sf 130 sf 420 sf75-250* Zone '“''el Apron ... 3,, Total Hardcover to ho o 2. Aon,- . ™ •• 1,250 Sf approve any"futlre^®^®*"^ advised that the r' hardcover in th^ ^_"loi'ovements that res^i^ the rc-moSai o7exL7°"®‘'"'’"‘th^y^ c'ounttrS'^^°t existing hardcover. ^ with Per?i7en77rdTnanc"es".' t7u7tu7e" IS7S7"suX'cr?o 7he ' Authorities ora«. j . property not with ?h7ano, -^ this variance run ...-.un^ust be exeroi u ® but aro run with the or _ of application for a buonly and ■a. condiuSSl7f thi7va°r"'‘'""’P“^'’^® "^th any of th rthe zoning codF» ^^^^^nce shall cons^^r-,?l^ terms and granted herein' automatically termin^f ^ 'Violation of 10' =^>'-11 hepunisVabie Ss r^.y^^thority ie as a misdemeanor. 1 lL,_ page 3 of 5 CITY : OF PRONO City of OROIXO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 1700 1984 . hereby agree^tolhfterms^^ understood and himself, his heirs, succe^c;oK<f t 7 behalf of «.P.^ p, ,p. ci„ co.„ca „„ uorotny HaUin, CitY-cIi?k (1' Property Ov;ner Oi'r-________ _■0 r4 k< / Hj Property Owner page 4 of 5 C. But^^^r, Mayor Wm CITY OP PRONO City of OROIVO resolution of the city council NO. 1700 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN On this ^ . _ c Public -SrA-r;--.- ^ ° ^ W/. ^ f" me e Notary the Petsonally appeared th°e""f"°^hcy) executed the ./"l^o'ng county, j ns t rl-Ln't! ^d' Vc f^heir) free act and deed".'" (‘hey) exec-u-Ud thL'same'a"s°hil Wi ^'Omy-pUBtrr' ■______ip/^r/^) ) SS. STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN j On this . asa. before me a Notary in —=—_ _ _ _ sonally appeared notary "public C®HlSSior-EXPi^ page 5 of 5 ■M:ii- V. . ^ A ■;ii'¥-S:' I ♦• • ‘ . ‘. >»• ^. .*.•:• .:V•■■•• • . • V* *‘ • . *- • ■ . . ' • /-'• • ‘i>* V'- •• . 'v . • ■' ■ > • » .. ‘ • ^ . r*' / • .' . ■, V. < , !"“<«* /• . •. • A*-V* • •', • ’ ' ' * ‘i* • . ’• * .V-:- o. •‘Z ^ -vi; •■■?•■■•*; f . ; : •■‘V'ji!- -;V' . . . ' V . • •■;................. ■. : • V';*■*•' • ‘•.. » '*{’ •* - « '.•••♦ .';• •• ,• •'Ik ' % . . ' . • .. ^. . .*••. ' I ' / : '• ' ‘ •*./••. ^ '................... / . .• ‘ 1- ' i- , v -‘ •;■ •f I ••■• ? '•‘fc '■•i " K, : i— •t • ^ * ‘' •• -..r/'-t--.- ■■ . ' ' .'■• ■•• v> ■••• . • .' ------------------1 , ' * ... > _ / \ .. . . , I' ‘ . -------*-^-.1 , t-sL. f\ . >. >1 /I.-•.-..-.vj: ' . ■ ,. ' Ai"‘ ■ .{ •*••• -^.4 ' . _ / i' .r ' •' ' • , I * ■ ' » * *• ' ^ ••.-• ---------------------------------------------• •• . • . . , , »• , • . ■• •. :: r^-'T-r.-v ‘.I.. .;. •,>■ • •. ^ -.r.r_ :••;;■• ■• •..• • .•, :~':^z±z:z:L,..: -. . '.K •■"'■' '.. ■ r : I,, .„ ‘ . : . *• I)) ' ' /''/y ■ ■ ' ■ * IV; Oi>< ... .• “■ . • • I* * • *' ‘ • 'i * • ■ S ■■ j;- • I < j *x''rX'y"‘\-yy• • y / \ ' *.*•* * » ’ iyAWym A y- ^ •; A-*%yy//y/xry^ ^ , • • y /yy ■ :-•••• ■< ■''' -y' yyyyy - Ay• ■■ ^ ■•■ • . * •• .•• • ‘.'yyy-'i ■ • •'••■,■ • •• ' • --------- _ /••/ .•'.'.ywvn ; ' ■ .. ■■:■■. y « •-. V ■ L-___ '\\r • /yy, /y\ . • • • • • -^ •• • • r • ■ •■•• ■.~:Z"'....•n:r-.■'• • }. ,■ .-y^,.■■ y-«• ..; • *;. h ‘ »• .' . --------------------------12 ........'■■•'>1' • - . •«,. —■-~lk~~.vxyy.-yy y y •. . •• j.. - fi. Y r-—. . ^ y ' //'/y '\ ' * i- ..• ..•• —■—A~-- ■Ay/.,y.‘y • y/ A .. .■*• •■.• .'■ ! .< •• J -.zi I- yy ■ ' y/y ■'■ : *.■ ■ , i:.: v::;'■“ ^: t .1| ■•',* .-r-.—'' '.■•. J • • . , '.■I •'' • *■'■ • J A " \—----------—.....*--------------------• . ‘•.. ' 1 •’ • •* • ■ ■ » * •■•'“ I ' ■ * •** • r|%, ^ 4. . . . ' f t . . . '. ■ f w •• • '1 •/. • I* .. . •/» •. . V •* y *' y ) ..............I,, . •• •. i'.i',-’ A ' 0 . • ^ »: t ,•' • • - if I ' ;y. ... > '••“•?-. w—-, L .. V ' ;’■' >A ■ Vtl ' ■..• r--—V “• '. >■;:•' . ■ f . '• . ;v, 1 .V'.-: v> ■ M f ^ f 4 * > 9 t I - ■; nt . . . - . . .y' .X v» r ••vVrM^»..vv .;,. . ;^.v. ■X'P a. > y-^yA~^ - - • '.•... - •. ■'.'••.•■.;■' ••' v'. ■ .• • . ' .—»—■—‘_____________________________ . " ■ • i I •• • . i* .•»■*. ♦ M * v».>. r_. rrr-'T • ... V/ k : • / 1 • <. •4 •v; .V < ti\ • • f'j:O ' i •* .