Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
08-17-1987 Planning Packet
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MONDAY, AOGOST 17, 1987 7:00 P.M. 1275 BROWN ROAD SODTB - COUNCIL CHAMBERS COUNCIL REPRESENTATIVE - J. Diann Goetten ATTENDANCE PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. 7:15 P.M. #1179 Orono Community Church, 770 & 950 Old Crystal Bay Road - Class I Subdivision of a Lot Line Rearrangement 2. 7:30 P.M. #1181 First National Bank of Navarre, 2500 Kelly Avenue Class III Subdivision ACTION ITEMS 3. #1056 Olai Hanson, 1390 Railroad Avenue - Variance - Referred Back to Planning Commission from Council 4. #1172 Christine Beck, 3820 Cherry Avenue - Variances - Continuation of Public Hearing 5. #1174 Craig K. Anderson, 375 Leaf Street/3300 Bayside Road Subdivision - Second Review 6. #1177 T. Waters/J. Dennis, 3055/3061 Casco Point Road - After-the-Fact Conditional Use Permit - Public Hearing 7. #1180 Charles Nadler, 2509 Kelly Avenue - Conditional Use Permit - Public Hearing 8. #1182 M. Dietrich-Blocker, 458 Linden Avenue - Variance - Public Hearing 9. #1183 Jack Swenson, 3020 North Shore Drive - After-the-Fact Variance - Public Hearing 10. #1184 Gerald T. McCourtney, 1055 West Ferndale Road Variance - Public Hearing 11. #1185 Gary Carlson, 965 Edgewood Hills Road - Renewal Variances - Public Hearing 12. Zoning Amendment - Standards for Accessory Structures SKETCH PLAN REVIEW 13. #1169 William Wear, 2950 Watertown Road - Conceptual Direction to Applicant ADDITIONAL ITEMS 14. Planning Commission approval of July 20, 1987 minutes. 15. Planning Commission to select a representative to attend the September 14, 1987 Council meeting. ADJOURIOIENT Px. PUBLIC ATTI’.:DANCE CITY OF ORONO MEETING DATE PLEASE FILL OUT THE INFORMATION REQUESTED BELOW FOR OUR CITY RECORDS. ■I.:*—^ I PUBLIC ATTENDANCE CITY OF ORONO MEETING DATE S'-I/' ^1 PLEASE FILL OUT THE INFORMATION REQUESTED BELOW FOR OUR CITY RECORDS. NAME (please print)ADDRESS NAME OR NUMBER 1. /ii(CL.(P '/X /«> M <‘X-^//i-9 2. S /-/ftoGZ^C /'/z Uj f^-//d J" / 4.1 Xi^A K UhcT M :to "I - .4X ‘ 5 4^ /me. 5. /U { hi. Jy ikC I •;>%■ A*‘<- />■ * ---------------i--------:|C—---------------------------- 6.(171.. 1 __3c>?c\ A j 'Su ^ w. 7.ii- //// zL J 9. 10. 11. 12. • 13. 14.• • 15. 16. 17.M09•VO•20. MbjBDabiba Pram Date: Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson Mary Jo Knott, Septic & Zoning Aide August 13, 1987 / Subject: #1179 Gary Connell, Representing the Orono Community Church, 770 Old Crystal Bay Road, Lot Line Rearrangement - Public Hearing Zoning District - RR-IB Single Family Rural Residential (2 acre) Area - Approximately 58 acres including both lots. Existing Lot 1 = 46.97 acres Existing Lot 2 = 8.84 acres Proposed Lot 1 = 51.39 acres Proposed Lot 2 = 4.42 acres Application - Class I Subdivision - Lot line rearrangement of platted properties. Pertinent Ordinances - Section 11.03, Definition 6 (A); Section 10.61, Subdivision 5 (A) List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Application Exhibit B - Plat Map Exhibit C - Property Owners List Exhibit D - Survey Exhibit E - Plans Approved at Council Meeting on August 9, 1982 Exhibit F - Staff Sketch Discussion - The applicant representing Orono Community Church has applied for a Class I subdivision involving a rearrangement of the lot line between Lots 1 and 2. In May of 1982, this parcel was subdivided from a 56 acre lot into two lots. Lot 1 consisted of 47 acres. Lot 2 consisted of 9 acres (see Exhibit D). During August of that same year, a building plan was submitted, reviewed, and approved by Council. This plan made use of the total area (9 acres) of Lot 2. The church building is located on Lot 2 and has completed its first phase of development. The existing and proposed construction of additions to the Church structure meet all current setbacks from tne newly created lot size pending lot line rearrangement approval. After a discussion with the applicant, it was decided not to vacate the 5' drainage and utility easements along each side of the lot line until the larger parcel is subdivided. This is the lot line that will be removed, pending the approval. Drainage and utility easements of 5' shall be dedicated placed along the proposed dividing line. Plans of a baseball field and presumed football field will need to be dropped. This area will be added to Lot 1 after the lot line rearrangement. The parking lot »ihown in the 1982 site plans does not meet the setback requirements from the new lot line. Section 10.61, Subdivision 5 (A) requires parking lots to have a minimum of 10' from any lot line. The Planning Commission should ask the applicant about future expansion plans and the need for additional parking area. The proposed parking lot will not fit onto the new lot size. The applicant should be advised if the subdivision is approved, that there will be limited room for parking lot expansion. Zoning File #1179 August 13, 1987 rage 2 of 2 Staff RecoBoiendation - Staff would recommend approval of the lot line rearrangement under the following conditions; 1. Not to vacate utility and drainage easements (refer to Exhibit F) along the existing lot line until Lot 1 is subdivided. At that time, depending on the subdivision, the property owner will decide whether to vacate the easements. 2. To dedicate 5' drainage and utility easements along each side of the new lot line. 3. Resolve the parking lot development with the applicant. The parking lot location is required to be a minimum of 10' away from lot lineu. 4. Owner of Lot 1 to legally combine newly created parcel with lot 1. Papers to be filed at the City prior to final approval by the City Council. If -f CITY OP ORONOit X 1 Q & ^ Date Rec'd '7-^1-^ ^ By 'T/~ aJ ________ Fee Rec'd i'.-Vof’J,67; SUBDIVISION APPLICATION FORM APPLICANT Name Telephone^ ^,0 \ Mailing Address ^o-.o r,'.i.A Mm PROPERTY i 1 Name I-?-* 4 Telephone ‘V 7? - *4 72'■> OWNER Mailing Address 'll,-) i?.>|L'l .Ln h-i Vf;J (Attach list if more than one) ‘ ^J ^ ♦ ^ PROPERTY LOCATION CITY OF Or<CK'D Street Address 77.) r'-A i » 1 Fim'CE OFFICE Property Identification No. (P.I.D.) fi 7- • ?J - ^ CHELK ^ ■. a.Tl ~c.'i .Vi Iw w< V" ■ vv ; ocrcrcT^'UM^k' vnnI > t ihnn i l*u Complete Legal Description to be attached to appli<j^$t;t'9il^ lffOl 703:56 - - - - - --- - - - - - - - - -—- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --- - - - - - - - - - - - -—- - - -fO-7 VI/ V tEXISTING LAND USE Number of Tax Parcels Development Size / Present Use (check) Acres Dry Land Acres Wet Land Acres Totalf all parcels Residential; no. of units Other (specify) CU,.-.ru Present Zoning District PROPOSAL _ _ _ Division for Tax Purposes X Lot Line Rearrangement Only (no new building sites) _ _ _ Subdivision for New Building Sites Number of Building Sites: Proposed Gross Density Minimum Lot Size: Proposed Use: (check) Existing Units New Units Total Units Units per Acres Square Feet Dry Buildable Land Residential Other (specify) _ _ _ _ _ _ (OVER) MINIMUM MATERIAL NECESSARY I'OR COMPLETE PRELIMINARY APPLICATION ’.1, Application Completed '•'2. Preliminary Plat information on Certificate o. 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 PINAL PLAT APPLICATION 1. Payment of fees (park fees, filing fee, sewer and water assessments) 2. Signed certificate of survey or mylar copies of foimal plat. 3. Title opinion. 4. Easements, 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 Revi2w (Class I, II & III) Preliminary Review (Class III and all non-residential) Pinal Plat Review (Class III) *(Plus any legal or engineering charges) $150.00 Preliminary Review (Class I & II Subdivisions) $250.00 $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 Commission and Council necessary to process this application and further agrees to pay all additional fees established by ordinance. Applicant's Signature Owner's Signature x. |'/ Date Date 1 i Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are usually held o* the third Monday of each month. ^ 44-^ (AOi 'A ^________Ljy?50 ^8 a" .ijcr% 4.- I ROAD A. ^ - -I-OLD---------- x:vs*7r :7«.i4 V ■b O "b «> c» Mm \ i:t.<5 f * «•* r*j. "* • ■ O 1 ^ i ^ 5 .; 3 11 • N b • i r [ «M W ^.y O > V>^ 1 1 .1 > 1 I •-r § 5 S -f q > j: X T3 > -<m 90 ao 12 an r» 01 I fM CM $ O c» o gsp ni i<* 90 N -< > > m z a a n > a§ 5a CD > O o CM r* r- a o M M 01 01 H H §§ fM fM 01 01 IM 01 1 01 I M U Ooo a > Hm o rj O O !0 M •n -n m z m xj m 01 H ^ m M 2 X 2 -n Q rj H -< n 2 H m rn M X S2S2; > n -n X H g►r* dI o o 04 o o o o V.O r> n^ - \ ll 1 I 1^" 1^ m ^ n Q o o m a M M Q fZZ6 If 01 Jc rs>t fs> <^ m -n M Ol X3 g"" X *0 01 01 M z > r- M -It 2 r r 0 M »-i ^ f— r* 01 2 r- r->22 isa•H o o ► m -D TJX 01 Cj Hf1 01 30 ^ ► M H -1 fS S S fn J» 01 01 01 r- jfid M O O o 04 04 04 I fM 04 Ooou > > O U4 r- r- o » d CD ^ M H 01 2 2 O IM TJ 04 1 r X osi'"'" i 33sd rnmHHO*-» 0) 2 X r- » Wm Q *>1 fM 3 -4 M M a 1 Z m m m n 1:3 04 g 01 Ol O 04 m a M Ol H Ol 30 04 ► 01 M^ r ri -< ^ H 01 04 -4 > > O f- f- O Cl d (M 3 2 ^ 9M S 01 x •-1 > HM 01 -< 01 -<n X ns Si Cl o f11 • TI M ►- Ml O CM 01 o D >) I- PROPOSED lOI OIVISION/COMOINRTION Of LOTS 1 iod 2, BLOCK I. Cryitdl Crcil #1179 TOs Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Planning Commission Merabers City Administrator Bernhardson FROM: DATE: SUB J; Jeanne A. Mabusth, Zoning Administrator August 13, 1987 11181 1st National Bank of Navarre, 2500 Kelly Ave. Preliminary Subdivision - Class III - Plat - Public Hearing Zoning District - LR-IB Total Area « 4.62 Dry area per drainage easement line = /.yj Defined wet area = 1.69 Refer to lot area key on preliminary plan (exhibit I) for area information on each lot. Application - involves the division of Lot 2, Block 1, Orono Hills into 4 single family residential lots, the property is served with sewer and water, applicant seeks density credit for wetlands. The installation of private drives through designated wetlands will also require conditional use permit/variance. Pertinent Ordinance - Chapter 11 - Subdivision Regulations - Class III section 10.55 Subd. 15(A) 2, 3 density credit for wetland areas within each lot - required 1/2 of dry contiguous land is satisfied as well as the wetland areas in each lot is less in area than dry lands. Lot 1 .663 .605 dry wet Lot 2 .582 .458 dry wet Lot 3 .763 .378 dry wet Lot 4 .917 .255 dry wet List of Exhibits - A - Application B - Property Owners List C - Plat Map D - Resolution #1258 E - Easement for berm area F - Lynch letter G - Orono Hills plat H - Drainage Plan I - preliminary Plat Jim Shaver is the representative for the Navarre Bank's subdivision application. Zoning File #1181 August 13, 1987 Page 2 In March of 1981, the City approved the two lot plat, Orono Hills, for the current owner providing for the division of the properties along the zoning boundary lines. The application involved the dedication of flowage and conservation easements over the wetlands (defined at the 940 elevation) and a landscape easement over 10 feet of Lot 2 along the shared lot line of Lots 1 & 2 providing a landscape buffer to the adjacent commercial property. In that approval, the City excluded from the restrictions of that flowage and conservation easement a 60 feet wide corridor for driveway purposes at the southeast edge of property at Kelly Ave. The City has reviewed several sketch plans for development of Lot 2 under a PRD seeking anywhere from 9 to 10 units. Formal subdivision plans were never filed. Review of Current Application — The current proposal involves a formal plat creating 4 lots for single family residential development. The property is served with municipal sewer and water and qualifies under Section 10.55 for wetland credit against required lot areas. The applicant is advised that the wetland area is defined at the drainage easement line and its use governed by the restrictions of the flowage and conservation easement. The dry buildable envelope of each lot meets the required minimum 1/2 acre of dry contiguous land per Section 10.55 A(2) and per 10.55 A(3) the wet areas do not exceed the dry lands within each envelope. Each lot meets the required 140 feet of width. Building sites will be located within the higher, gentler, sloped areas to the north. The engineer has asked that once the division lines are determined that building sites be designated on each lot so that the City can make recommendations as to the extension of municipal sewer and water lines. The lines would be extended within the shared drives right-of-way. The City will ask for the granting of access and utility easements over the municipal lines. The preliminary plans must designate the approved building envelopes (26 feet from 940 elevation wetland, 30 feet rear and 10 feet side). Staff approves of the two shared driveway accesses rather than private road serving all four lots. The engineer's review summarized the staff position. "difficult topography, private road construction could potentially result in greater damage to the existing wetland area adjacent to Kelly Ave," The southern access is excellent but the northern drive must be moved further north approximately 100 feet with adequate distance from the curve. The proposed access location is located across from 4 curb cuts all located within approximately 50 feet area. Sight distance is not adequate for 30 mph road. The recommended curb cut would be placed opposite the shared drive that servos zoning File #1181 August 13, 1987 Page 3 the duplex units on the west side of Kelly Ave. The use of private drives in place of a private road serving the 4 lot density will require a variance to the platting code. The MCWD and DNR must review the proposed drive construction; specifically to approve culvert placement and sizing. Planning Commission cannot act on this application until these reviews are completed . The property has been assessed for 2 residential water units and 1 sewer unit. The applicant will be advised of the current sewer and water unit charges for connecting to the municipal system. Such charges must be paid to the City prior to final plat approval . Drainage from the property flows south to the catch basin at Kelly Ave. to the opposite side of the road and then southward through a series of underground tiles and open ponding areas and then eventually to Carmens Cove (1300 feet). Review exhibit H. Planning Comaission Action - To table the application pending receipt of the following items; A. Reports from DNR and MCWD regarding culvert placement and sizing. Applicant to submit information to both agencies and the City of Orono. B. Revised preliminary plans designating the following: 1) Building envelopes - 26 feet from wetland (940 elevation) 10 feet side setback 30 feet rear setback 2) Approximate building sites. 3) Realign northern access approximately 100 feet further north in line with shared drive that serves two duplex units (show location of drive on west side of road). 4) Engineering plans for shared drives - provide hydrolic information that confirms culvert sizing - erosion control plan. C. Payraent for Conditional Use Permit and Variance - Conditional Use Permit $200.00 Var_iance__________________ TOTAL $350.00 These additional fees are required for access drives and municipal lines extensions to be constructed through designated wet lands, D. Staff to determine sewer and water charges for applicants. i CITY OF OR SUBDIVISION APPLICATION FORM 8 Date Rec'd S ^ By __ _ r’ _ _ _ Fee Rec'd 7 - APPLICANT Name 473-7551 7<3v3f ro' Telephone XXXmilCK 412 E. Wayzata Blvd., Wayzata, Mn., 5531)1 Mailing Address XKX8XXKa[XXXX3XXXaC«jaQfKXXKKYXXS.S8X ____________ F’lrst National Bank, of Navarre PROPERTY Name David J. Delaney_____________________ Telephone /|7\-Ql 11 OWNER Mailing Address P.O.Box 123> Navarre, Mn. 55392 (Attach list if more than one)a 11 Of CRQ^Q Fmf^iE OFFICE 4 7f ■•A/l PROPERTY LOCATION r H . vi 5£,v ' (I rucTk' ^uOtOO street Address Orono Hills''Addi tion, Kelly Avenue Property Identification No. (P.I.D.) 20-117-23 11 ^^^3^ Complete Legal Description to be attached to application EXISTING LAND USE Number of Tax Parcels 1 Development Size 4.303 A. —. -31 A . 4.621 A. Acres Dry Land Acres Wet Land Acres Total, all parcels Present Use (check)Residential; no. of units Other (specify) _ _ _ _ _ _ Present Zoning District PP_13 PROPOSAL -U'Division for Tax Purposes _ _ Lot Line Rearrangement Only (no new building sites) ^_ Subdivision for New Building Sites 0Number of Building Sites:Existing Units New Units Total Units Proposed Cross Density Units per 4,6 Acres Minimum Lot Size;.369 (.582) A. Square Feet Dry Buildable Land Proposed Use: (check)X Residential Other (specify) MINIMUM MATERIAL NECESSARY FOR COMPLETE PRELIMINARY APPLICATION 1. Application Completed 2. 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 PINAL PLAT APPLICATION 1. Payment of fees (park fees, filing fee, sewer and water assessments) 2. Signed certificate of survey or mylar copies of formal plat. 3. Title opinion. 4. Easements, Covenants, etc. 5. Developers Agreement and acceptable form of security. Certification by Zoning Department that Final Plat Application is complete. Zoning Officials Signature _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Date _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ FEES Sketch Pla^ Review (Class I, II & III) Preliminary Review (Class III and all non-rosidential) Final Plat Review (Class III) ♦(Plus any legal or engineering charges) $150.00 Preliminary Review (Class I & II Subdivisions) $250.00 $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 Commission and Council necessary to process this application and further agrees to pay all additional fees established by ordinance. ■. . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .—— Applicant's Signature' y Owner's Signature _ _ Date v) TVt' Date V Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are usually held on the third Monday of each Tionth. 