•; ■ ci-r • ■ ; ^ • • cA » . -J -1 *: ^ T rr ; W r” ■ I To: Date: Subject: Mayor Grabek Orono Council Members Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator February 9, 1987 #1112 Smith Bay Marina, Inc., 1960 Shoreline Drive - Conditional Use Permit for proposed change in non-conforming use of residential zoned property. - Continuation of public hearing to March 16, 1987. The applicant has advised that the site planner will be unable to submit a complete set of plans by the required deadline date. Fortunately, staff was advised before the required notice of the public hearing were mailed to all property owners within 350 feet. Staff has sent written notice to all advising of the continuation of the public hearing to your March 16, 1987 meeting. As the legal notice for the application was published the week of February 2, 1987, staff suggests that if there are interested members of the public in attendance that the Commission give them an opportunity to ask questions or comment on the proposal. Planning Commission Action: Move to table the conditional use permit for Smith Bay Marina, Inc. until the next regularly scheduled r eting of the Planning Co^ission on March 16, 1987 and request that statr send written notice to all affected property owners once again advising of the change in the review date. L n i a---'-TIT > --^...1- \ February 9, 1987 To All Affected Property Owners: The review of the Smiths Bay Marina's (formerly Sailors World) application for a conditional use permit seeking a boat sales/repair uso for the property now occupied by Tonka Transmission located at 1960 Shoreline Drive has been postponed until the Planning Commission meeting of March 16, 1987. M:;- V “ ' V ’•'V'' . * ' r- K ■:'k Sincerely, Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator ■ V ''5 ■VXL •Vi .-.V ‘ 'i / ' • CERTIFICATE OF MAILING STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) SS. ) CITY OF ORONO If Jamie Bosma, of the City of Orono, Hennepin County, Minnesota, do hereby certify that a Cancelation Notice of Public Hearing concerning the matter of a Conditional Use Permit for Smith Bay Marina, was mailed to the attached list of property owners . In Witness Whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and seal this 10th day of February 1987. Jamne BosmaV k li f i : '-if. ill f: - f ' iIfK iL j ■%:.'C., ■|E2r5!s| ..^ /; i ^ (. { (. C • e (. 38 10-11 7-23 31 cool GEORGE F ROVEGNO 2010 SFGRELINE ORI VE WAYZA1£ MN 55391 33 10-117-23 31 CC89 DANIEL CREAR 1980 SPATES AVF ^AVZATA MN 55391 38 10-117-23 A2 COOS A G ASCHENBECK JR 1930 SHORELINE DRIVE hAYZATA MN 55391 38. lC-117-23 42 0015 H TOURANGEAU 2060 SPATES AVE WAYZATA MN 55391 38 lC-117-23 42 0022 CRAIG OLSON 1960 SHORELINE OR WAYZATA MN 55391 38 10-117-23 31 00C8 MARIETTA h ANDERSON 2055 SPATES AVE hAYZATA MN 55391 38 10-117-23 31 0095 TERRY 0 MORSE 2C80 SPATES AVE CRONO MN 55391 28 10-117-23 42 0012 E ROeiE kAYNE 5CC9 E;<CELSI0R BLVD apt 126 ST LOUIS PARK MN 55416 28 10-117-23 92 0017 LYLE VICKERMAN INTERLACHEN LA EXCELS ICR MN 55331 38 10- 117-23 31 OCO? JOHN T SPENCC 2040 NO SHCRF DR kAYZATA MN 55391 38 10-117-23 31 0C90 RICHARD V STINSON 2040 SPATES AVE kAYZATA MN 55391 (38 10-117-23 42 0007 ALAN NETTLES C ANNE NETTLES 1940 SHORELINE DR ORONO MN 55391 f 38 10-117-23 42 0016 RONALC J PRINEAS L980 HERITAGE OR WAYZATA MN 55391 TOTAL LABELS BATCH 003 00017 ( 38 10-117-23 31 U0tt4 STATE LAND DEPT 38 10-117-23 31 009o HARRIET SPATES TOR mNGEAU 2060 SPATES AVE kAYZATA MN 55391 38 10-117-23 42 0014 SAILORS WORLD BCX 176 CRYSTAL BAY MN 5532^ 38 10-1* -23 4-2 0021 DANIEL CRtAR 1980 SPATES AVE kAYZATA ^N 55391 I %I 1 . X CITY OF ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING - PUBLIC HEARINi^ HIGHWAY 12 CORRIDOR STUDY/COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 3, 1987 7:30 P.M. The Orono Planning Commission met on the above date with the following members present; Chairman Kelley, Members Bellows and Taylo^ The following represented the staff: City administrator Bernhard^^^ Building & Zoning Administrator Mabusth, and Assistant Building & Zoning Administrator Gaffron. John Shardlow from Snardlow & uba^^^^ oresent to represent the City. The following were also present. CounciImember Sime and Peterson. Mayor Grabek was in attendance for the later part of the meeting. INTRODUCTION , ■ city Administrator Bernhardson explained that of the seven positions on the Planning Commission there are 3 remaining four, one member was called out of town and ""®^3e to make it back in time for the meeting. Because of this, the hearing may be conducted as scheduled and listen to action will be able to be taken, therefore, formal action will be deferred until the February 17, 1987 Planning Commission meeting. City Administrator Bernhardson explained the Council, at November 26, 1986 meeting, directed staff ^°7''%*iaiLSv”^2®^corr^cror as amendment to incorporate the changes in the Highway 12 corridor as indicated at that meeting. Once the Planning Co^ission has made recommendations, the comprehensive plan amendment will be taken to the CouLfl™ preliminary approval and then to the Metropolitan Council for their approval. The Council and Planning Commission will then work on adopting the implementation tools to make the amendment a possibility. oLe thLe tools are in place, the City would then be in a position to accept development plans, etc. for this area. City Administrator Bernhardson noted the study area^ all the lands in Orono abutting Highway 12 from County Road .. to Brown Road North, which then abuts the City parcels on the east which are surround'=‘d by the cities of Long Lake and Lyzata and interspersed by a piece of Wayzata. The because of numerous inquiries about zoning from the existing 2 acre rura residential. The study consisted of 9 meeting? starting in p through November 1986. City Administrator Bernhardson explained process, that following an inventory and anaylsis stage, the Counci identified four principal areas for goals and objectives o y» follows: and transitions back from Highway 12, if there are to be changes. 2. Transportation - both through and across the Highway 12 corridor for vehicular or non-vehicular traffic. 3. Environmental protection - including Lake Minnetonka and Long Lake and other natura] features of the area. 1 CITY OP ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING - PUBLIC HEARING HIGHWAY 12 CORRIDOR STUDY/COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT 4. Public service - ability to pay for needed improvements, and pay for the increased service demand. This was not just development of a tax base for the overall economic development of the community. The following alternatives were presented: 1. To leave the entire area as it is; 2. Look at means to develop on-site septic uses, apart from single family uses. 3. Allow for development that would go beyond the existing capacity of systems, primarily transportation and utility. 4. To develop generally within the existing systems. The recommended alternative incorporated by the comprehensive plan amendment to some degree represents all four of the above a'?, t-r natives. were: In the inventory and analysis, the three primary areas of concern 1, Existing Zoning and Land Use - both in Orono and Long Lake 2. Transportation - volume, flow, and safety 3. Utility - sewer (current allotted capacity of 116 units) Another concern addressed in the study and comprehensi^^^e amendment is the means by v/hich the City intends to undertake the change which is being proposed. It is principally going to be done by the use of zoning performance standards, divided into two general areas: 1. Set of standards required to be met in order to achieve the desired zoning classification for the development. 2. Once achieved, the standards for that district would then have to be met. Issues Metropolitan Council wants addressed in the comprehensive plan amendment: a) Sewer - need for installation of the 1,000 GPM pump at the Long Lake Lift Station. b) Transportation - frontage roads and signalization. c) Parks - no negative impact and will provide better local access to Baker Park and the Luce Line. d) Airport - Orono is in the southern fringe of the western Hennepin search area for an airport, but the area under consideration in Orono is thought to be too small an area for facilities and buffering. 