1 5 Om nw Ms U1o m no > •»XIr- O m *^S•• a ><m (II M n m «I inin 04 04 U1o^ rv> 0 1 7^ »- m ^ r- « r- fvi •< 04 < IM cn oo 04 r-m» 3m g S ^g3 X 3 o53-» rn Z 5 m ^ 04 •as?c i in in 04 ? rj o»> I o f\> ^ IM O I O) O) ^ H H X v4 H O 3 111° H4 n> m 01 r*o) M m SP•< *sm VIin 04 04 a 01 o m f\> 8-^2 Cl 90 in m M h Sm 0* l/l % fO O I % •- m %i r* I r- rj X M 90 M 90 Mnzmin m 01 Mu r m N g 8 SS 33 Om 613 T3 m *0 ►•<m 33 a31 i. e o > > ri » 33 M M in O C3 in rvi a Q o I MM M i fiaSS:: 8 g I rj O M -I O 1 3 “O rn -a m > 31 \ •< _ > rn z a 90 > 8 ^ ga 3J -< 04 31 1 W4 < <9 Q 9 M M > M 9 M 9 n n < M 04 >H-04 m mni•0 H 00IMrn0fM n n 0 b X 0 m m 01 01 m m 90 33 ca > Hn oo 33 Z Sm a> o fVIr*s n Xnm in z 01 M 8 mm in in 04 04 -< I- M m Z n o in !n r» 0 1•-• X M m k 4 f- i f- rj -< 04 > M< n m o M Z 32 am in *o in > £S ggss G a n n > > < < r? m JO n H •i g rsjo on ►- I 04 oo 04 5"*1° 33 O m X 5 p3 04 inin 04*c rj M M 01 01 H -4 5* H H r- r- 03 01n O O •n -n 33 31 33 33 m m ro 0 1 I CM 04 Oo 04 M 04 Z *0 90 33 O 14 $ > M M 5< o n n ► 33 33m fZ3aX X Z rj > > 04 rj 39 X3 O a a I 5533^- in in 04 M - n 4 X X Q I m m JO rj ► ► m 04 ^ ^H m M I— % £ ^ ^ S S33 ^ ^ g ino m <2^:: >5gnn r- o r- t* ni m •< n ► o n rn Z S -Q n 04 in fM 0 1 »-•s:: g I fvj 04 11= in in r> 33a o o M n -T3 0^ Q Q in r- o 3 3 M m > > in rj 01 01 o <04 I ► M O O 1-2 5C ^ f- o r- •» X ^ ni m >1^ n > o a rjH g m 04 moo 9 H X 04 9 > ^*— r-fM X •- > 01 9 ® S X ± m M L. 33 Z X i3^Ein oQ ni in > 2;^ 04 s SS2o 04 —« 04 04 n 04 rj 1 • m r“ M ►- Z Mmo o o 33 r J 3 M 33 33 On o 01 n n o M in 01 90 in in 01 m 33 M H 33 H 3 rj Sm in o 33 o r^ m o Cl i m ►- 2^:: "'So•n I fs* X >r* C m O C -n 3 ® 38- 3 o o rj O' m fvj X in n r\i m in 01 M 8 Xm r- n n o 04 X IN) 9 > m in 33 Mr- ©• m rvj m o 01 3 I in in 04 04 > rj 04 m n X M m -s4 33 O O -< -< > ► ► X X < M m oo rv) IM Z 33 *0 -O o w ► > > INJ 5 g°332 ► 05 M M o nt H o n n o ► XXX I 3 in o o X ►-2 M m ^ X X r- I m n r* r j r- r- -< 04 in r* r- in -< -< 35 •- 04 < •- 43 n m M -40 ► O f- ^ Z PI O 04 > O 01 01 rj 9 < -I H >33 ^^ o Z z in n» 33 > > > o rr a H H I _ n r* •-• 3 ►- Z in 09 9 X IMcM _ 04 9 O in o o o 04 X *ir| 4) 33 fM O Z Z _ O > > > 33 O o < < o ►- > > 9 M 33 2^ 33 2 m m HIs i ‘ 1 1 I Ha H 5 o o o o fV» 3 am V. g o 13 H O ? S -< 5 5 « > 3m 3 O *0 g i: fvi a 5I^S t- > fM 3 U1 m o W >- M o X I ->?a n ;a13 n > \ _gss S m > oo nj > ?! X o o O ro 90 ui i; 3 m J3 J3 SS isi r>» 0 1 3 H r-a^- 2 M p* M m ^:;28 >4 H o in -< 04t#« # 4% in > in < fW ra 04 Vi W VI ^in z > •< ^ *-04 -< < rj«o a m*-» H o Wi «Mu rsiI w Oos S $ n SJ a > Hm o Nr* 09 N O O XI M •n "ti m m (/I H^ m M ||33 kswJL H4 m rv9 SSm 0? X M ft1 8?-< 2. 8 in Qss ii; U1 Q VI M Ofa Q ^ nj -n ► I 3 a 7« H 3 ? V n M f- rj X H -< W m n r- X > •- r* o o rj 5-< rj a w > rj z •— »H n 2 M 2^ 3 H O in Q 0) in z > 04 -<23 S is;c. o >- fN> 3 in m o 01 04 Mo ^ I r- ^ M m ^ S ^ • o r* Mtn -< 04 >•< > ^ < n* m o o in m rvj a a m ^ •< -< f- r- r~ 03 ?! m m »-< m 8P^^ -< C C 2>S3< o om -n •n -n in in 04 04 m H > r- rM 0 1 I fV 04 o o in in 8 ys 3 <43 X cn 01 PI P- « 30 -< o o > fp- in > X X in < p- r- 04 m 04 o fj <43 <o n» o m p- I P- fV9 -< 04 > •- < rj m oo in M a am3 a > Cl ff! a M 04 5 mm ( CITY OF ORONO, City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. .1258 A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PLAT OF ORONO HILLS P vniEREAS, the City of Orono is a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Orono has adopted subdivision regulations for the orderly, economic and safe development of land within the City; and WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the application for a subdivision plat by David J. Delaney, the subdivider; and WHEREAS, the subdivider has completed all requirements of the platting regulations of the City, including; 1. * Dedication of drainage and utility easements. 2. Dedication on the plat of rights of way for public streets and roads, shown as County Road No. 19. 3. Dedication to the City of a Flowage and Conservation Easement (Exhibit A) providing for limitations on the use of wetlands and/or drainageways describee therein and shown on the plat as "drainage easements". Said easement will exclude for access purposes only a 60 feet wide driveway at Kelly Avenue to be constructed at the time the residential property is subdivided. 4. Execution of a landscaping and maintenance easement (Exhibit B) over, on and across a 10 feet wide berm area which will serve as a buffer between the bank site and residential property. 5. Demolition permit issued for removal of shed and barn located either on or near the proposed dividing line. 6. Payment to the City of a Park Dedication fee in the amount of $870.00. 7. Payment to the City for legal and administrative review fees in the amount of $50.00. PAGE 1 r 0 / /Ay \'City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 1258 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Orono hereby approves the plat of Orono Hills, Hennepin County, Minnesota; subject to the following condition that the afore said plat shall be filed by the City of Orono with the Hennepin County Recorder's Office together with a certified original copy of this Resolution and executed copies of Exhibits A and B as noted above. Dated this day of William B, ATTEST: Alberta Strom, City Clerk PAGE 2 OF 2 DECLARATION OF EASEMENT THIS DECLARATION, made thi dav of 7-, 1901 by DAVID J. DELANEY and RUTH II. DELANEY, his wife, as the owners in fee of the tract of land hereinafter described lying in Hennepin County, Minnesota, to-wit: Lot 2, Block 1, Orono Hills; WITNESSETH THAT: WHEREAS, it is the present plan of the Declarants to build a commercial building to be used by First National Bank of Navarre, together with various appurtenances in connection therewith on that part of said Orono Hills which is presently zoned commoricial under the ordinances of the City of Orono, namely Lot 1, Block 1, Orono Hills, hereinafter called the "bank site"; WHEREAS, the Declarants will bo constructing a berm and landscaping an area immediately adjacent to the Southwest side of the bank site; and WHEREAS, access to said berm area is necessary for the purpose of maintaining the berm area which will serve as a buffer between the bank site and the area presently zoned as residential lying Southwesterly and Northwesterly of the bank site. NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereto, hereby declare and impose upon the tract described below an easement over, on and across the area hereinafter described for the purpose of maintaining and caring for the berm to be constructed and all plant materials and landscaping located or to be located on that portion of Lot 2, Block 1, Orono Hills, hereinafter described, to-wit: That portion of said Lot 2, Block 1, lying North easterly of a lino lying Southwesterly of and parullol to the Southwest line of 53.>id Lot 1, Block 1, 10 fuot at right angles from said South west line, and between the Soutlioast line of said Lot 2, Block 1 and the Northwest line of said Lot 1, I'loc’k 1, extended Soutlieastcr ly. Tha' M,is ear.ent i .s a: p\u ' t :ia::; to and run.? wit?i the This easement shall run with and bind the land and be for the benefit of the bank site above described, and enforceable by the owner or owners of the bank site, their respective legal representatives, heirs, successors and assigns until thirty (30) years from the date hereof. Enforcement of this easement shall be by proceedings at law or equity against any person or persons violating or attempting to violate the rights granted under this casement, either to restrain such violations or recover damages therefor, and failure by the owner or owners of the bank site to enforce or seek to enforce the rights granted hereunder shall in no event be deemed a waiver of the right to do so for any subsequent violation. /y Ruth H. Delaney / STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) S3 COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) /S day of _ DELANEY, his wi The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before mo this , 1981, by PAVID J. DELANEY and RUTH H. STATE DEED TAX DUE HEREON $2.20 THIS INSTRUMENT VJAS DRAFTED BY: J. Robert Hibbs DORSEY, WINDHORST, HANNAFORD, WHITNEY & HALLADAY 2300 First National Bank Building Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402 Notary Public JULIE T. RENNER HOtAlt ruKIC-MINMfKJU . HI.N COUNTY r'r Bonesiroo, Rosene, Anderlik A Associstes, Inc. 2335 W. Trunk Highway 36 St Paul, MN 55113 61263&4600 Engineers S Architects Olfo O. Banettrov, P E. Hoben W, Mutana, P.E. JuhapM C. AnBr»:$i. P.t. Brm/foa^ A lembarg, P.L. BtcherBE. Tentar. P E. Jmmn C. Ofum, P.E. /August 12, 1987 City of Orno Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Attn: Jeanne Mabusth Building & Zoning Administrator Re: File No. 139-1181 2500 Kelly Avenue Ciann ft. Cook. P E. krtth A GufUott. P t. Thittmn t Su/TM, P t. KMksfti W kauer. P E Hobart O Uhunnkt, P.E. kfarrtm L. SoryfOlQ, P.t Donald C. Bergardi. P E. Jarry A. Boofdom. P.£. Hark A. Hamom, P.t. Tad K Etald. P E fdH-kaaf T. Haaimaan. P f Hubari H Pjrjjrrk. P t Dmrtd O LoUota, P t Tkomat W Patartum. P.t MKbaaf C Lymk. P t Eartn L. Wtita. P E Jamat H k Mamd, P E. Ermaaik P. Aadarum, P E. tr*tn A Bat kmaam. P E. Mark H Ho(/l P E. Hobart C Hasaak, A t.A. Thamma E. P.E. Uotl L I'lMMIf. P t. Ckarlat A trakaon Lao M Pawrbky Hurlan M Ohoa Stuam M Ebartm Dear Jeanne: We have reviewed the preliminary plats submitted on the Orono Hills 2nd Addition at 2500 Kelly Avenue. Two driveway accesses onto Kelly Avenue are proposed to serve four (4) residential lots. Due to the difficult topography of the site, one driveway access would be difficult to construct and could potentially result in greater damage to the existing wetland area adjacent to Kelly Avenue. Therefore, we would recommend approval of the use of two driveway accesses. The southern driveway access is located at a high point in the Kelly Avenue road surface and does have adequate sight distance in both directions. The northern driveway access does not have adequate sight distance to the south due to a curve in Kelly Avenue. We recommend that the access be located on the high ground 100 feet north of the location proposed. A location on higher ground would result in safer sight distances, would be less disruption to the wetland areas, and would likely contain more suitable subgrade soils for road construction. Page 1. 5720e city of Orono Crystal Bay, MN August 12, 1987 Future submittals should address culvert placement beneath the driveways for review. Because the proposed driveway easements are through a drainage easement adjacent to a wetland area, we recommend that plans be submitted t'" the DNR and the Minnehaha Watershed District for their review and approval. Yours very truly. BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC. Michael C. Lynch MCL:ci Page 2. 5720e LAFAYETTE BAY i I HLMLUY CEH1I^Y IMAT tMIG I’l AN WAG MHLHARf.O UNUt R MV (jIHl Cl SUl't HVIblON AND IHAI I AM 10 fHOKGGlONAl. tNOINl LH UNULH IHL LAWb '•I'NNtSOTA. 1 A (^UL y RLGIGTE M ^ ^SHF' G UE THL STATE ur ■ ^Hr McCOMBS-KNUTSON 'fo:Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson From: Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator Date August 12, 1987 Subject: #1056 Olai Hanson, 1390 Railroad Avenue - Variance - Referral from Council to Review Additional Information Submitted Application: Side setback variance to construct a detached garage. List of Exhibits Exhibit A Exhibit B Exhibit C Exhibit D Exhibit E Exhibit F Exhibit G - Letter From Applicant's Attorney 7/20/87 - Letter From Applicant's Attorney 6/18/87 - Letter From Applicant's Engineer Wenck 6/16/87 - Council Minutes 6/8/87 - Council Action Notice 6/15/87 - Staff Memo & Exhibits of 6/2/87 - Sun Angles From Garage (Average 5' From Lot Line and 10' High) Discussion Please review the memo and exhibits of 6/2/87. Note also that applicant's engineer has submitted a statement that soil correction would be necessary to ensure stability of the proposed garage if it is ultimately constructed over the former septic tank or drainfield location. City Engineer Glenn Cook has reviewed Wenck's letter and agrees with the soil replacement and compaction, the site could be made suitable for a garage slab and structure. The applicant requests a side setback variance for a number of apparent reasons: 1. Avoid the high cost of soil correction. (Remember that economics alone do not constitute a valid hardship per Section 10.03 Subd 3(A) (4)) 2. Reduce the angle of entry into the garage from the driveway on the north side of the house. 3. Keep a larger usable lawn area for this relatively small lot (0.17 acre) in the 2 acre zone. Lot Line Issue: The lot line issue may be nearing a conclusion, as indicated by Ms. Page's letter of 7-20-87. However, as of this writing I have not received confirmation that Mrs. Golden has agreed to the lot line redefinitions. In light of this. Planning Commission may wish to consider the variance based on "worst case" lot line for the applicant, since some variance would be necessary for his proposal to proceed regardless of the outcome of the lot line issue. Council has agreed to reconsider their previous tabling of the application on this basis. Planning Commission may Zoning File 1056 August 12, 1987 Page 2 of 2 wish to also review this based on the proposed lot line, which would leave northwest and northeast garage setbacks at 4.6' and 7.2' instead of 3.8' and 6.4'. Hardships A. ) Staff feels that the high cost of soil correction cannot be considered as a hardship. Doth City Engineer and applicant's engineer agree soil correction is necessary but feasible. Therefore, staff suggests that the issue of soil conditions may not be a valid hardship for variance approval since soil correction is merely a cost of doing the project. B. ) Angle of entry into the garage may be a valid concern; if the garage is 20' from the house and 10' from the worst case lot line (i.e. the fence), it would likely be difficult to get a car in and out of the right-hand stall. Thj«! can be resolved by either moving the garage further back, say 30' from the house, or by the granting of a variance to side yard setback. C. ) Hardcover; If the garage moves to 30' from the house, the hardcover will be approximately 120 s.f. additional than if it's at 20' from the house. This is a difference of 1.6%. Applicants property with the new garage in either location will be near the 35% limit in this 500-1000' lakeshore setback zone. Mrs. Golden's Concerns: A. ) "The garage will cut off light to her existing garden if it is only 3.8' to 6.4' from her presumed lot line". Her garden is up against the lot line. Please review Exhibit F. While not taking into account any skewness of the garage in relation to north- south, nor the morning or afternoon sun angles, it should help you visualize whether or not there is a significient blockage of sunlight at noon on the dates noted. B. ) The concern over whether her garage is over the lot line is of no consequence in determing whether a variance for applicant's garage should be granted. Staff Recommendation Staff suggests that applicant's engineer has verified that, for a price, soil correction on Hanson's lot can be accomplished so that the concerns of soil stability and gas generation can be alleviated, hence the garage can, at a price, be developed 10' from the lot line (wherever it is) and 30' back from the house, which should be ample to alleviate problems with access to the garage. Does applicant have a valid hardship other than economic? The concerns of the neighbor as to sunlight blockage may have some validity during certain seasons. Planning Commission is requested to make a recommendation based on the information presented, and any recommendation for approval, conditional thrt°recomm%'dation.^ should be supported by suitable findings justifying LEONARD C.%IND0UI8T LAURCSS V ACMMAN GC^A lO C maonuson COWARD M CLCNNON MCLVIN I ORCNStCiN ROBCRT j.Sh CNAN ISRAEL C. KRAWETZ EUGENE HEATING JAMES P. MARTINEAU RICHARD J. FITZGERALD PHILIP J. ORTHUN JOHN A. FORREST william e. fox JOHN J CONNELLY jERROLO F. BEROFALH DAVID M. LEBEOOFF JOHN H.STROTHMAN DAVID O. NCWHALL XURTIS A. ORCENLEY ROBERT V. ATMORC PATRICK OCLANC'' HOWARD J. KAUFFMAN RONALD O.VANTINE JOHN B.WINSTON LAURANCC R.WALDOCH RICHARD B. SOLUM THOMAS H.GARRETT HI DARVLE L. uphoff DAVID J. DAVENPORT MARK R JOHNSON RICHARD A PRIMUTH R. WALTER BACHMXN JCFfRCT R SCHMIDT timothy h butler ROBCRT G. MITCHELL. JR. J MICHAEL DAOY J KEVIN COSTLEY ROBERT J.HARTMAN JOSEPH G KOHLER MARY C. CURTIN RICHARD D. MCNEIL DONALD C SWENSON BRUCE A BONJOUR JAMES P. MCCARTHY STEVEN J JOHNSON RICHARD IHRIG RODERICK I.MACKENZIE THOMAS G LOVETT IX DAVID B WCSCOC LYNN M ANDERSON LINDQUIST & VSNNUM 4200 IDS CENTrR ' MINNEAPOLIS»MINNCSOTA 59402*2208 TELEPHONE 16121 37l-sl2ll TELEX 29 0044 TELECOPIER (6121 371-3207 CABLE: LINLAW MINNEAPOLIS THOMAS E.OLENNON RENEE J SELIG TERESA B BONNER JOHN R. HOUSTON DENNIS M. O MALLEY EDWARD J WCGERSON DANIEL J Sh ERAN DAVID A ALLGEVCR gregort p miller Fleming WAY2ATA OFFICE 740 EAST LAKE STREET WAY2ATA, MINNESOTA'6Sa9' WRITER S DIRECT DIAL NUMBER 371-3528 July 20, 1987 o:»tluno DEBOR ah M REGAN MARTIN P ROSENBAUM ELINOR C ROSENSTEIN ROSANNE H.WiRTH DEBRA K PAGE MICHAEL D OLAFSON SUSAN C BARNES JOEL H green DAVID L. HALLETY STEVEN E RAU Charles r weaver , jr ANN M PARRCNT DAVID L. SASSEVILLC DAVID A DONNA DENISE O REILLY JONATHAN M . BYE timothy R BAER timothy 5 MCiht CC J ROBERT PAULSON.JR JOSEPH A THOMSON JOSEPH W DICKER ANN L IIJIMA ELIZABETH G ABY KATHARINE N HELMS WALLACE G HIL«E CHARLES P MOORSC PATI JO POFAML LUKE H TERHAAR MICH ACL J YOUNG KAREN L SCh RCIBCR OF COUNSEL NORMAN L. NCWHALL RETIRED THOMAS VENNUM Mr. Michael P. Gaffron Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator City of Orono P. O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Members of the Orono City Council and Planning Commission (see list attached) Re: 1390 Railroad Avenue Variance Request for Garage Construction Gentlemen and Ms. Barrows; This office represents Olai and Hilda Hanson, owners of property located at 1390 Railroad Avenue. By letter dated March 12, 1987, I requested that the Orono City Council and Orono City Planning Commission reconsider the Hansons' request for a variance to facilitate the construction of a garage. On June 8, 1987, I appeared before the Orono City Council on behalf of the Hansons to discuss the garage variance. At that time, the Council referred the Application back to the Planning Commission for further review upon the following conditions; 1. The Hansons were to provide the City Council and Planning Commission with additional information regarding soil conditions relating to the placement of the proposed garage. 