4 i y a - 1 HI^AY 15°?^ ^IANNING COMMTQ ct 2 CORHXBOH STUBVCO m'I^S Housino ~ ^ ^ niodera+-^f) Metrnr.^1 • erate goal development. improvement-^* ^^^^dlow exnia-; Old Crystal*B slternanV’®'^ font "ay be^olVf ®°a<3 and Wl i J ® '’ave been "ove^e^nt'^s to thJ'Vra°d''ib°'"''" th. way curb cu4 at^ t"‘®tsections A tton thi7 "'°te d°eveiAp°A*'’' "t ao.ternat Consolidate the a^ ^ahe to „ahe a%A%if t/^A-nta, demote or al t-r^ —tly ^ Of 01d"r -ote condition ^ and s to *k ®-cern about^-s^Ao anggested.” £f5^“ayAren'terse'’t- ’^®“ed connection out at Ir^A^'^tve is A^A^tthout hav £n:rA"^“e'a/d£A47"°P°®®"^^^^ teccbake Road. ®"tia 1 between the rA ?® toad to tontage roadwa folfoAsV®® ‘’®twe‘en'’"„®VlA®w Dr^/^'’ been^^ve and old c *>.' .« ^ CITY OF ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING - PUBLIC HEARING HIGHWAY 12 CORRIDOR STUDY/COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT Scheme 1. Remote frontage road with a consolidated strip center with no direct access onto Highway 12. There are some free-standing commercial pads between the frontage road and Highway 12, with access of frontage to town houses. All alternatives given call for the retention of the wetlands and trees on the site. The area to the north, as shown, is subdivided into single family lots with not a great deal of support for increase of density. Scheme 2. All free-standing commercial pads along the frontage road, then transitional multiple residential back to single family residential. The only real difference between this and Scheme 1 is the consolidation of the commercial potential into a single major center in the middle of the corridor in Scheme 1. Scheme 3. Commercial areas would be limited to the areas which are between a single facing frontage road and Highway 12 on both sides, again with transitional multiple family back to single family residential to the north. Scheme 4. Limits the commercial area to the northeast quadrant of Crystal Bay Road and Highway 12 then transitional to multi-residential and back to single family residential to the north. Mr. Shardlow noted it was the consensus of the Council, that if the performance standards could be met and if appropriate sewer capacity could be identified, any one of the above alternatives could be feasible. Planning Commission Questions Chairman Kelley verified the definition of one sewer unit as serving a single household. He questioned what was the original section of land which was assessed for sewer. ». City Administrator Bernhardson explained that the original sewered area was to the south and west of Highway 12, the school area and the industrial area. He clarified that no sewer units were allocated to Area No. 4 and 5 with the exception of the Orono Shopping Center and part of Area No. 1. Bernhardson noted that the remaining 116 sewer units should be allocated to the original area that was assessed. He stated that the City could have a maximum allocation of 600 units (116 included in that number) which would require a minimum of two changes and possibly the thj rd: 1 •Addition of a 1,000 GPM pump at Long Lake 2. Pipe C (800 foot segment) changed by adding a parallel pipe or a larger pipe to replace the current pipe 3. Pipe E - possibly requiring a change City Administrator Bernhardson noted that with the existing interceptor may still be take capacity in this area over and above the additional 600 units for this area, but there currently is not a prepared pump space available apart from the one that is proposed to be used. 1 I I CITY OF ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING - PUBLIC HEARING HIGHWAY 12 CORRIDOR STUDY/COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT City Administrator Bernhardson additionally added that the difference between the 600 available units minus the original 116, would have to be negotiated between the cities of Medina and Long Lake. Medina is currently at their allocated capacity of 82 units in the system. Long Lake had an original 1,200 units, which are not all are currently being used. To date, the City of Orono has used approximately 1/2 of the original units allocated to them (about 102 units). Chairman Kelley asked if the proposed service road going behind the Orono Shopping Center, would be the only access to the center. Mr. Shardlow explained that there is no proposal to eliminate the centers access directly onto Highway 12, basically because it would be very costly to do so. The rear access may be able to be designed to give the center access preferrable access, in which the center may choose to convert. Chairman Kelley asked what motivation would be given to the property owners to the south of Highway 12, (Van Dale and Washington Scientific), to share in the cost of reconstructing the roadways. City Administrator Bernhardson explained that in this area greater funding through City participation in the use of Municipal State Aid Funds. The property owners do have some interest in improvement of the access because they have safety concerns for their employees directly accessing on to Highway 12. Chairman Kelley address the proposal of Brown Road North being closed. He asked for justification lor the closing, and whether it has been reviewed by MnDot or the City of Long Lake and the property owners along Brown Road North. City Administrator Bernhardson noted there is a petition from the property owners along Brown Road North regarding the volume of traffic and the speed on Brown Road North. The closing of the road has been mentioned to the City of Long Lake and their response is they are not in favor of the closing. The primary reason for development of the frontage road is for the east/west flow and property access, not the closing of Brown Road North. Taylor noted that from a traffic and a design point of view, there certainly is an understandable motivation to block the road off at the intersection or between the intersection and the proposed curb cut in order to provide continued access to the bank. In dealing with the affected property owners and the definition of unsafe access, these wou.'d be over riding the design criteria. Bellows noted that by making Brown Road North a little more difficult to use by rerouting traffic temporarily, a preferable traffic pattern could be established. This may not necessarily be a perfect solution, but once the pattern for traffic has been established. Brown Road North may be reopened. the »'ould 2dina Long leing the (hind Mr, Shardlow noted -f-ha-i- 4-v.^ i. ccur on the Rebers property would defln^f^f development which are to Rebers property has been developed ?L ® ^o be built until the •'®®P traffic off Highwav*^12 east/west road criteria looked at in the planning prLess: "°ted the two other people\rtheVo^unity''fee/ls ‘^un1a^ ^th 12, which several planning process for an alternative to t^arktuauln.^°°’'®^ ^‘’® Reber property.”®® ® responsibility to provide access for the solution, but*'we^must^not^nv®^^®' meant to say this is the nni exists with the al^^rn'aUves”."®"'®”’' ""® ®^--tages and^di'saLantagerar area and how they are Vflocated. water units are available for the constructed^a n\lT'‘waterttwer®Ibo®ut’®°"^ *''’® I'd"? Lakedetermine tower space for rhic a ' ^ ysars ago. a study was don^ need to be drilled for additional un/ts.^'' additional well would probably se®rve®;®heT®®V"®''®“""^^^^ a®l 1® ut®A®itT®"" ae®v7l®opl’l®nt ‘’.®''®^°"™®"‘- ''PP—1 «°uld als“d“eVc\^d"t®t “h®l®„|r:“®„^^®,^ not be changedTrr®tJe®?urr™r^::?ng!’®^ "*’® -d E will City Administrator Bernhardson noted the following exceptions: Farms - which^will’^remain as"it°is.°’^"'^"^ ' Summerfield may be a possibLity®to use^portlons^of however, there for grouping and buffering away from County lo®a^6° 3. In Area C, comprehensive property.P1 an^“aiTndm'’eTr^nowlng ‘’®f®or f • i a I L u L highway 12^ property^ Church is in ^-h requirement for \he^ center ^PjP5°^ed for a day ^care^' must be sprinkled anT in ^®en addrLsed ^ne would have to be d1 ^ order for this to ho ^ huildinq tLTul7.