2. The Hansons were to settle their boundary lino dispute with their neighbor to the north, Mrs. Golden. Since the June 8th City Council meeting, a consulting engineer inspected the property with regard to soil conditions sur rounding the placement of the garage. Attached please find a copy of Wenck Associates, Inc.'s Juno 16, 1987 letter to me with regard to this matter. By letter dated June 18, LINDQUIST & VENNUM Mr. Michael P, Gaffron July 17, 1987 Page Two 1987, I previously forwarded a copy of Mr. Wenck's letter to Michael Gaffron, Assistant Planning and Zoning Admini strator for the City of Orono. As you can see from Mr. Wenck's letter, it is not advisable to build the structure to the south or to the west of its proposed location. As you can see, the cost of curing soil conditions to move the garage would be in the approximate range of $1,500 to $2,000. Due to this hardship, Mr. Hanson re-requests that the City Planning Commission grant his variance for the placement of the garage. I believe the enclosed letter from Mr. Wenck should satisfy the City's concerns with regard to the soil conditions relative to the garage placement. Additionally, the Hansons claim a hardship due to the sharp angle of the driveway which would be required if the garage were relocated to the south or the west of its proposed loca tion. The Hansons are elderly individuals who would have difficulty maneuvering their car in and out of the garage if the turning radius for the driveway were any tighter than presently proposed. With regard to the boundary line dispute, Mrs. Golden and the Hansons have agreed to resolve their dispute with regard to the boundary line by creating a new boundary line, which boundary line falls directly in the middle of the previously disputed area. At my request, the surveying firm of McCombs- Knutson Associates, Inc. prepared a survey and legal descrip tion showing the new boundary line. Dan Bergeron, a real estate agent who is assisting Mrs. Golden in this matter, has informed me that Mrs. Golden is agreeable to the new boundary line. I am preparing Quit Claim Deeds for the Hansons and Mrs. Golden to formally relinquish their respec tive rights to the property which falls beyond the new boundary line. I will continue to work with Mr. Bergeron to follow up on this matter. I will attempt to have the Deeds executed and recorded before August 17, 1987. Notwith standing the recording of the Deeds, it is my understanding that the dispute has been resolved and our remaining work is a matter of documentation of the settlement. I enclose a copy of the survey prepared by McCoinbs-Knutson which indicates the new boundary line, as well as the place ment of the proposed garage. As you can see from this survey, the garage will now be 4.6 feet from the boundary line. Due to Orono setback requirements, this distance is insuffi cient for Mr. and Mrs. Hanson to build their garage without LMNDOUIST & VENNUM Mr. Michael P. Gaffron Members of the Orono City Planning Conunission July 20, 1987 Page Three a variance from the Orono City Council and Planning Commis sion. Accordingly, on behalf of Mr. and Mrs. Hanson, I re quest that the City grant a variance to the Hansons for the construction of their proposed garage. This variance is requested on the basis of inappropriate soil conditions and a significantly difficult turning radius for the placement of the garage in another location. This matter was originally scheduled for discussion by the Planning Commission on July 20, 1987. Due to surveying delays, I was unable to provide the City with the enclosed information before July 17th. Accordingly, Mr. Gaffron suggested that the matter be tabled until August 17th to allow the Planning Conunission sufficient time to review the enclosed materials and consider the Hansons' request. If I can answer any questions you may have with regard to these materials, please call me. I thank you for your consideration of Mr. Hanson's variance requos t. Very truly yours, lindq;jist & vennum 1• i DKP:tw Enclosures cc;Henry Reiss, w/enc. Dan Bergeron, w/enc. c ORONO CITY COUNCIL Janes R. Grabek 960 Forest Arms Lane Mound, MN 55364 William J. Sime, Jr. 2106 Shadvwood Road Wayzata, MN 55391 J. Diann Goetten 1385 Fox Street Wayzata, MN 55391 Barbara A. Peterson 1261 Arbor Street P. O. Box 164 Crystal Bay, mN 55323 Fdv/ard Callahan 2545 L'orth S’aore Drive P. O, Box 72 Crystal Ray, MN 55323 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Charles Kelley 2720 White Oak Circle Long Lake, MN 55356 Paul Taylor 3075 Farviov Lane Long Lake, MN 55356 Jin Hanson 884 Dakota Avenue Long Lake, MN 55356 Maureen 3. Bellows 265 S. Brown Road Long Lake, MM 55356 '“'dv/arc Cohon 519 North Ferndale Road Wayzata, 55391 Jeffrey Johnson 3825 Cherry Avenue •’ound, MM 5 5 364 '•'dv/ard C. Brown 155 North Stubbs Bay Road Long Lake, MM 55356 € c c m a « ^m%mt Wenck Associates. Inc June 16, 1987 Consulting Engineers (612) 475-0M58 Ms. Debra Page Lindquist and Vennum 4200 IDS Center 80 South Eighth Street Minneapolis, MM 55402 Re: Olai Hanson 1390 Railroad Avenue Orono, Minnesota Dear Ms. Page: I have inspected the referenced property relative to the placement of the proposed garage in relation to a former septic tank system and drainfield. The enclosed Figure 1 shows the relative location of the proposed garage to these former sanitary waste treatment facilities. VHiile the septic tanks were removed, there still exists the potential for gases to be generated at this location and it is not advisable to construct a concrete garage floor over such an area. The drainfield was iiot removed and the same potential exists in this area for the generation of gases. In addition, if the proposed garage were shifted over the septic tank location, the area where the septic tanks were located would need to be excavated, filled with proper foundation material and recompacted to prevent the garage footings and floor slab from settling. It is estimated that this work would cost the owner approximately $1,500 - $2,000. It is, therefore, concluded that it is not advisable to move the proposed structure either to the so”th or the west. II you have any questions on this matter please feel free to call me. Sincerely, JiF.NCK ASSOCIATES, INC. , I Norman C. Wenck, P.E. NCW/cmk Enclosure 832 TAeive Oai«s Center 151)00 Wa/.:aia B'vd Wa,.’aia MN 55391 —-----------p a c/2 ^ H- cu rt H- (D H* M (D CD I-' r c:l c M. r»* > "D h O X H- 3a* rt (D ron Dn H- O D tn G C Hc 3 Q CT Q 'D rt H- O ►a p w p D CL cr > M ir: O -fc*Is* i i| w*»f §11 9 m •§ •J ►-• vO Cr -J ^nc/ c/ ^tcJi^oec/ fc.nc^ ) /. j»j <2v /, • « I \ • . •'* I Wv;- >V/.*. ;i “*V4 ‘v^ y. y'V • i / / 'S‘/-^i^ if UC; -^t *w,-r ■ < >t;' •i: %.?• •->. < • *>. .'••• ,»; • m} ^^'« ?' •■; 5 !/ •* 'I 'T •• • • M r'» lilytif'i jUis h< ^ • < : ? V ■• • •! I •U O r* : f » . . 1 *■• *• '* n^;.-3::ii 1 •■?::- i V i '. ;5 4*JS 5; 1 k .rV .',; i i: p=*l|!|l! II iim ^ zi.rsilj 5^-, s.^srai-’ si 3;,'3r:£-2 jf » ♦ • v< » ►- Jt H' 4'i/;2 * s'*! ■ * • * • *. I*<. • - • i ;# ,A V-iV . »i i V »« > r . • t * ; ;i’..i • * « • * I ■» »' • • N • •i ••;»<>•-•* ,i • - ‘ ^ ' I* ' ^ ‘ 'if . '^T 14 . • , ;,Vr s*!’ ‘ ..«^*<• !i- • ; •'/.•.-I-. « *» '•. . < • • • LCONAR^ C.Li;<DOUl5T LAunCSS V. ACHMA^ GCPALO c magnuson COWAHO M OlCNHON ViLVIN I ORCNSTCtN ROBERT J. SHE RAN ISRAEL C. KRAWCT2 EUGENE BEATING JAMES P. MARTINCAU RICHARD J. riTZGCRAtO PHILIP J. ORTMUN JOHN A rORRCST WILLIAM C T’OA JOHN J CONNELLY JERROlO r BERGrALB DAVID M LEBCOorr JOHN H STROTHMAN DAVID G. NCWHALL BURTIS A GRCENLEY ROBERT V. AT mORC PATRICB DELANEY HOWARD J BAUrfMAN RONALD O. VANTINE JOHN B.WINSTON LAURANCE R WALOOC n RICHARD B. SOLUM Thomas h .garrctt m daryle l uPHorr DAVID J DAVENPORT MARB R JOHNSON RICHARD A PRiMUTH R. WALTER BACHMAN JETFREV R SCHMIDT TIMOTHT h butler ROBERT O. MITCHELL. JR. J MICHAEL DADY J BEViN COSTLEY ROBERT J. HARTMAN JOSEPH O BOHLER MAR'<' E CURTIN RICHARD D MCNEIL DONALD C SWENSON BRUCE A. BONJOUR JAMES P. MCCARTHY STEVEN J JOHNSON Richard ihric ROOERlCB I.MACKENZIE THOMAS G LOVETT DT DAVID B WESCOE LYNN M ANDERSON Mr. Michael P. Gaffron Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator City of Orono P. O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 LINDQUIST & VENNUM 4200 IDS CENTER MINNEAPOLIS. MINNESOTA 55402*2205 TELEPHONE I6I2I 371-3211 TELEX 29 004-1 TELECOPfEf^ I6I2I 371-3207 CABLE: UNLAW MINNEAPOLIS WAY2ATA OFFICE 740 EAST LAKE STREET WAY2ATA MINNESOTA 55391 WRITERS DIRECT DIAL NUMBER 371-3528 June 18, 1987 THOMAS E.GLENNON PENCE J 5ELIG TERESA B BONNER JOHN R. HOUSTON DENNIS M.OMALLEY EDWARD J WEGERSON DANIEL J Sh CRAN . -------------DAVID A^LLGETER * rTTGRropRv-^ M*ilCR .. - \ rcRPtN^B ,r> EMING I; ’ ) L. ROcrrtMOH :r . • I ■RIC»»A»0 *T OSTlUNO DEBORAH M REOAN MARTIN R ROSENBAUM MICHAEL D OLAFSON i SUSAN E BARNES JOEL H GREEN^■■■pAvrBri wxarTT'^ ” STEVEN C RAU CH ARLES R. WEAVER. JR ANN M PARQCNT i I I f i|*Vii;;\ : U\1 DAVID L SASSCVILLE DAVID A. DONNA DENISE O. REILLY JONATHAN M BYE timothy R BAER timothy S. MC iNTEE J ROBERT PAULSON, JR JOSEPH A Thomson JOSEPH w. D icker ANN L IIJIMA Elizabeth g. aby KATHARINE N HELMS WALLACE G HILKE CHARLES P MOOR5C PATI JO POFA ml LUBE H. TERh AAR MICHAEL J. YOUNG KAREN L SC mRCICIER OF COUNSEL NORMAN L. NEWMALL _______I RCYiREO THOMAS VENNUM Re: Olai Hanson Request for Variance Dear Mike: Enclosed please find a copy of a letter which I have received from Norman Wenck, regarding the location of Olai Hanson's garage. As you can see, Mr. Wenck has attached a diagram setting forth the approximate locations of the drain field and former septic tanks of the property. As you can see, Mr. Wenck's conclusion is that it is not advisable to move the structure either to the south or the west. I believe the enclosed letter satisfies the City's concerns with regard to the location of the garage. I am submitting this letter to you at this time for your review and appropriate consultation with any other individual. If, for any reason, the enclosed letter does not satisfy the City's concerns, please let me know as soon as possible. As you are aware, my client is most anxious to complete his requirements from the City with regard to the variance. It would be advisable for us to obtain all appropriate documentation prior to the July 20th Planning Commission meeting. As I indicated on the telephone, I am working with Dan Bergeron to resolve the lot lino dispute between the Hansons and Mrs. Golden. I will keep you posted as my work in this matter progresses. Mike, I certainly appreciate your time involv’ed in reviewing those materials prior to the Planning Commission meeting. I look forward to hearing from you in this regard. Very truly yours. DKP:tw cc: Henry Reiss Olai Hanson Consulting Engineers (612) 475-0858 We nek Associates. Inc June 16, 1987 Ms. Debra Page Lindquist and Vennuin 4200 IDS Center 80 South Eighth Street Minneapolis, MN 5S402 Re: Olai Hanson 1390 Railroad Avenue Orono, Minnesota Dear Ms. Page: I have inspected the referenced property relative to the placement of the proposed garage in relation to a former septic tank system and drainfield. The enclosed Figure 1 shows the relative location of the proposed garage to these former sanitary waste treatment facilities. While the septic tanks were removed, there still exists the potential for gases to be generated at this location and it is not advisable to construct a concrete garage floor over such an area. The drainfield was not removed and the same potential exists in this area for the generation of gases. In addition, if the proposed garage were shifted over the septic tank location, the area where the septic tanks were located would need to be excavated, filled with proper foundation material and recompacted to prevent the garage footings and floor slab from settling. It is estimated that this work would cost the owner approximately $1,500 - $2,000. It is, therefore, concluded tliat it is not advisable to move the proposed structure either to the .south or the west. If you have any questions on this matter please feel free to call me. Sincerely, _ _iiENCK ASSOCIATES, INC. Norman C. Wenck, P.E. NCW/cmk Enclosure 832 Twelve Oaks Center 15500 Wayzala Blvd Way/ala MN 55391 a (r. ►1 H- rt* H- (D D t-h ^ H- M fD D; M 3 C. € H- rt > HD C X H* 3a* rt 0) r 0o rt p- C 3 ifi O t;c p 3 O P CT- Q TJ rt H- O Z) P 3 CL Cr* > M Oz » •* ?e 5F m cz# f-7a/ ./ MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD JUNE 8, 1987 #1020 SUBURBAN HENNEPIN PARKS* 2865 NORTH SHORE DRIVE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT It was moved by CounciImember Sime, seconded by CounciImember Peterson, to accept the information regarding the June 9, 1986 & August 25, 1986 approval of the Noerenberg Park Master Plan and that a resolution of approval will be drafted and presented for formal adoption by Council at the June 22,1987 meeting. Motion, Ayes 4, Nays 0. 11051056 OLAI HANSON RAILROAD AVENUE VARIANCE REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION OF TABLING City Administrator Beinhardson explained that on 9/8/86 Council tabled the application for a side setback variance to construct a detached double garage until applicant and neighbor (Mr. & Mrs. Francis Golden) could resolve a lot line dispute. At this time, applicant's attorney requests City Council to reconsider tabling action and give applicant direction whether the variance would be granted under the most restrictive possible lot line outcome because if variance would ultimately be denied regardless, they might not pursue litigation with neighbor to resolve lot line. City Administrator Bernhardson noted that since the application was tabled, Mr. Francis Golden has passed away and Mrs. Golden is not in good health but still opposes the variances and contests the lot line. The neighbor was not able to be in attendance as she had received notice on Saturday, June 6, and because of ill health was unable to attend or obtain a representative on short notice. Applicants attorney, Debra Page, was present and reiterated City Administrator's Bernhardson's statement. Mayor Grabek stated he had no objection to Planning Commission reconsidering the application under these circumstances. He encouraged resolving this matter without causing any fuiihrr hardship to the Hanson & Golden families, and p*. d that staff and Council would do their utmost in helping this matter along. It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by CounciImember Goetten, to refer this application back to the Planning Commission for re-consideration. Motion, Ayes 4, Nays 0. J CITY OP ORONO P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 473-7357 APPLICATION NO. 1056 NOTICE OP COUNCIL ACTION Date of Notice: 6-15-87 TO:Olai Hanson P.O. Box 129 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 COPIES:Debra K. Page Lindquist And Vennum 4200 IDS Center Mpls., MN 55402-2205 TYPE OP APPLICATION:XX Variance DATE OP MEETING: 6 -8-87 VOTE:4 For 0 Against COUNCIL ACTION - MOTION: To refer your application back to the Planning Commission for further review. This item will be scheduled before the Planning Commission on July 20, 1987. Additional information regarding soil conditions as they relate to placement of the proposed garage, or any other additional information you wish to submit, should be in this office no later than July 10, 1987 If you desire certified copies of the official Council minutes, they are available from the City Recorder or City Clerk after review and approval by the City Council. To: Prom: Date: Mayor Grabek Orono Council Members City Administrator Bernhardson Michael P. Gaffron, Assistant Planning & Zoning Administrator June 2, 1987 Subject: #1056 Olai Hanson, 1390 Railroad Avenue - Variance - Request for Reconsideration of Tabling of 9/8/86 Application: Side setback variance to construct a detached garage. List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Request From Applicant's Attorney 3/12/87 Exhibit B - Council Minutes of 9/8/86 Exhibit C - Memo & Exhibits of 9/5/86 At Issue: Mrs. Francis Golden, neighbor adjacent to the affected side lot line, disputes lot line location and opposes variance due to location of garden near lot line that would lose benefit of sunlight. Prior Council Action: Council tabled this request on 9/8/86 until applicant and neighbor resolve lot line dispute. Current Request: Applicant's attorney requests City Council to reconsider tabling action and give applicant direction whether the variance would be granted under the most restrictive possible lot line outcome (if variance would ultimately be denied regardless, they might not pursue litigation with neighbor to resolve lot line). Pertinent Pacts: Lot line dispute overlap; 2.9' (2'11") Required side setback: 10' Proposed setback based on applicant's survey: 6'9" Proposed setback based on Golden's survey; 3'10" Proposed N.E. garage corner (applicant's survey): 9'4" Proposed N.E. garage corner (Golden's survey): 6'5" Applicant's Stated Hardships: 1) Moving garage to meet 10' setback will create a problem maneuvering car into garage due to proximity to house. A backup apron between house and garage is feasible to make maneuvering easier (this hardship was considered by Planning Commission xn their review). 