^ to -te‘"'^^^t?lTtles“Vr;r;on\^i «hph";^^un^^ ^hr^„""^te^ line, MapZe line past old Crvstal^n City could out in •/ extra capacity into this line that the pjlm°®'^' Probably not oi)^i ’r t°h tha^the Fulmer property wi 11 ^brtappTng. it is i^!S§^C COMMENTS gfrarSnS "■•• •»• •I* It Will b© V©1*V nne-l-1 t^rday'^oare^oenter?”’ tL° th^’^re^^^^ 2 « I* ll © G 1 1 t*7 « a^Vay.^ the septic ^y^tem °nTZ:^TL^,lTr T"- -tercould no longer be used his abi owner of a parce>i f been tested for on^slf^ trunk line for ? . ^^°P®rty in Area C, asked testing. ^ ^^e sewage systems Tn'd u" did" n^ot s7v, hJs •cr pass the perculation being prop^^s^ed ^ernhardson noted tha<- for that property. ' ^ ^rea. He asked for a letter^of^4-h^^^®”^^y ^°ter of the perc results X7^ t HO other comments were made for this area. -- f J i CITY OP ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING - PUBLIC HEARING HIGHWAY 12 CORRIDOR STUDY/COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT Chairman Kelley moved to Parcel 2, explaining Miller, Van Dale and Washington Scientific are the principal property owners of this property. Mike Unger of Washington Scientific was present. He asked if in alternative #2, the frontage road could be moved closer to the tracks. Mr. Shardlow noted that there is nothing specific about the current proposed alignment, except that it aligns perpendicular with Daniels Street in Long Lake and it should come out to a point on Old Crystal Bay Road. It could be realigned very easily. Mr. Unger stated that Washington Scientific has no preference to date with either Alternative 1 or 2 and would like to discuss both alternatives with the City further and discussing how both the company and City can benefit each other in this project. Mr. Smeby, Mayor of Long Lake stated that we must keep in mind that the rezoning for this corridor is the main issue, with safety a primary concern. The exact location of the roads will be located when the development starts in that area. City Administrator Bernhardson noted that the comprehensive plan amendment must be submitted to all affected jurisdictions for their review. Jeff Ruse, Engineer for the City of Long Lake, stated his concern about increased traffic volumes on Daniels Street, east of Willow Drive. Chairman Kelley moved onto Area 3. Marshal Lebonon, Architect, asked if there is a potential for additional sewer for the site. Chairman Kelley restated again that initially there are 116 units available with the possiblity of a total of 600 units. He noted he would like to see the development stay within the 600 units. City Administrator Bernhardson noted that to install additional sewer line to that property going to the long Lake pump station would bring the number of available sewer units to over 1200. This was mentioned as a proposed alternative, but the City chose not to select it as an alternative because Council directed planners to stay relatively within major existing pipe capacity. Curtis Quady of Crystal Bay stated his opinion that he would like to see the zoning in the area to stay the same as it is currently. He asked if we know how long Highway 12 will be in the exact area that it is now. 8 fiat ■i^ • * * 4«- CITY OP ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING - PUBLIC HEARING HIGHWAY 12 CORRIDOR STUDY/COMPREFENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT City Administrator Bernhardson explained that in the late 1960's or early 1970's there was discussion on expanding Highway 12 to a four lane highway through the City. At that time it was determined that Highway 212 would be the major east/west throughfare west through the State. MnDot has indicated that there are no plans to do anything of any significance to Highway 12 within the next 15-20 years, with the note that they are only a reactive force. The Willmar Chamber of Commerce has proposed