2) The location of the former septic tanks and drainfield limits the south and east extent of the garage slab or foundation because of the disturbed soil, according to the applicant. This has not been verified by an engineer. (This information was not brought up by applicant until after the Planning Commission review.) Zoning File #1056 June 2, 1987 Page 2 of 2 Discussion: Since this item was tabled on 9/8/86» Mr. Golden has passed away, however, Mrs. Golden at our last discussion was still opposed to the variances and still contests the lot line. Planning Commission on 8/18/86, had voted 4-2 to recommend denial of the variance, finding that the vehicle maneuvering hardship does not justify the variances requested. The additional hardship of disturbed soils has not been addressed by the Planning Commission. Applicant seems to have a legitimate reason to request additional review, in that if Council will not grant his variance even if he prevails in a lot-line dispute, then it's probably not worth the expense of litigating the lot line which would be a financial burden on both Hanson and Mrs. Golden. Considering that the degree of variance depends on the location of the lot line, staff suggests that the request be considered based on the worst- case situation for Hanson, i.e. presume Hanson loses and the 3'10" and 6'5" NW and NE setbacks are proposed. Staff Recommendation: If Council finds that it would be prudent and fair to applicant and neighbor to reconsider the variance and take action without the lot line being resolved, staff recommends that the application be referred to the Planning Commission for review of the soils hardship, and staff suggests that applicant retain an engineer to give an opinion on whether the disturbed soils in question will or will not support the proposed garage. If, on the other hand. Council does not wish to reconsider the tabling action of 9/8/86, the Council may table it again until such time that the neighbors no longer dispute the location of the lot line. / r 'u '— LC0NAI90 C.|INOOUiST LAUnCSS V. ACAMAN OCPAtO C.MA0NU50N CDMARO M GlCNMON MCLVIN I OPCN5TCIN ROBCPT J.SmCRAN isracl l. arawct ; CUOCNC KCATINO JAMES P MARTINCAU ntC^ARD J.riT/OCOAtO PHIttP J. OPTHUN JOHN A. roRRCST william c . ro« JOHN J. CONNCLLV JCRPOLO r. OCPOrALK OAvio M. Lcecoorf JOHN H.STROTHMAN OAVIO O. NCWHALL •»URTl5 A CPCCNLCV ROBERT V. ATMORC PATRICK OCLANET HOWARD J.AAurPMAN RONALD O. VANTINC JOHN B.WINSTON LAURANCC R.WALOOCH RICHARD B.SOLUM THOMAS H.OARRCTT III OARYLC L. UPHOr r PAVIO J DAVENPORT MARA R JOHNSON RICHARD A. PRIMUTH R. WALTER BACHMAN JE^fREV R.SCHMIDT Timothy h Bu Tc ER ROOtRT O MiTCHCLL.jR. J. MICHAEL OAOY J. KEVIN COSTLEY ROBERT J.HARTMAN JOSEPH G RO h ^c R mart E CUPIIN RICHARD U. MCNEIL DONALO C.SWENSON BR’^CE A BONJOUR JAMES P MCCARTHY STEVEN J JOHNSON RlCHARTi IHRIO RODERICK I.MACKENZIE THOMAS O. LOVETT El DAVID B WESCOE LYNN M. ANDERSON LINDQUIST & VENNUM 4200 IDS CENTER MINNEAPOLIS.MINNESOTA 55402-2205 TELEPHONE I6I2I 37I-32M TELEX 29 0044 TELECC«*«ER I6I2I 371-3207 CABLE! LINLA.V MINNEAPOLIS WAV2ATA orricE 740 EAST LAKE STREET WAYZATA. MINNESOTA 55391 WRITERS DIRECT DIAL NUMBER Thomas E.GlENNON RENCE j SCLIG TERESA B BONNER JOHN R. mOu STON DENNIS M.OMALLET COWARD J. WEGERSON DANIEL J ShLRAN DAVID A. ALLGEYER GREGORY P miller 'CRRENCE j c ^C miNG N, ROLE ENGM RICHARD T. OSTLUNO DEBORAH H.RCGAN MARTIN R. ROSENBAUM Elinor c rosenste »n ROSANNE H.WiRTH DEBRA K PAGE MICHAEL O OLAfSON SUSAN E BARNES JOEL H CRCEN DAVID L. HALLETT STrvtN E. RAU CHARLES R WEAVER. JR. ANN M. PARRENT OAVIO L SASSEVILLE OAVIO A. DONNA OCNISC C REILLY JONATHAN M . BYE timothy n flACR timothy S MClNTfC J ROBERT PAULSON. JB. JOSEPH A Thomson JOSEPH W. DICKER ANN L II JIM A LL*/AOCT m O AB> rATHARlNE N. HELMS WALLACE G HILKC CHARLES p MOORSC PATl JO POCAHL L‘ ‘K E H. T£RH AAR MICHAEL J. YOUNG or COUNSEL NORMAN L. NCWHALL RETIRED THOMAS VENNUM March 12, 1987 Members of the Orono City Council and Orono City Planning Commission (see list attached) Re: 1390 Railroad Avenue Variance for Garage Construction Ladies and Gentlemen: This office represents Olai Hanson, owner of the above-described property. It is my understanding that Mr. Hanson applied for a variance to build a garage upon his property, which variance was required due to the proposed nonconforming setback of the garage to the property line. I have had the opportunity to meet with Michael Gaffron, Assistant Zoning Administrator, with regard to this matter. Mr. Gaffron tells me that the Orono City Council tabled the matter until Mr. Hanson and his neighbor, the Goldens, resolve their dispute with regard to the location of the property line. It is my under standing that the Goldens believe that the property line falls 2.9 feet to the southwest of the area where my client believes the property line falls. While I am willing to initiate litigation with the neighboring property owner regarding the actual location of the property line, I have advised ny client that even if Mr. Hanson was to prevail in the litigation, the City Council would need to rule on the variance requested by Mr. Hanson inasmuch as the garage would still be located six feet nine inches (6'9") from the nearest property line. At its greatest distance, the garage would be nine feet four inches (9'4") from the property line. Accordingly, this letter is to request the City's assistance in rehearing this matter. Inasmuch as a lawsuit will not resolve the need for a variance, Mr. Hanson is requesting that the City reevaluate its position taken at the last City Council meeting held in this regard on Septemoer 8, 1986. I would appreciate the opportunity to fully explain this position to the Planning Commission and/or the rouncll. Accordingly, I ,L^NDOUIST & VENNUM Member of Orono City Council and Orono City Planning Commission March 9, 1987 Page Two hereby request that Mr. Hanson's application be placed on the next Planning Commission meeting agenda for further discussion. I will confirm this matter by telephone with the City offices. If you should have any further questions in this regard, please give me a call. Very truly yours, LINDOUIST & VENNUM . -'' \ Debra K. Page HK P:tw cc: Michael Gaffron Olai Hanson Henrv Reiss r pt ORONO CITY COUNCIL Janos R. Orabek 960 Forest Arms Lane Mound, MN 55364 William J. Sine, Jr. 2106 Shadvwood Road Wayzata, MN 55391 J. Diann Goetten 138 5 Fox .Street Wayzata, MN 55391 Barbara Teterson 1261 Arbor Street O. nox 1.64 Crystal Ray, mN 55323 Pdwa»*d Callahan 254S *.'ortn Shore Drive P. O, Rox 72 Crystal Ray, MN 55323 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Charles Kellev 27 20 Iv’hite Oak Circle Long Lake, MN 55356 Paul Taylor 307 5 Far'^iew Lane Lonq Lake, MN 55356 Jin Hanson 884 Dakota Avenue Long lake, MN 55356 Maur-'*ei S. Bellows 265 S. Brown Road Long * ake, MN 55356 r^nHon 519 North Frrndale Road Wayzata, MN 55391 Jeffrey John«^on :o25 Cherry Avenue Mound, MN 55364 Fd"/ard C. Brown .>55 North Stubbs Pay Road Lonq Lake, MN 55356 ‘ I4NUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 8, 1986 • #1048/1049/1063 WASHINGTON SCIENTIFIC INC. CONTINUED It was moved by Counci1 member Frahm, seconded by Mayor Butler, grant variances to W.S.I. amending Resolution #2042 deleting Conclusions, Order and Conditions Item #1 and adding to Conclusions, Order and Conditions Item #2 that the landscape and screening provided must meet City requirements as determined on the Hwy. 12 study. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. Z^unrni » I HANSON \ 1390 RAILROAD AVENUE VARIANCE Present for this matter were the applicants, Olai Hanson, and the objecting neighbors, Florence Golden of 1380 Railroad Avenue. Mr, & Mrs. Frances & Per staff recommendation, it was moved by CounciImember Frahm, seconded by CounciImember Adams, to table this matter until such time that the applicarit and his neighbor legally resolve the lot line dispute. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. Mr. Hanson stated that he planned to file suit against the neighbor the following day. #1064 CITY OF ORONO SPATES AVENUE LIFT STATION CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - RESOLUTION CONTINUED TO SEPTEMBER 22, 1986 This item was requested to be taken off the consent agenda by Gary Printup. The staff's recommendation for the consent agenda was that this matter be continued to the September 22, 1986 Council meeting for discussion. Mr. Printup questioned why a public hearing was never held for the additional $5,000 added to the initial bond. CounciImember Frahm stated that he personally would be happy to address his question at the next meeting because all the information has not been brought out. It was moved by CounciImember Frahm, seconded by Mayor Butler, to table this matter until the September 22, 1986 Council meeting. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. PAUL R. PHILLIPS 2160 SIXTH AVENUE NORTH PRIVATE ROAD NAME APPROVAL It wes moved by CounciImember Adams, seconded by Mayor Butler, to approve "Phillips Drive" as the private road name for the Phillips Woocl tnd Terrace plat which serves bot’.i Orono and Medina lots. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. I • TO;Mayor Butler Mark Bernhardson, City Administrator Orono Council Members Planning Commission Members FROM: DATE: SUBJ: Michael P. Gaffron, Assistant Zoning Administrator September 5, 1986 #1056 Olai HansoUr 1390 Railroad Avenue - Variance List of Exhibits - A - Sketch showing staked location and septic conflicts B - Memo and Exhibits of 8/14/86 C - Planning Commission Minutes of 8/18/86 This is a request for a side setback variance to construct detached garage. Applicant has staked the proposed garage at 9'4" from the side lot line at one corner and 6'9" from the side lot line at the other corner (see Exhibit D-2). His original reasons for the variance were that moving the garage further from the side lot line would create an extreme angle of entrance into the garage. An additional reason recently stated is that the former septic tank location is at the opposite side and remnants of drainfield at the rear, and he wishes to avoid putting a garage slab over these disturbed soj1 areas. Staff has verified the location of these disturbed areas but no engineer has attempted to determine the feasibility of putting a slab over them. The neighbor to the north, Mr. Golden, contests the validity of the lot line based on an older survey. Golden also objects based on the proximity of pro; jsed garage to his garden. This is discussed further in the memo of ®/14/86. Although staff feels that it is most likely that applicants survey is probably correct, the City runs the risk of becoming a party to any lawsuit by Golden if the variance is granted based on applicants claimed lot line, and perhaps risks being party to a lawsuit by Hanson if the variance is denied based in part on the contested lot line. Staff Recomendation - 1. In order to approve. Council should find that Hanson's hardships of disturbed soil locations and ease of direct access justify the variance in spite of objections by Golden regarding the garden area, ana should state that the variance is granted for the proposed location based on factors other than the lot lire location. 2. In order to deny, make the opposite findings, that tne Hanson hardships do not justify the variance regardless of where the lot line IS . 3. A third alternative, which may be the most prudent action, is to table until such time that the applicant and his neighbor legally resolve the lot line dispute. Note that neither party has filed suit against the other nor has a strong intent to do so been stated. O To:Planning Commission Members FrcMi; Michael P. Gaffron, Assistant Planning & Zoning Administrator Date:August 14,1986 Subject: #1056 Olai Hanson, 1390 Railroad Avenue Variance - Continuation of Public Hearing List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Exhibit B - Planning Commission Minutes of 7/21/86 Staff Memo and Exhibits of 7/17/86 Including Additional Survey Exhibits D-2 and D-3 This item was tabled at your July 21st meeting pending staff review of the objection by Mr. Golden, the northerly neighbor, regarding conflicting surveys. Item 1 - Conflicting Surveys Mr. Golden has submitted a survey dated in 1950 that shows his property to wholly contain his garage with 2.7 feet of setback. A 1971. survey submitted by Hanson shows Golden's garage 0.25 feet over the line into Hanson's lot. The garage has not moved. Item 2 - Lawsuit Over Hanson's South Lot Line In 1971, Mr. Hanson sued his neighbor LiQuey to the south because of a similar conflict in lot lines. I.aQuey apparently had a survey done which showed his lot line overlapping onto what Hanson felt was his property based on old survey stakes. The district cojrt ruled that there was no basis to revise anyone's legal description, no basis for "adverse possession" and that the line as shown on LaQuey's newer survey would stand. Hanson concurrently had his lot re-surveyed and it, too, showed that the old stakes were apparently wrong. Mr. Hanson's new survey, as a result, also showed that the old pins between Hanson and Golden were apparently wrong. Item 3 - Golden's Objection Regarding Lot Line Location Golden, in his objection, is relying on a 1950 survey which he accepted as correctly representing his property boundaries when he bought the property. He stated he was told by someone that his lot line was not changed as a result of Hansons suit with LaQuey. It is apparent that the legal descriptions did not change, but that the original survey pins apparently were placed incorrectly based on a problem with a reference point in Spates Avenue. It is likely that if Mr. Golden would have a new survey done, it would show the lot line consistent with Hanson's survey. It appears likely that Golden's garage is over onto Hanson's property. Zoning File #1056 August 14, 1986 Page 2 Staff Recommendation Regarding Survey It is staff's opinion and recommendation that the variance request be reviewed under the assumption that Hanson's survey is correct. Golden's Objection Regarding Open Space, Sunlight, Etc. Mr. & Mrs. Golden object to the proposed garage location, which is requested by Hanson on his survey as 6' from the line at the northwest corner of the garage and about 8' from the line at the northeast corner. The Goldens maintain a garden up to the chicken wire fence and feel the garage placed that close to the line w'i 11 be a detriment to their garden. Staff Recommendation Hanson's claimed hardship is that to move the garage over to the 10' setback line would mean a sharper angle required to enter and exit from the garage. In order to recommend approval, Planning Commission will have to find that this hardship justifies the variance request in spite of the neighbor's objections. A recommendation to deny would have to make the opposite findings. )rwrn0f^ -rc> ' j'A c -TIaC/J rcA'^fn'^ 4 MINUTES OP THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD JULY 21, 1986 «1045 BLOEMENDAAL continued Assistant Zoning Administrator Gaffron explained the request for a front yard setback variance to construct an attached garage addition 27' from the lot line. He noted that this house was built prior to the current zoning code. No one was present from the public regarding this matter and the public hearing was, closed. It was moved by Callahan, seconded by McDonald, to recommend approval per staff recommendation. Motion, Ayes 6, Nays 0. #1050 THOMAS R. BROWNE 760 SOUTH BROWN ROAD VARlANCE PUBLIC HEARING 7:45 - 7:51 The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing was noted. Thomas & Sheila Browne were present for this matter. Assistant Zoning Administrator Gaffron explained the request to construct a 2-story addition with a den where a screen porch existed and a new attached garage on the north side of the house (both maintaining 37.2' setback) requiring a variance because it is considered new structural encroachment into front setback zone. He noted that applicant is relocating his driveway further north to a safer location with the City's and County's approval. He noted that the old garage will be removed once the new garage is built. Planning Commission expressed concern regarding the angle of the drivew'ay entrance. No one was present from the public regarding this matter and the public hearing was closed. It v/as moved by Chairman Kelley, seconded by Taylor, to recommend approval per staff recommendation and subject to entrance of driveway be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer prior to the July 28th Council meeting. Motion, Ayes 6, Nays 0. #1056^ OLAI HANSON T390 RAILROAD AVENUE VARIANCE PUBLIC HEARING 7:52 - 7:56 The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing was noted. MINUTES OP THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD JULY 21, 1986 #1056 HANSON continued Olai 6r Hilda Hanson were present for this matter. Assistant Zoning Administrator Gaffron explained the request to construct a 20' x 24’ detached garage 5' - 7.5' from the side yard lot line requiring a variance. He noted that the applicants surv'ey indicates the neighbor's, Frances Golden, 1380 Railroad Ave., garage is located on the applicants property. Today, Frances Golden submitted his own survey dated in 1950 which indicates the garage located 2.7* from the lot line. Both the applicant and Mr. Golden have indicated that tbore was a court action in 1971 that affected the lot line. Staff recommends tabling this matter in order to determine the actual lot line. Frances Golden was present for this matter. It was moved by Chairman Kelley, seconded by Callahan, to table this matter and continue the Public Hearing to the August 18, 1986 Planning Commission meeting. Motion, Ayes 6, Nays 0. #1026 MIKE HILBELINK/JOHN VOGT 160 OLD CRYSTAL BAY ROAD PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION REFERRED BACK TO PC BY COUNCIL Applicants Mike Hi 1 be link and John Vogt were present for this matter. Zoning Administrator Mabusth explained that the Council referred this preliminary subdivision plan back to the Planning Commission for them to address future access in relation to this property. She explained the staff's recommendation for future accesses proposing a north/south link from Watertown Rd. to Woodhaven Dr. along the east property line of Lots 2 & 3. Mr. Hilbelink stated he objected to staff's proposal because that area is the only area of trees on the property. He also objected to taking a 50-60 easement on his property for a future road when he does not intend any high density development and would serve to benefit the property to the east. He stated that he did not feel the proposed throughroad was the most central location for it, recommending a throughroad on the east lot line of the Hal Ison estate plat. r To:Mayor Butler Mark Bernhardson, City Administrator Orono Council Members Planning Commission Members From: Michael P. Gaffron, Assistant Planning & Zoning Administrator Date:July 17, 1986 Subject: #1056 Olai Hanson, 1390 Railroad Avenue - Variance - Public Hearing Zoning District - LR-IA Application - Variance to side yard setback to construct a 20' X 24' detached garage. List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Application Exhibit B - Plat Map Exhibit C - Property Owners List Exhibit D - Survey With Hardcover Review Pertinent Pacts Side yard setback Hardcover - 500-1000' Proposed 5' - 7.5' 33.6% Allowed or Required Variance 10' 5' 35% Discussion Mr. Hanson wishes to construct a 20' x 24' detached garage on his property. He is requesting a 5' setback from the side lot line to minimize the degree of angle needed to enter the garage. (Note that the gray- colored single garage belongs to his neighbor to the north). Mr. Hanson's house is connected to the new Crystal Bay sewer system, so there is no potential encroachment on drainfield to consider. Building/Fire Inspector Tom Jacobs notes that a garage less than 10' from the lot line should have a firewall along that side, i.e. sheetrock on that inside wall along the property line. There would not appear to be any encroachment on neighbors views or light or air. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the side yard setback for the detached garage, conditioned on the wall next to the lot line being constructed as a firewall, based on these findings: 1. Garage location near lot line will reduce the angle needed to enter the garage. 2. No encroachment on neighbors views, light or air. fiiC CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION /t- . V Initial Application Fee $150.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $75.00 (no change from original application) Atter-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address _ _/370 iir\ \j Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) /C // /■ ) ~■) / (T'/Yr .' . Please chec)c one — Is the property V abstract or torrens? Please attach legal description to application if not included on required SuiTV0y* ~ applicant Name .QiAl _ _ _ _ _ _ Mailing Address O )2j^ c_ Phone ^'7^- OWNER Name ( )L Phone Mailing Address O ^ C£AV Date Property Acquired (month/year) I (do) ,^o not^also own the adjacent parcels of land. PRESENT USE OP PROPERTY Present Zoning District Present Use of Property // Residential y other (specify) DESCRIPTION OP REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost S Describe request in detail: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _.b'Y^V/ VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area Let Width Hardcover Setback Variances (Front V Side Other Rear) X O <1V Uf-i (OVER) HARDSHIP cnfo^"L:rof difficulty resulting fro. strict - -//-/g*/,<*./yf*v> //■ j 'T^ -'i ’y Mia. ’ A ^ Jt ^ * t^, . . . - ^■ ■ f , - -- - .ir^-7-r^4-<^> DESCRIPTION OP UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS RequiremeTt^s^*^^^ property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code —;_________LC^rA'J/cy.'^t ,^>y'/_rT7Ai — uu.-.-r- -T-ri A i/nth A L • f' : ’,yvyr> -rTTf /. <-r- " ------------ REQUIRED SUBMITTALS > 0m, Completed Application Form. 23 Certified Property Owners List of owners within 150 ' (you can obtaiivthi 6~Iigt ■327lh ^ Stamped, legal sized envelopes ( #10 ) pro-add.essed to each of the names on the above list with no return address. t/4. Certificate of survey including hardcover calculations as required. 5l 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. APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The appli'-ant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zon^-ng /.dministrator, agrees to pay all fees and/or unusual expenses incurred in review of ‘rhis application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct, vo the best of his/her knowledge. Applicant's signature OWNERS SIGNATURE /•■'7 ,0^tiJ /i y Date i S ^ ^ ^ The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consuliints, agents, commission m.embers, and Council members for purposes of investigation a.nd verificatior of this request. Owner's s 1 gnature ^ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Date A <2, r) Ctiy. Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Co-'mission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are hold on the third Monday of each month. /V t MAXWEL v.^< ^ ■' *v 3 ; , Hv A \ . :5 . ^--------h** iL. 'l <t .* .. % • 4 '.r: •^r^) ..—1 jtl:i L'S « » / » ADO. A 5. •iRVsTAC'.'i/ ..,/ r-i'/, •» '■ .J ■’ ri MINNEJONKA' ■~,3‘A- c/> u V TO* ■ . \ t.. ' '.• Y'/^i i '' ■«'»,.. ■'.' :t > V', •■;•//•=- ■■■t;-/:'/ / m// 'O'M 7 / cr < V /*» >i‘ >?Kl" I I'.v' , / ^ t\t) ■>GRYStAL ^^'MTKAi'i (11*) lit ----------------X <■•••• m• . •• w • (0 PWOSPCCT 44 % a (.f» 3 ‘ 1 r -.K'<: M - ^ 4 '^1 } o »?v rs --DH ,0/ / —• > '<C'^ CDJ I f Ki- .‘I ’y* ^ f—....,^ o A-I O' s.., ■ ,v / //L'd'y ^ V i\ I __________ • »m t « H O 3 z > ^ X < S5 m 3 “o 2 M 2 ni n X o 5-" a m•o -4 04 0^ 0 1 >J I fSJ 04 04 O o :^>§3> X 2 o3 Ti m Tj m > JO \ •< >> m 2 o a 39 > a g 3 a 39 m n 03 m m o 04 a o < < ►• g» -< X m m 04 (/» X3 33 o H m m o *- > o -H -i o r- -4 H I O > vn 0-1 04ro 04 < < 30 ^ > NJ 3 3 M I M »-« f— rj r- r- 30 04 r* r- O rn n > oi :o ;o o m > o H < O> m or- gsii ssii m>•43 13 PI 33 PI > 30 \ -< > ► PI 2 0 3 “0 PI Tl PI > 30 N -< ►> ni 2 Q 0 30 > 0 S %” s00 30 >- O S 0 9 r n > o > -< O 33 H 2 gg 01 O PI 01 3J 04 fT| *- o s 7? O rj 3 o Q» §§i I fs» 04 •< 30 ni 3 -< > 5^ -< ►- 3 ^2 rn \ a om m SSo cr» rn m o ►- o 0 1 ■n *n *- 01 m 01 04 VIX *-•04 00*0 3030 0 4- M PI 0 <0 PI 30 30o o < < m rtigg 8S 52:: S fv> m 04 r- M 04 X ►- m 39 o o 30 o ►- M-nm go5m o Xm T3 M o oTi Tl m ? X O PI m PI O T3 O M m 2 30 M PI 3;^ PI 30 W H PI M 55 >■ 5-< 5: H CSJ► > 33 »-4 a < < ri PI :n 33 •-IP §1 04o 0 1 PI PI n Xn n I n n rvi -4o >r* CO > c >-< ^4 > H > 3 3 > > 30 33 M M PI PI -4 H H H > > 2 PI X X i > H Cl 0 VI PI -<0 •< 04 VI 5 0 a 01 04 VI Pi ri PI 0 H 04 04 X 33•n X 0 30 0 01 01PIM H 0 »-•0 0M02 2PIVI*-• O 04 0> 0 01 01 *- 0 1 Ui *-• ■o > I -4 IN> PI 04 O) 04 > *- <m o o o 09 o o O' oo o n >-< N > H > 01 01 04 o ►- < X» m f> 33 01 2 O CO X > -< PI :a 3 M n ao n m o -< 30 H < O 04n *— o 33 X' n iN> 2 o I PI •— CD 3 > ^ n -< I n rvj O 30 04 -< M a 04 CT ^ PI o 33 o o o n CJ o 33 O r- -< X > 01 M -4 •- > P9 X r- O > 03 > o O Vi VI 04 rs> 04 O o u r- »- 0» > 04 M O O I- X o > I ^ 33 O > vj 2 M I f— N» m 30 04 -4 o > > 04 r* o •— > o < o PI o VI Oi 01 04ro 04 > O < o PI o O' 5•< 5J n o X'o 01 VI 04 O 01 Io 33 PI O 30 01 U PI•** om i. o u 0 r* 9 X o Z .c* 0 *- H O I 01 ►- -D Z ►-n 3 >13 » I n -4 fs> m X 04 01 04 X •—i o PI o o C3 M 30 E M r- r- > o •< -< •< o f- r- N o m m Jgoo Cl o 3 01 O O 2x00 O -'I 33 ra 33 PI PI PI VI -< 01 o 04 30 O M ►- < m o 01 f\> 09 o O' o •-« 0 1 Q 30 I H rj X 04 X ^PI X •— > S Or- m o o O 04 33 f .* / A SOI# 01 -4 PI 3 31 PI 33S -4 31 > 2 1 O ftl • -o M ►- ^ •- 04 01 O "•'N u. auunron. Ciyotal iiy, Minnccota / I>'S /^srO ^ *# ' •AlX th^t Cf t}'»0 IT05*tlzr!?.ot (JlCJtcr of tho SOTitll”''*’t 'JtlCTtCI* and, Govcrn-cnt Lot 3 of Soctloa 10, T 11? IT. R 23 17, of tlio 5U1 p’::. doocrlLod aa follovrai Starfciiv:; at tho Southrent Comer of Lot 6 of ElbrlC^ S. 3:JrR08* ITlrot SuTidlvision of ccJ.d Sootioa lO ti.onco Soutiiroatcrly alonj the *ra3terly line of tho m^lit of uciy of tho Croat ITorthorn RallTrcy 197,06,?t thcnco Southeaotorly at 90 dOiTTcoa to t:J.d rl:;it of tray line iMD ft. to q point on tixo E^iStorly lino of Jtallrood Avo., said point bolnj tho true point of ho^lnslag ' 05 this Dtirvcy. Thcnco Sout)ioastcrly ct 90 de.TTOOs to tho z:actcrly lino of Avo, 125 It., tacnoo Southtrootorly ICO ft,, tlxczioo IToi'thwoctcrly 125 * ' to tlio Easterly lino of Railroad Avo,, thcnco Eorthenstorly alon^ said Easterly lino lOC ft, to the trua point of bo^rjiln^*, * % Cortlfloato] I horohy cortliy that I havo ourvoycd tlio ’ property deccrlhod ahovo, that tho above plat lo a corroot roprecontatlon of said survey, that all dlstancoo nro correctly e)io\7n In foot and In cleclnuals of a foot, and tliat Iron nartcoro havo boon placed in tho "round as ladlcatod for fufaro refer once, Y^i—-5 >y.po.. L Til. s7Kolley<^^ RoC ’ Civil Tix’^lnoor & Lrnd Surveyor Re,". I3IG Kollcy & Eolley Landscape Contraotors A Ds^noers 2ulldli\" Location made Cotoher 13, I950, certified to bo oorroct as shown on plat above. Scalcj 1 • - ICO • 0: Iron Marhero Cat01 July 21, I950 % f ^4. t * * MINUTES OP THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD AUGUST 18, 1986 1*1039 ULRICH CONTINUED McDonald stated that two precedents would be set being 1) allowing the system without proof of hardship; 2) opening up this type of system being allowed for everybody, of which impact concerns her. Goetten stated that she agreed with McDonald, she is concerned about the aquifer. She noted that she feels there has been enough variances, conditional use permits, land alterations etc. on this property and she refuses to grant anything else. OLAI HANSON RAILROAD AVENUE VARIANCE CONTINUATION OP PUBLIC HEARING 7:34 - 7:50 Olai Hanson was present for this matter. Assistant Zoning Administrator Gaffron explained the conflicting surveys. He submitted the survey which staff feels they are bound to accept as the correct survey from Mr. Hanson. This survey shows the Golden garage over onto Hanson's property. Frances Golden was present for this matter and stated that he protests this application and still maintains that his survey dated in 1950 should be honored due to the statute of limitations. Chairman Kelley stated that the Planning Commission must act on staff's recommendation of the correct survey and if Mr. Golden does not agree with their recommendation, he should get his facts in order and submit them to the City Council and City Attorney. Mrs. Golden stated that they felt the proposed garage would be detrimental to their garden. Rovegno suggested that the Planning Commission eliminate discussion on which survey is correct and act on a reasonable compromise location i.e. 7' from lot line rather than the proposed 4' from lot line. Mr. Hanson stated that to move the garage over to the 10' setback line would create a problem with maneuvering the car into the garage and spoil the backyard. Bellows stated that she agreed with applicants reasons on the garage location. Chairman Kelley asked why the garage could not be placed 4' to the south. X MINUTES OP THE PIANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD AUGUST 18, 1986 #1056 HANSON CONTINUED Assistant Zoning Administrator Gaffron stated that the only reason he found for not moving the garage back 4* would be creating a sharper angle required to enter and exit the garage. Chairman Kelley noted that the turnaround would accomodate that problem. There were no other comments from the public regarding this matter and the public hearing was closed. It was moved by Chairman Kelley, seconded by Goetten, to recommend denial of the 4' setback variance as requested. Motion, Ayes 4, Nays 2. Bellows and McDonald voted nay. McDonald stating that applicant should be allowed to revise his request to 7' from lot line before denial. #1046 DOUGLAS J. ZDMBUSCH 1535 LONG LAKE BOULEVARD CONDITIONAL USB PERMIT CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC BEARING 7:52 - 7:57 Douglas J. Zumbusch and his landscaper, were present for this matter. Robert LaFavor, Assistant Zoning Administrator Gaffron stated that staff has located a least 3 of the drairfields and anticipate no problems as far as disruption of septic system. Applicant has had a survey done but they have not received a hard copy as yet. He stated that Mr. LaFavor indicates that the stairs and landings will be constructed with pervious non-hardcover platforms in order to decrease the amount of hardcover. Mr. LaFavor submitted photos of the proposed steps and landings contructed of timbers with inlaid rock with fiber mat underneath. No one was present from the public regarding this matter and the public hearing was closed. It was moved by Goetten, seconded by McDonald, to recommend approval per staff recommendation amending condition #3 to state that the stairs and landings will be lined with geotechnical material. Motion, Ayes 6, Nays 0. ZONING PILE NO.1172 CITY OP ORONO P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN NOTICE OP PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION 55323 473-7357 Date of Notice: 7/22/87 TO; Mrs. Christine Beck 3820 Cherry Avenue Mound, MN 55364 COPIES TO:James Beck Brandon Fir.ancial Corp. Suite 310 900 Second Avenue South Minneapolis, MN 55402 TYPE OF APPLICATION: XX Variance DATE OP Iih:-TING: 7/20/87 VOTE; 5 For 0 Against Planning Cosraission recowionds the following: XX Tabled for reasons noted below NOTES AND SPBClitL CONDITIONS: The Planning Commission tabled your variance application until either you or an authorized agent could be present before the Planning Commission to respond to any questions they may have. Per the conversation with your son on Tuesday, July 21st, staff will reschedule your application before the Planning Commission at their next regularly scheduled meeting on August 17th. J To: Date: Subject: Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson Proa: Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator August 14, 1987 #1174 Craig Anderson, 375 Leaf Street/3300 Bayside Road Preliminary Plat - Second Review List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Exhibit B - Exhibit C - Exhibit D - Discussion - Revised Preliminary Plat Drawing Sketch With Staff Recommendations Memo & Exhibits of 7/15/87 Planning Commission Minutes of 7/20/87 Applicant has provided a relatively complete preliminary plat drawing as of 8/14/87. Proposed dimensions, house rites, septic sites, and driveway locations are shown. The appropriate easements for floodplain, drainageways, and drainage and utilities along lot lines, have been shown. Site Planning - Because this is a very unique property, it is appropriate to address individual site planning during this subdivision review, although in most other relatively simple plats we would not be as concerned with house and driveway locations. Lot 1 - Is the most critical because it contains some unusually steep slopes and a major drainageway. The two septic sites as shown on the staff sketch are acceptable and functional, and will not affect any neighboring wells. Neither site will be affected by driveway location, although staff suggests that the driveway continue to the house site directly north of septic site 2 instead of swinging easterly towards septic site 1 (see staff sketch). Under the applicant's proposed configuration, the house site is very limited by septic to the south, the new lot line to the north-east, and the 40-50% embankment on the northwest. Staff would suggest that the lot line move easterly as shown, leaving approximately 2.3 buildable acres in Lot 1 and 2.5 buildable acres in Lot 2. This will give much more flexibility in house placement on Lot 1 in consideration of the 30' required side setback, but will not appreciably affect the buildability of Lot 2. Zoning File #1174 August 14, 1987 Page 2 of 2 Lot 2 - Contains a substantially more flexible building site, not as restricted by slope considerations. Two septic sites are shown as overlapping, which I believe is a misrepresentation of what the site evaluator intended. On the staff sketch, note that for Lot 2, septic site 1 was tested originally and was suitable for a mound. Site 2A was originally tested and needed a mound, but was in a swale area, and the intent was to move it northerly out of the swale. There is also a good potential to locate another site just west of site 1, but this would have a more restricting effect on the possible house locations. Again, neither septic sites 1 and 2 will be affected by driveways ^ the driveway is revised per the staff sketch. Staff Recommendation - Staff recommends approval of the plat subject to the following cor.dxcions and revisions; 1. Surveyed locations of all perc test and boring holes shall be added to the preliminary plat drawings prior to preliminary plat review by the City Council. Staff to verify that the tested sites have been revised and shown correctly for future reference. 2. Both driveways shall be re-defined per staff sketch to avoid septic sites. 3. Building envelopes that protect the established septic sites shall be shown on the preliminary plat drawings for future reference. 4. The interior lot line shall be moved easterly as shown on staff sketch and shown on the preliminary plat drawing. 5. Subject to drainage and utility easements, drainageway easements and floodplain drainageway easements as shown on the preliminary plat drawing. A conservation and flowage easement shall be granted over the flood plain drainageway. 6. Subject to payment of park fees per current fee schedule of $200 for each new 2-acre lot. Total park fee = $400. 7. Access location onto Leaf Street to be approved by Public Works Department prior to driveway construction. 24" culvert required for crossing the drainageway. 8. Access location onto Bayside Road (County Road 84) to be subject to Hennepin Department of Transportation approval. 24" culvert required for drainageway crossing. 9.Variances are granted for lot width at 50' setback; Lot 1 - 200' required, 121' existing; 79' variance Lot 2 - 200' required, 70' existing; 130' variance # MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD JULY 20, 1987 #1171 LANDMARK CONSTRUCTION INC. CONTINUED Staff stated that the LMCD was referring to the usage level of 1 boat per 50' lakeshore for single ownership and that applicant may have been misled by this fact. It was moved by Chairman Kelley, seconded by Bellows, to table this application pending more information and a larger detailed site plan. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. 