a four lane extension from Wayzata to Willmar, if not all the way the South Dakota border. This will be addressed by the Council at a later date. Mr. Quady asked if Highway 12 is not going to be upgraded to meet traffic demands, aren't there going to be a lot of problems added to that area if that many additional sewer units are added to the corridor. City Administrator Bernhardson stated we are trying to establish a frontage road system that would keep some of the local traffic off Highway 12, and by placing sewer units in this corridor, it may replace the need for the units further out. In the Orono portion of the corridor, there is a 100' right-of-way, so a limited expansion of turn lanes and capacity could be done to provide for better traffic flow in the existing corridor. Becky Courtr^a from the Pioneer Newspaper, asked how many land owners are within the Aiaa 3 boundaries. City Administrator Bernhardson noted there are approximately 6 owners, including 3 partnerships. Chairman Kelley moved onto Area 4. Sid Rebers was present together with his attorney, Steven Pflaum, and engineer, Larry Hanson. Mr. Pflaum started by explaining Mr. Rebers basic issues for the area of land which he owns. First there is about 45 acres, of which 10 are zoned B-1 commercial (roughly the south 1/3 of the property). This property is probably as significantly impacted as much as any other property in this study, and is able to adapt to these proposed uses and development with one exception. The areas of concensus are: 1. Proposed development along Brown Road - this development can handle the frontage road going through the Rebers property, and as part of the development, he can absorb his portion of the cost. 2. The proposal of a secondary road through the site to connect with the subdivision to the immediate west - can be accomodated in his proposed usage also. I. ^ n J VI CITY OP ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING - PUBLIC HEARING HIGHWAY 12 CORRIDOR STUDY/COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT Mr. Pflaum explained Mr. Rebers proposes residential for the northern 2/3 of the site. He believes that this area should be sewered that it have a higher density than the 2—acre minimum because the sewer and water units are available either through Orono or Long Lake. The property will have to bear a significant portion of the corridor development costs. The 2-acre on-site septic requirements are not economical type of combination usage. i*3rry Hanson explained that Mr. Rebers would like to develop the ^®^^hern portion into 1—acre sites because of the concern of on-site sewage treatment. A few of the sites have been tested and found to have perched water^ thus presuming a potential for problems. The following calculations have been made regarding the amount of tree removal under the two scenarios. (These calculations include house pad and roadways.) 2-acre lots - using primary septic system ; 15% tree removal using alternative system: almost double 1-acre lots - sewered 12% tree removal To add sewer/water/streets to the area for 2-acre lots = $360,000 $24,000 per unit (based on 15 units) Mr. Hanson noted, because of the 2-acre lots to the north of this property, the southern portion of the residential area could be 1-acre lots and the most northern portion of Mr. Rebers lots could be 2—acre lots. With all 2-acre lots, there would be 15 lots. With all 1-acre lots, 25 lots, and with the combination of l-acre/2-acre lots, 21 lots total. Mr. Rebers noted he is willing to assume the cost of putting in sewer and water. He noted because of the soil testing results, sewer is the only way to develop this property. City Administrator Bernhardson noted that the possibility does exist for the commerical part of the property to be served by a Long Lake local line, not tied into until Pipe E. Bellows asked if there would be any known variances required for the residential area development. Building & Zoning Administrator Mabusth noted that the area had not been looked at for B-1 zoning yet. Chairman Kelley asked with this type of development for the residential area, how would this affect the run-off of water from a piece of property and how does it affect the pond in the lower right corner. Mr. Hanson explained that proper flood control and water quality devices will be on the site. i li SBM^mTrs •r«T3 r^ MITO »VPVS [•^15 MiW - PUBLIC HEARING •AN AMENDMENT ohe, would like to see in the i°woul7b/?