1117 4 /:RAIG ANDERSON 375LEAP STREET AND 3300 BAYSIDE ROAD CLASS II PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION PUBLIC HEARING 8:00-8:21 The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing was noted. Assistant Zoning Administrator Gaffron explained the request to split a 5.7 acre parcel into two building sites of 2-plus acres each. -Lot 1 (wesc) is anticipated to access from Bayside Road. The proposed house site is to the rear of the lot where it widens out. The lot needs a width variance but does front on a public road. -Lot 2 will access from Leaf Street. The assu.iied house site is to the rear, overlooking the creek. This lot also needs a width variance. He noted that staff has concerns regarding the septic systems. Soil testing indicates that mound systems will be necessary. Staff is also concerned that the neigboring properties will have relatively little area for alternate septic sites because the southerly portion of Lot 1 (part of this subdivision) will no longer be viable as a potential future acquisition by either neighboring property for use as drainfield. Therefore, staff would suggest that this division may well seal the fate of the City's future determination of need to extend sewers to some properties in the study area east of Crestview. Staff is concerned about the drainage on this property only in that provision must be made to protect significant drainageways that traverse the property. Henry Furchner, 360 Leaf Street, stated he was concerned with disruption of a spawning area in the creek which is DNR protected. Assistant Zoning Administrator Gaffron stated he would chock into Mr. Furchner's concern. In response to Bellow's question, Assistant Zoning Administrator Gaffron stated he felt comfortable the 2 lot development could successfully sustain mound systems, however, would like better defined locations. • f I MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD JULY 20, 1987 #1174 CRAIG ANDERSON CONTINUED Bellows felt that this was a problematic subdivison indicating concern with access and staff's septic concerns noting that there seemed to be many marginal issues. Cohen agreed with Bellows due to the "speculative" site plan submitted. Assistant Zoning Administrator Gaffron further explained the proposed plan pointing out the required setbacks (per Exhibit J). Planning Commission majority felt the access corridor width was the major issue and that lot width was adequate if all other standards were met. Mr. Furchner, again, indicated his concern with disruption of the creek and drain e. There were no other comments from the public and the Public Hearing was closed. It was moved by Chairman Kelley, seconded by Cohen, to table this application pending additional information and more detaile’ olan. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. ZONING AMENDMENT STANDARDS FOR ACCESSORY STRUCTURES PUBLIC HEARING 9:07-9:07 The Affidavit of Publication was noted. There were no comments from the public regarding this matter and the public hearing was closed. It was moved by Johnson, seconded by Cohen, to table this matter until the August Planning Commission meeting in order to provide more time for Planning Commission to review the proposed amendment. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. 11056 OLAI HANSON 1390 RAILROAD AVENUE VARIANCE - ADDITIONAL REVIEW It was moved by Chairman Kelley, seconded by Bellows, to table this matter until the August 17, 1987 meeting per applicant's attorney request. Motion, Ayes 4, Nays 0. (Taylor not present to vote. ) To:Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson From: Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator Date:July 15, 1987 Subject: #1174 Craig Anderson, "375" Leaf Street/"3300" Bayside Road - Preliminary Subdivision - Public Hearing Zon.rng District: LR-lA, 2 acre unsewered (This property is within the defined Stubbs Bay Sewer Study Area) Application - 2 Lot plat of 5.7 acre parcel Proposed Lot 1 (West): Lot area, gross: 2.85 acres Lot area, net contiguous east of creek: Approximately 2.32 acres Lot width at 50' setback from Bayside Road: 121' (200' required) Proposed Lot 2 (Bast): Lot area, gross: 2.85 acres Lot area, net contiguous east of creek: 2.80 acres Lot width at 50' setback from Leaf Street: 70' (200' required) List of Exhibits Exhibit A “ Application Exhibit B - Informative Letter of Request Exhibit C - Plat Map Exhibit D - Property Owners List Exhibit E - Survey with Proposed Division Line Exhibit F - Topographical Survey Exhibit G - Topographical Survey Showing Tested Septic Sites, Anticipated House, and Driveway Locations Exhibit H - Sections of Floodplain Map Exhibit I - Letter from Neighbor Boylan Exhibit J - Setback Definition Exhibit K - Airphoto Exhibit L - Stubbs Bay Sewer Study Preliminary Information Discussion - I. General Applicant proposes to split this 5.7 acre parcel into two building sites of 2 plus acres each. Lot 1 (west) is anticipated to access from Bayside Road. The proposed house site is to the rear of the lot where it widens out. The lot needs a I •r width variance but does front on a public roadway. Lot 2 will access from Leaf Street. Again, the assumed house site is to the rear, overlooking the creek. This lot also needs a width variance. II. Drainage Drainage is a concern on this property only in that provision must be made to protect significant drainageways that traverse the property. "Stubbs Bay Creek" follows along the northwest lot line of the property. A detailed flood study of the drainage area was done in the 1970's and floodplain elevations have been defined. The City will require granting of a Conservation and Flowage Easement coinciding with the floodplain elevations along the creek. Staff's preliminary review indicates that lot areas east of the drainage easement will still exceed the required 2.0 acres in area by a wide margin . Both access corridors are traversed by a minor creek/gully leading from a pond east of Leaf Street. Culverts and driveway grading must be approved by the City Engineer to ensure no restrictions in flow through this drainageway. III. Setbacks Based on the Zoning Code definition of rear lot line and rear yard. Exhibit J indicates the setbacks that will be required for these lots. IV. Septic Concerns Applicant's Engineer has submitted soil testing information for primary and alternate sites. The clay soils on the site are mottled at a 2'-3' depth, indicating mound systems will be necessary. We have some concerns as follows: a. ) Primary site for Lot 2 appears to be within a minor drainage swale from the property to the northeast. The alternate site on Lot 2 is a much better site. We would prefer to see the primary site moved to a location away from the swale and further back from the southerly lot line, since a mound in this area will have a potential impact on the soil-water regime of the neighboring properties duo to topography. b. ) The primary site for Lot 1 is not in a swale but should also ba moved northwesterly to reduce its impact on neighboring properties. c. ) The alternate site for Lot 1 needs to bo better defined so that the orientation and size of the potential system to be installed is known and so that the driveway can be located to avoid this site. V. Septic Concerns In Neighboring Properties Because this property is in the Stubbs Bay Sewer Study Area, it is appropriate to consider what effect, if any, this subdivision will have as to overall septic concerns in the area. There is no question that the two new lots can meet the standards for on-site sewage treatment. Staff does note, however, that the properties at 3280 and 3310 Bayside are each approximately only 0.9 acres in area, and have relatively little area that is potentially suitable for alternate septic systems (see Exhibit L). The southerly portion of Lot 1 will, as of this subdivision, no longer be viable as a potential future acquisition by either neighboring property for use as drainfield. Staff would suggest that this division may well seal the fate on the City's future determination of need to extend sewers to some properties in the study area east of Crestview. Staff Recofiuiendation Staff recommends approval of the 2 lot plat for Craig Anderson subject to the following conditions: 1. Each lot most be at least 2.0 acres in dry buildable area east of the easterly floodplain boundary along the Stubbs Bay Creek. 2. Lot width variances for both lots to be granted. 3. Setbacks per Exhibit J of this memo. 4. Septic sites, house locations, driveway locations to be refined in accordance with Item IV above (work with staff on this and resolve prior to Council review for preliminary plat approval). 5. Preliminary plat survey to be completed and submitted prior to Council review for preliminary plat approval . 6. Flowage and Conservation Easement to be granted in accordance with the flodplain boundaries along Stubbs Bay Creek. 7. Grant standard drainage and utility easements along all lot lines. Grant widened drainage and utility easement for minor creek along Bayside Road. 8. Plat to dedicate 33' for right-of-way for Leaf Street and 33' for right-of-way for Bayside Road if surveyor determines those right-of-ways have never been so dedicated. 9. Pack fees to be paid in the amount of $200.00 pec new lot (2 lots at $200 each = $400.00 total). 10. Final Dciveway and culvect access locations to be appcoved by City Engineec. 11. Applicant is advised that a dciveway pecmit must be obtained fcom Hennepin County foe the Bayside Road (County Road 84) access. u • A CITY OP ORONO #1174 Date Rec'd Pp u c Fee Rec'd SUBDIVISION APPLICATION FORM yso"" " C :A ■SO12f'-r/r Telephone *\"lto - fi059»APPLICANT Name CK. ^^^ckr_\rsr>ty\_ _ _ _ _ _ _— -3 Mailing Address ISU^ C\x^\Kn "\^VvO^ UciAa PROPERTY Name C* £^aj ^A.g n .«=^v /^_____________ OWNER - Mailing Address \SC^5 TVv^^r Lrv\luiUo^&’^^SA (Attach list if more than one) Telephone ^^~Uf> - ISj0200000 PROPERTY LOCATION ‘310. a street Address *^"1 ^ Ler^-C C^^<Q 5-^cc> \'c£<° t Property Identification No. (P.I.D.) O) S ~ V \ ~1 — *7t/;7A'jP^P ^ Complete Legal Description to be attached to applica^icKY Tlli4t EXISTING LAND USE Number of Tax Parcels Development Size I S’-*? rf* s.~> (2, ^Phot-U +, T<ecl Acres Dry Land Acres Wet Land Acres Total, all parcels r^' Present Use (check)(1^AryWT Residential? no. of units Other (specify) _ _ _ _ _ _ Present Zoning District l~ ~ \ PROPOSAL Division for Tax Purposes X Lot Line Rearrangement Only (no new building sites) Subdivision for New Building Sites Number of Building Sites:O 7^ Existing Units New Units Total Units Proposed Gross Density o Units per fT,*7 Acres Minimum Lot Size:Square Feet Dry Buildable Land Proposed Use: (check)V Residential Other (specify) (OVER) • MINIMUM MATERIAL NECESSARY FOR COMPLETE PRELIMINARY APPLICATION Application Completed 2. 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 Zoning^Officials Signature Date “7B 7 MINIMUM MATERIAL NECESSARY FOR COMPLETE FINAL PLAT APPLICATION 1. Payment of fees (park fees, filing fee, sewer and water assessments) 2. Signed certificate of survey or mylar copies of formal plat. 3. Title opinion. 4. Easements, Covenants, etc. 5. Developers Agreement and acceptable form of security. Certification by Zoning Department that Final Plat Application is complete. Zoning Officials Signature _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Date _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ FEES Sketch P’an Review (Class I, II & III)$150.00 Preliminary Review (Class I & II Subdivisions) $250.00 Preliminary Review (Class III and all non-residential) $300.00 plus 20.00/lot Final Plat Review (Class III) *(Plus any legal or engineering charges) $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 Commission and Council necessary to process this application and further agrees to pay all additional fees established by ordinance. Applicant's Signature _ C' 0 \ c. o \ ,AX tW, ^ V, Owner's Signature 3 \ 3 ^ t j>. Date ^ I"?.""! Date (q \ 1 r;’7 Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are usually held on the third Monday of each month. f I ----- axH. B TTHPiPEi^i'Ls ”11 |=r/ ' \»J^ i i 6l2/StU-07n 10S60 ^^axjzaxa boulevard (Sdnnetandia, SS343 ^0*nYtom ft^fayCemum: UufolUmnn^ information is given per tiu requirements as stated in ike application for suBdivisionfor ike city of Orono. 1. *Ike foUounng legal descripiion was iakenfrom a unifuau of survey for T^nneik ^umkanu ^ SMl of Lot 12, Auditor s SuBditnsion 9{ymBcr 20J, ^Hennepin County, (Minnesota, IIXCLTT ikai pan descriStd as follows: ^Beginning at tfu Southwest comer thereof; thence *U^est along the South line cf said Lot 12 a distance of 310 feet; thence 7{prth and parallel with the Tost line of said Lot 12, to the right of way line of the Minnesota ‘Wesum %flilroad; thenu Southeasterly along the Ofprtherly line cf said Lot 12 to the 9{prtheast comer thereof; thenu South SOful to place of Beginning, ^ All of Lot 13, Auditor’s SuBdivision ^mBer 203, (Hennepin County, Minnesota, TXCL'PT that pan descriBedasfoUous: Beginning at the Cfpriheast comer thereof; thence along the Ofprth line of said Lot 13 a distance of 310 feet; thence South and parallel with the Tost line of said Lot 13 a distance of 124,7 fut; thenu Last and parallel uith the 9(prth line of said Lot 13 a distance of 310 ful; thenu ?{gnh 124,7 fut to plau cf Beginning, CJ All of Lot 18 and the ^i^est 121 fut cf Lot IS in Auditor's SuBdivision 9^mBer203, (Hennepin County, Minnesota, It does not purport to show improvements or encroachments. 2, Ihe property is owned By Mauriu Taylor and wife. Craig TC Anderson dBa Creug Properties, Inc, holds the Contract for 'Deed. .'23, Cray % Anderson • residenu 476 • 80S* office 591 -0711 voice pager 648 • 1977 4. A purchase agreemznt was signed and accepted May 5,1987. A Contract for Deed will Be executed July 1,1987 at closing. 5. Currently the property is unused forested land. There are no structures on the entire site. S.^i*c enclose a copy cf the survey with proposed division line in red and a copy of the site topography from a city drawing. 7, 'Itt purchased the property to Build2 homes. One may eventually Be occupied By Craig and fRjBecca Anderson, the authors of this proposal Sinurcly, Cray % ^ndh^on 3l *v>-117-^3- 47/ •• -1 /</ 7j t !?™ Q..L\ ' ,6‘‘-L /^is '^\z /4(tO 0 iiYT.i ■ ■*: ,#•^v ,\' o 2N \ <r- • • li* ■'♦o t H ( > !.:• ^ -, T”* * \ ( 4 '/f Wietv 1^0 VI 0 3 h^z '/ 6 . X---------- .%'S V 1 ^ > r5J>Vi4;*A V ? 0 -Ci ♦ ?«! Vo ^■9 J ',*' '^ •' o, ^ ^4 «.)•) 'C *r% i 0 S 17 1^ 1 3/7 w « ' w ( 7^ ;■., (^)1 ,«> i <‘> ! 7." vO. 4 k ■'' - 1 '^{Sf a ■ .M. •V ’ V 3 1 <• ^’8] tiel 9 w sti t,: -J. ° 2/Vo i ./ 400 fl.97 a*.fi/7» ’4 ’ 75 »V ' ft »i 0.'3 ftft V>^ 2b7:5 ^4<7 .X. ”:5 ^ «•yj .'*< ***!!. 3f- 35^ _27 2/3 240 iJ 34 /fy ’’'// J,’ t^y' {2’>l 12 1 .1 2 5 § rt 3 -a T3 m > « \ -< > ► m 3 t"3 o :q > a a 3 9 a m 9 c5 ?: X rr c/1 HI3 °2 m C/4 KM 09 o > SCI !$S c;i C/1 Crf $ 9a > o a M 1/1 O U1 I 3 •- mxs ga M C-1 I r>9 u o o KM Fi 'x T* C? o x; •J T *.J r»s - -SS n P KM 1/1 S ^ X g K/1 > a n » < > in n ^ cn x: M w _ < in > m a* < r- m f- u a w a a 09 X -J X ri s5-^ ;n I W4 M •* c ^ o is VI < rr .*9 > X :! o 3 9 r’l TJ m > 9 N. •< V >1-13 0 o 9 > a a 3 9 9 m r* rj 9g «’ncs X Cl fn H < •• H42 m z; > ifi < Kn m KM $ 9 9 C C Cl Cl Cl Cl m n a am m 9 9 Cl Cl O Oz z o u o C) rj 09 in o Cl I n 9 m Cl M ri S > < m I r» KM O O P9 Cl -4 35 S -c gsa 9 §32 o m 9 9 > X a fe2* 9 S9a vn Cl iM Cl O' M O' Cl n 9 m Cl 2 M ri £ > <m z z m m c s HI HI 55 m m 9 9 O o f\> o Cl o Cl I n H» 9 ^ m I Cl fM M Hi n ^ o > o < IM m IM H 55 3 5 > m o 9 a 9 II m *0 9 ilm KM Cl % o o z > ^ 3g X 2 P m > o a 9 X TI n 9 > 9 -< > PI z o 9 > a 3 9 r KM iiS m o c. u 3z o C4 KM n p r"o O p 9 > >p r- W Z o P > m p p 1 > > _c-i X P H*X -< z n M 111 -4 •• p m p O M GJ <M C_X >v4 3 M p z 1 3 o n •<1 Z m X >IM 2 m M > P fM P X 9 M X a P > P*M a •»m p < m m ^ —^ —p m K H P X 9 KM Cl H d c.r- n M 5=" c.ns o o p o> H n X o o p 9s o > m o p N IM C4 X P X ms m 9 Mz c X m p p C4 P P IM > P > r- -< p > M Oa o m M p 9 Qa z > o u *M P P > CM O O Kit O i M *-• P P ►-g > z -< I P IM m M 04 -H a > m Hi ^ 9 a o o 04 P I i u IM P n 9 ri P -4 < M ri Z sop HI o p r- p ^ M HI P O > P X I -5 P —04 m z p s:: m I Cl IM HI H ri ^ Z o > o < 04 m Hi r- rj g p K ii m > a o m > §• ^ O 9 353 m •• s o fn r* f- p p 04 P P M m > 2 a o p o p fM P o o p 1 ?? ^ IM > P > Hi < I> m oo T4 P 9a i IM P n 9 m P 5 M m X go 55 Z > 9 O o o IM 8 0 p 1 9 9 H > P < p m p !j! Z X 5 z p p 3S m -4 > r- n H. 9 m I P IM 2'- M H ri X* S o > o < IM m KM )6 O P I I IM P O O 9a IM O r 9 > ni X P m -4 < 3 ^2 mz > p < p m KM p p □ OOP o p rj p r- o o > > P P P I •• P O H 9 p Z m I X > P M M P -H p 9 X < r* p ni ri ^ -< -4 Z o Z > > o > p < o p mo 35 O -< 9 S3 <H O -< 9 m23 *■* 9 HI P z H! Ml § P •< P H f- P gp g a p p ri > r* -< m p 2 m 9 P P 0 P 1 3 ►- P P o P 9a X rj 09 o o a m> ■» m p >►—m p >M m M o >M a o 3 o o a 1 3 0 0 M 1 Z m M a rj 2 m M P fM •if 1/1 M p p Q P 9 O P 9 O ZuZ Q H'a z M p Z p m p p p H p p o p >o Jdpopr-o p o*p p p p o 5 > > <m a m o f- 9 r- M m 5 S ni p P r. 0 p 1 I fM P O o CM rr 1 1 ?: X m 09 P n 9 m p 9 9 0 C C o cl Cl rj cl Cl p n m p o r- r- P p r I > P < p m p p p ^ a a m PI 9 9 Cl P O Oz z n H 9 m p -4 I fM KM r* IM Q 'O a ®n p 9 > rn X p "3 *s 9 O > -4 •>• -< a o p o p rj Mi o o p I & » 3 ? o ^ 'f n H 9 ^ m I P IM 9a > Xm rj o n 9 n P 5 M m Z a o > > p P M C/I 9 Z M HF >M •—> p- m ^p <m ^p < m m S p m £p m -< H o p o p > o p ► o P z > < n m ^ O'< H m 01 p > r* p X • n ' I •• -T P P 0 p 1 •• p M I rj p o o 9 m I ism • 9 M ^ P P o -* O Tl^ > 'I ^ X ;! o m > »\ -< > > m 2 a a ;a > a a 2 X2 30 m r— sMo n & o i Cl Cl rri m O 930 S Cl Cl m m o KM CO rj COo o Kjy I m a -< a o ►- 2m 30o in > in a KM ui Ch M M Ifl Cl s M ■nm ca ^ > ^ -< I Cl fN> M kmam *— 30a o ooin Sa L4 rj o Xm ca > -< Cl Mam CO o 3.. > s: X O -< cj r o > o u KM CO ro o o in I in in KM in O' 30a >z CD > >4 •< f Cl ro M 04o m ►- j> Xio o o o <n o oss a »• ininu ino* CD > -< Cl •-<am n Cl ao 3 «• m O 04 04 CO M O O Oin I n > 30a M Cl H Mz CD •-* > ^ -< I Cl rj M 04a m ►- 30a o o o Mm Q 'H-X3 M O 3> ): *a 9a rj (^in Xm m T| X Xss ii O o rjo in 04 01 Cl H Cl Cl -4 H O in I Z XX -H -4 Cl Cl 04 Cl s§ m *s4 > I -n CM 04 Cl H 4- 4> ooo CM 0 Cl 1 CM C4 Ooo z T3 m TJ ft1 > 30 \ -< > > m z CD a X > a a 3 X 30 m ss?** Q CM > Q 2 Cl Z _O I I fv» C4 C4 CM Ooo Cl g S ni m a fm X m Cl H o n > mSm > > 3 3 O 04 O CO o -o Cl o in c. u X 30 Cl Cl 04 in O' m H > r*m ^ > I m CM 04 Cl -H ►- ooo W1 r- CMg o a'^ mm X *n m Cl3-< m m Cln X >n Cln X >n 0 14 O CD CM 0>in a Cl X X H -4 m ^ > I m CM 04 Cl Clin 04c« O' o o o s X :! o 3 n3 m -0 m ► aa \ -< > §S^§ i iSii3 *0 m TJ m > 30 \ -< > ► m 2 O a aa > o a 3» 30 fn s 9a X X § 3 M P*m >-n Cl -4 Cl Cl 04in 0» m 30 n 30c. a ol 30 ri o X Cl Sd M M O 04 O OB 04 o o I m ^ > I ni CM 04 Cl H ri u M M o o o OB O a 04 C^ a c Xm m> X X m a" -< m ^5n o u O OB 04 O'o o c 3 Cl •4 m Cl Cl 04 in O' m H > m > I -n CM 04 Cl H IM 04 O o o H2 > > X 3 TJ m > \ -< 2 a > > m z a O 30 a 30 a 3 30 m r- u o ^ C> > X m m Cl 3 H n n o 04 30 30 o OB > > 04 M M **4 Cl Cl O O O CD I Cl Cl 04 Cl O' •• •• p- ►- m «g 3 2 > I 4-4 M m fM on 04 o O Cl r- r- H fM mm 04 r- m > > S 5m n X3 *0 Cl Cl ooo o a 04 O 04 OB C Xm m >m n o o 30 30 O > > 04 r-4 1-4 Cl Cl o o CD a I Cl H Cl in 04 Cl O' r* »-• m Z Z > I H4 m fM n n oi o O Cl r- p- -4 tMm m > > Q Sm m 30 30 Cl 01 ^ 9 oooin z z r- 30 -O TT9 ^3 C #• Cl »-• r*aor- ni c.> o S X X Z M m H4 r* ^ p- m 3 o p- > Z 4M > ao 30 0 1 I fM 04 Cl in 04 in O' fM 04 ooo O' >n X o o Cc a > Hm oc^ V fM 14 V,o m I•o Mz 35 O -< •o S3 H O -< TJ m i XIun? 30 M P" o M 30 Cl 3 H > H M Cl -< Cl X3 m TJ cn am • ■o M 04 04 in D'o or Ul'hViY FCI*. ■n’H.MIAM IN LC'TS 12, U, U>, AN5 18, AUDIIVR‘3 SUHIIVIilCN V- HiVNEPIN COUNTY, WfWSSOTA ■ M #1174 Certificate of SxiTvayj I heraby certify tnat thia la a tn» end correct rt-pcfia-intatlon of h curvo/ of the tour,daria8 of; A ‘All of Lot ir, A*-iiUor*s Sut^lvlilcn 2?;;, Hoanopln Cc.vJ.t/, Minr.».e)tn, L/.Ciirr that part doecrtted a a To I love: *^,:lnr.lnr at J.o SoutK*eaet cornor thiTHof; thunco *»)3t alonj: tho South lino of said Lot 1? a dlstono*** nf 310 feat; thonca Nortr. ur.d jtirall^^l with tha F^st Ilna of aali Lot IT, to irn »“l^:ht of w*/ U:.« c»* i?:* r;r»nc»ota Loatum hellroad; th«*nce Lou*./’astorly along tho NorUiorly l3no of sain I#ot L' to thj Northeaot ronajr tnoreof; thence Sevith 60 foc«t to place of beginning, B/ A.11 of Lot 13, A’^ltor*e SubdlTlalon JiLat^ar olr. County, Mlnno'«.it/», LXCEi’I that jart dea- crlbed aa follova: Pnglnnin,: iit the rtorlhftaat ccjrn.ir tr.oreof; thence .ept ilong tho Not *»• line of said Lot 13 a distance of 31^ feet; therue Louth nnd panllul with the ^wnt llr.»» n:* r.aid Uit 13 a diaUnce of 127,.7 foul; thuore Last and larhUel with l^o ^,o^th 1 l:io of •nla 1.* a distance of 310 feet; thence l^irth 124.7 feel to uUce of l-jpjlnfiIng , S V ^ , €XU.H-\ Hm (/>m o H Oz > o H 2 ^ I; m m s:§ 2 r- 2> o X m m o2 m ism 5 > u''HP :i 0 I - 1 B -< -< ?> r(? 0 0 I v'. I A r.s. C7 -o — i/' LO ^ i ^ o. l// I \ JUL I 4IWT ex^. z ,;ii 3240 Bayside Road Long Lake, MN 55356 July 14, 1967 TO: City of Orono Planning Commission RE: Application #1174 It is the purpose of th’s letter to express my concern with this proposed subdivision. As I expressed to Michael Gaffron today on the telephone, my concern is with the row of trees that lie on or near the lot line between our property and that of the proposed subdivision. If it would be necessary to remove these trees to provide access to these lots I would strongly object to this plan. The removal of these trees would drastically change the nature of our property. I would appreciate assurance that these trees will not be removed before approval is given to this subdivision. I will be unable to attend the hearing on July 20, but am confident that you as the planning commission will consider my concern. Yours Truly, Donald K. Bo/fan V \ \/ 4 • r V / / * » i ' • I '.A--V rt.'<2!r y < li '.'iy “- ; i is _ V /■ V n / C:J N / /i \wb. \\ y ' .1 y 'A j r N -ii /A » /' \1 -' ^ rV \'W ^.•HO } X 5 i N SA*/ Alt. -\ \ •i M ta-.\^ \ \ ’J k'tjm'a- --J. ti \v^ . ') N >^r-i—-/ •7 *7 :r. .» ■"/ ■ ''- y so \/// /-/ t-1^ __.-0_C\' N'tA>-IJA^. 1-^M \r?© 'y ?33i5 \ i • « A .’Av.V\rv \V wA\Va t\^‘i . . ' V •.**\\ , ► •%4. ^ : .^•jivV'S V\ V' I ii 'V \ ' 53|r' ^ '■ ■ mIj ■|3| \''' “A. iw>'.--•--«-^=«^-3JK-> ♦\ V ,..-. ^ ■< -••• • ■M -f 11'.:Jb fc^’' V/ .V I w’r Jiki.sssiif Ii , f • . , ;.•• v-ir ^ i . ■' ;■/ I TO: FROM DATE: Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson Jeanne A. Mabusth, Zoning Administrator August 11, 1987 SUBJECT: #1177 Todd Waters/John Dennis, 3055/3061 Casco Point Road - After-the-fact Conditional Use Permit and Variance - Public Hearing Zoning District - LR-IC Pertinent Ordinances Section 10.22 Subdivision 2 - No excavation, land alterations within 75 feet of the shoreline of Lake Minnetonka. Section 10.55 Subdivision 8 - Development Restricted: Prohibition - no land alteration permitted within the lakeshore protected area. Section 10.03 Subdivisions 19 & 20 - Prohibitions and permit required for all land alternations. List of Exhibits A - Application B - Property Owners List C - Plat Map D - Resolution 02172 E - Staff Letter 5/20/87 F - Building Permit Application G - Survey/Final Site Plan Approved with Application #1129 H - Updated survey submitted with Building Permit I - North Elevation J - West Elevation K - Kopischke's Report L - Original Site Conditions M - Proposed Site Conditions N - Lynch Report 0 - Grading and Drainage Plan Review of Application On May 11, 1987 Council approved variances to the average lakeshore setback and per Section 10.55 Subdivision 8 approved construction of a new residence, not reconstruction of an existing residence as the resolution would suggest within the lakeshore protected area. Neither staff. Planning Commission or Council realized that the one third of the lakeside of the structure was to be a walkout requiring additional excavation and encroachment into the lakeshore protected areas. The applicant Zoning File #1177 August 11, 1987 Page 2 has advised that even with the original plan, involving use of the existing house that the partial walkout was planned. The applicant could have argued that the variance to Section 10.55 Subdivision 8 would have allowed the additional excavation for the partial walkout. The Difficulty for the applicant is that the excavation involves major drainage alterations and alteration of lakeshore banks that clearly were not required because of the walkout. Review Exhibit L, the underground tile that carried drainage from the rear to the lakeshore was removed and a swale along the north side of the house was installed to maintain runoff from 5+ acre watershed to east or rear of property. Drainage did not drain to the rear basin as originally assumed but drained through Waters and neighbors to the north drainage tiles directly to lake. The staff would agree with Mr. Kopischke, applicant's project planner that the City finds a grassed swale method for conveyance of ground water far superior to underground tile conveyance. Staff should add that Mr. Kopischke's assistance was sought by applicant after staff stopped all work on land alterations within lakeshore yard and advised of the need for a conditional use permit. There were other instances when staff could have been made aware of the alterations proposed by the applicant outside of the building elevations submitted with plan. A copy of a page from the building permit application procedure has been enclosed Exhibit F. Note item 2 - "changes in grade or drainage require plans showing existing and proposed contours or grades." In Exhibit E, staff sought an updated survey showing realigned house and all other improvements. Review Exhibit H, the survey submitted as most updated survey, the house has been realigned - but note the section of principal structure adjacent to deck - this does not exist. Also note the concrete step has been relocated in front of new deck area. There was no access shown from deck with the review of Application #1129 and yet the house elevations (exhibits I & J) show extensive stairs network from deck area. Stairs or concrete step as plans designate must be relocated to south side of deck and out of protected area to minimize impact and reduce need for elevated stairs structure because of the more graduated elevations at south edge of deck. If access to lakeshore is required, grade level steps can be installed within existing banks with txeated ties. Mr. Dennis has withdrawn his participation in the applxcation. Mr. Dennis wishes only to have the existing elevations tapered along his property line. Please review Mr. Kopischke's report. Exhibit K, that summarizes the applicant's plan to improve treatment of surface drainage. The ’’eport also lists supportive findings that would call for approval of the grading and drainage plans included with his Zoning File #1177 August 11, 1987 Page 3 reports (exhibits M & 0). That same report also includes a plan of original site conditions (exhibit L). The original elevations show the front line of the house to be 16 feet higher than the lake elevation. The walkout area is shown 6 feet higher than lakeshore elevation in proposed contour plans with the drainage swale at 8 feet above the lakeshore elevation. *:ike Lynch has submitted the engineering revie\. of the grading and drainage plans submitted by Mr. Kopischke. He approves the drainage swale method and concurs that the flattened slopes within the lakeshore yard will reduce the velocity of runoff resulting in less potential for erosion and greater treatment potential. Lynch cautions that if soil materials removed with original excavation are to be used in backfilling that slope grades must be minimized. Once soils are disturbed they lose their cohesiveness with soils that remain undisturbed. Slope grades must be no greater than 3.1 but preferring 4.1 whenever possible. He also calls attention to the 6 feet height difference of flattened yard area in relation to shoreline and seeks information on the wave height and run-off factor for this section of shoreline. Kopischke has been advised of this request and will prepare the necessary information. Staff has also discussed revising the proposed plan (exhibit M) providing gentler slopes as follows: a) Along the north side extend elevations into flatter area reducing need for extensive retaining wall - attempt to provide 4.1 slopes - may only need small retaining wall adjacent to house where area is restricted. b) Allow retaining walls at 114 elevation in front of house to protect more stable undisturbed soils - this really involves replacement of existing stone wall. c) Fill in excavated area to the west (lakeside) of stone retaining walls - remove timbered walls and provide 4.1 slopes when feasible but nothing less than 3.1. The extension of the higher elevations at the north and south sides of the property will lessen the "tunnel effect" created by the original excavation. The reduction in use of retaining walls will also lessen this effect but most important erosion potential will be greatly reduced with gentler slopes and less use of retaining walls. Mr. Kopischke has also been advised of staf's recommendation regarding the original grading and drainage plan. Kopischke will submit revised plans including staff's suggestions. If the Zoning File #1177 August 11, 1987 Page 4 revised plans are received prior to delivery of your packets, they will be included, if not, they will be presented at your meeting. Mr. Waters has submitted photos of the original lakeshore yard and the present condition. Both Mr. Dennis and Waters agreed that even with the storm of July 23rdm the swale worked and even the existing elevations with no vegetation sustained little damage. Options for action by the Planning Commission - A. Deny the after-the-fact conditional use permit: 1. Require total replacement - tell applicant to redesign house from current walkout. 2. Require partial replacement - allow for minimal excavation for walkout to function. Issues to answert a) How does applicant deal with drainage from east? b) If previous contours restored, applicant will still have severe erosion problems along 1.1 grade slopes of lakeshore banks especially at those slope grades with the use of disturbed soils. Will Planning Commision allow stone retaining wall at this point? B. Approve applicant's original plan based on findings listed in Kopischke's review with no further structural encroachment of lakeshore protected yard as follows; 1. Stairs from deck relocated to south out of protected area. 2. Additional access improvements required because of severe slopes within lakeshore protected area must be via grade level steps built into existing banks, C. Approve plans as amended by staff with conditions 1 & 2 as noted above in item B. ■a p- // / /■ /’■)' fir CITY OP ORONO GENERAL LAND USE APPLICATION # PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address I CVVGC’i P— PO Property Identification Number (P.l.D.) “l^ ) \^ 4* i abstract or torrens?Please check one - Is the property ____ (for Conditional Use Applications only) Please attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. APPLICANT "■",lcT\T3"‘ Name '\%irrK^C<z Y atT ^[2- Phone (home) Phone (work) t -C^AZ.\ Address PT fZn::> City Zip OWNER (if different tha. applicant) Name Address Phone (home) Phone _ _ _ _ City _ _ _ Date Property Acquired CITY OF OROHO __nFFiFF 1 u'w'Vi. n ___________________________(month/year)Ji 200.00 I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. rucri( ji “• “»A /)A • vvv\/ FEES - CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS $100.00 a)Resiuential accessory Use $150.00 b)Institutional (church,school, $150.00 c)Duplex Credit/Bldg $250.00 d)Commercial/Industrial Use $200.00 f)Land Alteration liiCEiFJ-THAfiK YOU fi007200 COOl ROl Tll:‘> 07/10. Grading and filling - 101 cu. yd. or more Seawallf retaining walls within 75' of lakeshore PRD/PID - see fee schedule OTHER APPLICATIONS _ _ _ _ $150.00 $250.00 _ _ _ _ $150.00 _ _ _ _ $ 50.00 _ _ _ _ $250.00 $200.00 Commercial Site Plan Review (+ consultant fees) Vacation Easement Vacation Easement Vacation With Subdivision Rezoning Appeals Other - see fee schedule PRESENT USE OP PROPERTY Present Zoning District Present Use of Property ^^Af>1tuVResidential _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Othei (specify) DESCRIPTION OP REQUEST Describe request in detail: I s4_ _ REQUIRED SUBMITTALS 1. Completed Application Form. 2. 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) 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. 5. Construction plan, if applicable. 6. Plat Map. The applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your application is not complete if the above information has not been included. Certification by Zoning Department that Land Use Application is complete. Zoning Officials Signature Date 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 )cno’7ledge. Applicant's signature (t//Date y/f/j-i W/ledges and agi OWNERS SIGNATURE The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorized reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents, commission members, and Council members for purf jes of investigation and verification of this request. Owner's signature^Date Applicant must have all submittals into the City officas 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of th^ Planning Commission and Council, and, if an applicant is unable t attend a scheduled meeting, to please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. H np 5- ii :: *J rn n > 33 > ^ ;r o :a a :: ;a ni a § t4 O l>4 O r: > 30 n > Cloo r- r- > :u 33 -< U1 Cl "go M Cla M •n:a O•o b C3 ;j O 04 04 ca o 04 o rj 0 1 :o > 3 n > 01no TJ O z -i XJa -4 I 04 04 O o o § rn >o o 3Q H > >: > H n ni 33 ? 1- I O31 Q 8 U1 Cl 04 *o ra Cl n > O)no n M 33n Clo 33 33 O r- fi» a T3 ••o 5S -4 r- 33 n M -<n M > o u 04 O M Cl rv> 0 1 ►- 0 H- > ^01 I n ra O 04 n 04 o o rvj as H >ir *•*<h *Tj ni > V, - :• ri Ll PJ tJ M q •« in 33 •n3J O *0 r: iJ 3- ‘3 12 AJ ni r w o 3> o O K O' :0 N ►- M > 01 H n > > c. Cl•V rn2o3 r* TJ M O H Cl M O Cl Z 30 04 H I ^ ^ £ •- 7T > O Hnn 01 5i3 < 03 C > -4 m nj 01 Of C3 ri 0 1 n > 01no r> 04 > rri T 04 Z H O ^ O > I- Z o H O S'- j' • • M V. * ^ t J o a J H > ^ % “D •< ri XI -I•na•a « ' - V? o3- Xir XIn 3» H > V ua 33 04 0 Cl n > 01 n o V r t Z n TJ:a 30 0 HM 01 > CJa 3J nc 3Q H w-i 03 O 04 O 0 01 04 ca ra 0 1 c. c. « rt n n»- ” o 4^ TJ C Cl M Cl z 04 H *43H* 33 O n > 01no I ra 04 04 l-l m Z o H H o > — r- a Clo ais -4 Oz > ;• - X -A Z Ti ri Ml > a N •< ^ r \ Z O-J 9 o 2 CJaa 04 0 04 Cl n > 01 no ao M 01 Cl o( <3 Z•- -4 ao s 1» 01 C3 rt X) M -> I 5 a ;> **3 z m -4 H ri XI M lin Nn > 04 03 r.' 0 1 s wr.i ri M 01 H nia n > 01no ao Mz -4 >1 I M 04 04 O o o a r- a . BC33^- HI O 2: o o ra a 5m o Noo z > 04 Cl n > 01no m mama H 205 n K-4 Cl a Cl 04 o HIn n > C/lno no a > n > 01no oo ra 0 1 ra 01 04 o o 04 2 Ss ^ •a o q ^ r* 04 z z 01 ra Z ^ 25-8 04 03 Cl Cl o 'O ri a 01o f.ic 01 m Cl > 0) z ra 0 1 > H- 0 ►- > H 01 I n ra a 04 n ^ O 04 H4 Z o H o 04 a Cl o 9 E > H H > O' 04»— ra n 5* 01n O n Cl »-4 01 a 04 0 H- 1. > 3 m 01 Z O aa X 9 '^3o Sig H» ra n4 rc 0 1 H* n H. ► H 01 I n ra O 04 3*oora ra 01 ♦-* H ra -sj >sc r5 ^8 Cl > Cl < ►- m o O. 0. > > z zn m 01 01 a a n > 3ma HIzm n > 3 ma Mzm X X N N n m r- r- 1“ r 04 C9 ri 0 1 C* #1 H* I ra 04 o o M H > Cl Cl 04 o 01 0 Cl Cl n > 01 n o s HI H ao >o c. c. 88 Z Z •o a o 04 0 Cl 01 a mz-»» M 01 m H > f- 04 CD ra 0 1 n »- > H t1 I n ra O 04 a 04o ^ 1-4z o H o H< a 03a -< N H > Cl Cl 04 *0 04 O ra 0 n > 01 n o s Mz H aa n > ao 0. 0 01 rn m O 04 04 01 O ra o ri 0 1 m 0 )> 01 n o ao M >r" Z o H O ra a o a 04 <a cr Cl n > 01no a* o a n a H 2 01 o r< a arri m o 04o Cl Cl a 01 o 04 *-io z ►- H ao >o C. P* IT > C- H a m c. o. n m a a a a n m m m n 01no 3 04 »:d ra 0 1 I ri 04 u o o aa oao w 0 •> 01 ni < no z M ri O </l 01 O 04 •H 04 C3 n o < X' n Cl ri Z o I Cl a 01 o 04 M n HI a > H ► 01 I -< n ra O 04 s aa 04 ►H Z o H O a iva a JZ>•< > H > ao Cl HI S 5 :a o >a o. u 0 X 9» 01a 01 P* H rn 01 Z > Z m 01H m Z o 04 ^ O Cl la o n H» > oi I n ra O 04 a 04o ^ HI Z O H o o a O' a z H a a 04 r o 3 r> a33g > > < r- vn m Cl ^ 01 o ra 01 c HI H m Cl a o 04 3 - ra o 04 O oocn > I- r- ra 0 1 m H > n > 01no n HIa I ra 04 04 o o o C3 E>-< H > 04 0 ra Cl n > 01 n o a Cl UJma H Cl Cl 04 <0 ao a > Z £a aa X O 04 O 04 03 0 > ra a 01 ra a o a H* \ n H. n > H 01 I 3 o ra HI o 04 r* r- a 04 > 0 4> Ml > Z o H o > o r- a ra M o o2 ua E 04 a a o 04 >0 04 C9 -< ►- Q Cl o N Cl 3» r- p- 01 ra H n > > o ZOMmOh - 2 O m m > %4 01 I a n n ra H H O 04 Cl > Cl a p- a 04 04 O O > O M M Z O H O o Ra z 0a S3 M O H a m Is m a M 01 Z ar- q M -a 3 01 3 H > H Mo2 01 H a =4fc <r >1 H OP XZl *□ M > ?3 — n rta :a o o n :o;u n *D ?