“K°" issues are: ro"ad^o%u°ff«nK^ -uoh lighted ‘^urrer the residential =f "°th"i ?d \";/ec"t \"he^ 'a ction does need“t^=leX Road North stay ooen ^«ri "C^aT”)ut is Brown Road>ut IS preliminary at this time. .■jr."„'"".s; ,r i«f~%s ‘E.s“;:s "V“?s ighfare through the bank parking 5. Taylor left the meeting at present. lained within this area there the east, probably set back multipleBtng back to single family lemlnte^''' Brown Road 11 the need for the east/west ^Ighwaf n.'’ .Lake Drive property owners bars property because they do properties. \\ V Plannin.T Cqmission Discussion ;.nH nr, T^.*- , the day ca^'e will h = ,r« *. t «^ea e, the issue ofup. Lot 1 should be l#af-i- ae o ^ ^'*^7 to be dealt wlfh ae •;*. " ^ bungalows or modest'"residential^^ ^a^Lpa?ftio"n Dr^l^Sitr doubTIBavailability should be addressed a<5 <-r. ^ ^^^e/2-acre idea, the sewer zoning should change from rural residential ^ot 5, the in a ’’^"^ers Wood wffdevfloned “P the area zone and we should uphold that*^idea. it was a.i^v*£^i'EE2■liEr-”•« ffrs£i\F£ni'S i^Swe“ef 4"ere'* 1-°" ° should b^Tepras" °t should“b| n© tnat bsairs lookincr oo 4-u^ .. wjt* Rgdgits proposal for* aa and it does have to bl dealt with^i^sp°ec\aTwa-^1 conditioni what the ’^iddlt-ot-the-road^6e^^^ options open as to exactly wtuld^be'^tott^”® «i9hwari2"tt'’rtidtfr atTth'’t"®t''® amendment contrnued until that meeting. The -efing'’td^o\\"„e"d “ a“toto%“/."„! ^ '1 - state Highways 3.16 - County Roads 30.09 - City Streets 47.35 MSA - 10.91 Other - 36.44 - Private Roads 8.9 r ^ brought^ -car ei?f -fcncr^ 3?“^ and could poUihi -crease cu- ^r '=‘’^" °‘'>C'^iiininiun. Possibly require 1-2 adr! by 17- ocitional people at a ?°yity_Ro^s The state has numero^V to other levels of^ ' ^^egarding criteria for beina o5°^ that they do 5 ^^''^'^nraent. hack to Countip*! ^ Roads and should h^ feel fit the that either should ^c^^ties in turn feel turned 62 and County — -e State (surh° I""® '^°sds comraunicy needs. Base'd 0^’’®*'® ^cea l ly serve" o r®®®—"" has designated thFrl 1 ® ®—‘^>’ '3°ne in 197^ nf F local turned back to Oronof that the^ ^lerrhou^Th"^ Tonkawa Road - 13c: - 151Bayside-Pox - 84 South Brown Road - 145 1.76 2.78 4. og 2.00 In addition it is • 0^?:^ r^^sr ®-«"’^‘trr"ned°rark^r®o°^ <--ty si, possibly Old c/ysta""! the County‘^tak?'’° ^^orth Shore up to about 13 Willow. Th^totaf^"? McCully and •maintenance resoLc^M -T • ^hich would these that this would ^y ^t lea°t 20% City's person in the tree hiring of at^ieas^ anticipated another vehicle department together additional The current is^e IS P-''‘"9 ^n?^c^„rr"rr® ^'^'^Ition of °f the turnbacks toaelh ®"'°“."t of funding that wi 1 -tm. would have to ^ ^^^ with the stanH;:^*-^ come 3s p^rt 1987 some of thele iss°*^ It is^ai^tir^streets these may be taken ^ili be addressed during apart from beinfr '98 Legislature ^^tion on having contact with municipal lobbvinL^'"®''®''/ ^^ty (The Ci ty may be able^t^^^ "^^y have iftt ?e the County.) to more e f f icien11 y mainta i n ^ ^t.^ ""^^ntain the roads than ^ECOMKEND^^TION: While the inot great. tne impetus for n t-„ *. i how to address suchthe City begirt - greater. it ^®^ues should the demand hor, ‘liscussion of takeover costs , ®^9^®ted that a more comnt^'^"’^ demonstrably with requiring any ^rnbaok this issue'^bV r^ai.f"F^®'®-vei Of funding ''for®"ct;?, "hrrpp."°«®-» ’^ROPOSiilD MOTION - Moved by __, se-:onded by __, to accept staff'sinfornation regarding upcoming road issues and to direct staff to worl: to develop more accurate cost estimates at the point requests for turnbacks are made. Ayes , Nays f 4 "irt*1