* CD -< U N 08 M >z 0 > 01 n o H > 5 o ^ ra Qo El Uicn 0*4o :aa z: HH•nm o 04 0 U4 (P T 8 O I»-• n •- > vj 01 I o rj a 04 •V ^o u M :: o -4 O C/4 » Oa cj3- -4n X ooro 5 o >Hm o \oo 0> m•ws Cl O 30 H m ti m ■n n C 43 ::dm > (i 01 m no n r* o 04 04 0> 8v km o U 43 n on 33 ui n 04 r- •4 43 m >a C3as CJ 33c n 01 > -4 01> n o a r\) 0 1 Ir\» U4 o ^ M 04:a oo |3 as lam 5|r- g M 30 </) X H M C/1 -< 01 -4 X V ILe^' r X3m i m • •D M ^ 04on o • i • • City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 2172 D A RESOLUTION GRANTING A VARIANCE TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.22, SUBDIVISION 1 & 2 AND SECTION 10.55, SUBDIVISION 8 PILE #1129 WHEREAS, Todd Waters (hereinafter "the applicant”) is the owner of the property located at 3061 Casco Point Road within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as follows: (Exhibit A attached), (hereinafter "the property"); and VHIEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City for a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivision 1 and 2 and Section 10.55, Subdivision 8 to reconstruct existing residence and construct a new dec)c within the 0-75' lalceshore setback zone, constituting hardcover, structure, and average setback encroachment in that setback zone where no hardcover, structure, or average setback encroachment are normally allowed; and to construct an addxtion to such residence that will increase the hardcover in the 75-250’ lakeshore setback zone above the 25% hardcover level normally allowed. Minnesota; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #1129. 2. The property is located in the LR-IC Single Family Lakeshore Residential District. 3. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on April 20, 1987, and recommended approval of the proposed variance based upon the following findings: applicant intends to construct a new foundation under the existing structure, hence he has the opportunity to move the house back from the lake a short distance, B) The proposed deck is to be 8' in v;idth. Moving the entire house and deck back 8' from the existing location will result in no new encroachment into the average lakeshore setback, will re.sult in no additional 0 — 75' hardcover, and may actually decrease the 0-75' hardcover. Pago 1 of 4 City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 2171 C) As a result of moving the house, the 75-250' hardcover will be increased to 33.1% where only 25% is normally allowed. This can be justified by the fact that the majority of drainage in the 75-250' zone does not flow toward the lake but is held in the basin area east of the house. D) The view encroachment caused by the proposed porch at the south end of the house is minimal. The effected neighbor to the south has submitted a letter of non-objection to the project. E) The relocation of the municipal sewer line is feasible and will not cause any problems for the municipal sewer system. 4. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicant and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. 5. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variance would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; v/ould not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate a demon strable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicant; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zonincr Code and Comprehen.sive Plan of the City. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND COimiTIONS Based upon the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a variance to the Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivision 1 and 2 and Section 10.55, Subdivision 8 to reconstruct existing residence and construct a new deck within the 0-75' lakeshore setback zone, constituting hardcover, structure, and average setback encroachment in that setback zone where no hardcover, structures, or average setback encroachment are normally allowed; and to construct an addition to such residence that will increase the hardcover in the 75-250' lakeshore setback zone above the 25% hardcover level normally allowed, subject to the following conditions; 1. The existing house shall be moved 8' eastward from its present location, and all proposed additions, including porch, deck, attached garage, and room additions, shall be similarly moved 8' eastward from the proposed site plan, resulting in a maximum house encroachment into the 75' setback zone of 8' and a maximum dock encroachment into that zone of 16*. Page 2 of 4 City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 2172 2. Hardcover in 0-75' setback zone shall not exceed 7.1% or 542 s.f. Hardcover in the 75-250' setback zone shall not exceed 33.1% or 5,910 s.f. Applicant is advised that no additional hardcover will be approved and that any future proposals to increase hardcover on the property might be approved only with concurrent removals of equivalent amounts of existing hardcover so that there is no net increase in ' hardcover percentage. 3. The municipal sewer line may be relocated by applicant's contractor at applicant's expense upon plan approval by the City Engineer and Public Works Coordinator. Applicant shall provide plans for such work prior to issuance of the building permit. Applicant shall grant a 10' easement either side of the relocated sev;er line. Applicant shall be responsible for obtaining a similar easement for the City from the affected neighboring property owners. Such easements shall be granted prior to issuance of building permits for the residence. 4. Applicant shall provide a revised survey/site plan with the final proposed house location prior to issuance of a building permit. 5. Authorities granted with this resolution run with the property not with the applicant, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit within one year of the date of Council approval, or this variance will expire on that date (May 11, 1988). 6. Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this resolution shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 7. The undersigned applicant has read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of himself, his heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. ( ATT^T: Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 11th day of May, 1987. \ ‘ ->.• City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 2172 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) On this ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) k day of 19S'^ before me a Notary Public within and for sal^d county, personally appeared _ _ _ _iJo'kr^^._ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 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. NmBf *'uS*'*® •»ptre$ STATE OF MINNESOTA ) )ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this day of _______r 1987, before me a Notary Public within and for said Coimty, personally appeared ______brriS T. n')Cj/ihr-iO(:i 'k.^r^ known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the .foregoinginstrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. S- MY COMMISSION EXPIK'.S Page 4 of 4 • I ♦ \ CITY of ORONO I’osl Office Hox 66•Crystal Bay, Minnesota Municipal Offices On the North Shore of Lake Minnetonka May 20, 1987 Todd Waters 3061 Casco Point Road Wayzata, MN 55391 Dear Mr. Waters; Per our telephone conversation of 5/19/87, the City cannot issue a building permit until the following has been either executed or submitted; 1. Sign off on original resolutions at Teri Naab's desk - to be executed by both you and your wife. 2. Engineering plans for sewer line realignment. 3. Executed easements by both you and neighboring property owner - 20 feet width - 10 feet on either side of line. 4. Revised survey shc./ing approved location of house, sewer line and all other improvements. Please call if you have additional questions. Sincerely, Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator JAM/tln IIUII.DINC. A ZONING - 473-7357 ASSl-SSING ADMINISTRATION & FINANCE - 473 7358 Pl'Hl.IC WORKS - 473-7359 BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATION PROCEDURE Each application for a building permit shall bo accompanied by the data indicated below. Failure to submit complete information will result in return of applications. Please read carefully the listed requirements. 1. ALL APPLICATIONS A. Completed application forms including all information required in the numbered spaces, dated and signed by applicant. Two copies of building plans, drawn to scale, together with specifications containing the following minimum information; (requirement for building plans may be waived by the Building Official for small structures or minor work). Where manufacturer or dealer requires the return of one approved set of plans, four copies will be necessary. 1. Certified____Survey - (required for every application) Legal description of property, dimensions of property, location of existing and proposed structures on site, location of all proposed improvements such as driveways, retaining walls, decks, sidewalks, etc. 2. Grading and Drainage__P1.2.11S ~ where any changes in grade or drainage are proposed as a result of the construction, a grading and drainage plan must be submitted showing existing and proposed contours or grades. Required for ^1. projects. 3. £1221 __£l£H£ ” each floor or level including basement or foundation, decks, porches, garage or carport. Size, spacing, and direction of floor and ceiling framing members, girders, beams, columns and piers. Location and size of all windows and doors including manufacturers identification and documentation of window and door infiltration test data. Iiocation and size of ail permanently installed cabinets, plumbing fixtures, heating, ventilation and air conditioning equipment. 4. Exterior Elevations - All sides of building showing windows, doors, finished grades, exterior finish, depth of footings, foundation v/alls, piers and finished floor elevations. 5. Details__and Sections - a minimum of one section detail through exterior wall for each type of construction proposed, showing materials and dimensions of each member from footing to the highest point of the roof. Details including calculations and stress diagrams together with manufacturers specifications are required for all trusses. Fireplaces, if proposed, must be detailed in plan and cross section. Details and calculations are required for each critical construction detail including beams, overhanging or cantilevered joists, stairways, balconies, or other unique structural features. Information and calculations pertaining to thermal transmittance values and resistance values of each proposed material are required and may be shown either on plans or in specifications (see detailed energy requirement sheet for complete listing of information). r " s > O C 9 "< m Tj g ao Tj Sm MX m o ^ cn 33 ^ r- --■■i ---- J « i ]i -----------1- * IJ•V 3 r r-.^l r* L_____J as..^ .r-J : *:^V o i ■ : 1 ■.Ui.------------------- 1 It 1 1 //! 1 1 'i 1 ^ •»* f. ?" o! ^cif ^ __ o o \ ' ■J. (A 1;-----------------1 I 1 1*c NI 1 ■p;1 K \\\\ II* ^ WESTWOOD PLANNING & ENGINEERING COMPANY The Honorable Mayor, City Council and Planning Commission City of Orono P.0, Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 RE: Todd Waters/Oori Molitor Residence 3061 c<- Point Road City Zrning File #1129 Dear Mayor, Council and Planning Commission: In February of 1987, Todd Waters had madp application for variances relating to hardcover, average lakeshore setback, structure in the 0-75’ setback and requested relocation of a sanitary sewer line to accomodate construction of a new home in the same location as an existing structure. The Planning Commission and Council approved these requests in April and May, 1987 respectively. A building permit was then issued with both the City and Applicant/Owner assuming that all necessary permits and approvals were received. An approval oversight was discovered after building construction charted, footings were placed and walls started. The p'*. ^.'^sed intent, as shown on the building plans originally submitted for approv.il, was to construct a walkout from the basement level on the lake side of the new house. Since the new house has a first floor elevation essentially the same as the original house and since the original house did not have a lower level walkout to the lake, it was necessary to excavate a portion the steep 15- 17 foot bank and yard adjacent to the lake within the 0-75 foot setback. This is prohibited within Section 10.55; Subdivision 8 of the Flood Plain and Wetlands Management section of the Zoning Ordinance where if states "... (No) grading ... excavation,... shall be allowed., on any land within 75 feet of the ordinary highwater elevation of any lake shoreli le..This same section though does go on to indicate that this type of grading and excavation could be permitted "...if such activity (being no excavation) upon those adjacent areas incompatible with the policies expressed in this secHon..." At this time, the construction on the building is continuing but work has stopped 0!i the yard grading adjacent to the lake. Rough site grading was basically complete when work stopped and is as shown on grading plans prepared for Todd Waters (7-7-87) and Jack Dennis (7-9-87; the adjacent neighbor to the north at 3055 Casco Point Road). A straw bale ai'xe has been placed adjacent to the lake to control site runoff and sedimentation until this variance proposal to allow the excavation is resolved. The reasons for grading and excavation are both subjective and well founded on good engineering practice. There was a desire to develop a more useable yard area adjacent to the lakeshore a less steep and safer lakesr.ore access route would be provided by flattening the grade to the low^r walkout level. BS;75 fD.’NtUU) 'K SING, UflO 'KLYN PARK ‘MNNESOTA S5443 4.4 0B67 (Business Of(ice) 74(5 WAV/AT A fJOUltVAHD GT LOUIS PARK. MINNESOTA S5426 <61 2i S4f*0*lS ROME RKlflELIUtffSiVUiKIlIiHailtItlsif •KliIE RIlliKE [•lIliiHiTSiraili:! RKlEtlE R»IE [fWMt »inrE RiirE RKliilE •iriT:[•TirtKm HinHE •I:I«»rE [•MUMITlEira rtiraiffiiTE ^UKItlVira [i&HE RMiraiHTZflflEiHiia RrOAKI [•MuKI [U:jlKflEilE r.riora •HE rtranE •lIMd [•Kllliiai an-.iiraHE [•HSEE RiliO^ RBrE •I«I«B [•■ai RKfil RKIIK1 [tJlill nwmmMil [dilRWE ^UIE romi R1U9 The stated purpose of the Flood Plain and Wetlands Management (Section 10.55, Subd.l) ordinance is "... to protect the public interest against... unplanned land development which affects...lakes....which... will result in loss and damage to public and private improvements through inundation by fioud waters and subsequent expensive construction of storm sewers and other public projects...". The "specific intent of this section", with comment as it relates to this project, is to: Subd. 1. A. Reduce danger to health by protecting surface and ground water supplies from the impairment which results from incompatible land uses by providing safe and sanitary drainage. (Overland site drainage and slope stabilization to control water born erosion and sediment migration to the lake). Subd. 1. B. Reduce the financial burdens imposed both on this community and on communities within the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District and the individuals therein by frequent floods and overlcw of water on lands. (Positive front yard drainage and home flood protection) Subd. 1. C. Permit and encourage planned development land uses which will not impede the flow of floodwater or cause danger to life or property. Subd. 1. E. (Positive front yard drainage and home flood protection) Avoid fast funoff of surface waters from developed areas to prevent pollutional materials such as animal feces, motor oils, paper, sand, salt and other debris, garbage and foreign materials from being carried directly into the nearest natural stream, lake or other public waters. (Rec. .ce erosion and sediment movement to the lake; reduce runoff velocity; stabilize steep slopes) Subd. 1. H. Prevent the development of structures in areas unfit for human usage by reason of danger from flooding, unsanitary conditions or other hazards. Subd. 1. J. (Flooding protection) Protect against potential loss of life, loss of property, health and safety hazards, disruption of commerce and governmental services, extraordinary public expenditures for flood protection and relief, and impairment of the tax base, all of which adversely affect the public health, safety and general welfare. (Flooding protection) Section 10,55, Subdivision 25, identifies the criteria to justify a variance and states "In extraordinary cases, the council may authorize ijpon application such variance from the terms of this Section as will not be contrary to the public interest, where owing to special conditions a literal enforcement of the provisions of this Section will result in unnecessary hardship so that the spirit of this Section shall be observed and substantial justice done. No variance shall have the effect of allowing in any district uses prohibited in that district, permit a lower degree of flood protection than the regulatory flood protection elevation for the particular area, or permit standards lower than those required by State law," The specific items the Council will use to review the validity of the variance is as follows: Subd, 25. A. No variance shall be granted which the Council determines will or has a tendency to : 1. Increase the height or duration of flood water in or along the Minnehaha Creek, (The amount of runoff will remain as originally existed and have no adverse impact. 2. Result in the placement of an artificial obstruction which will restrict the passage of flood water in such a manner as to increase the height of flooding, except obstructions approved by the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District in conjunction with sound flood plain management, (A natural obstruction was creating a flooding problem which is resolved by site grading. An open swale, rather than storm sewer, will permit the proper passage of flood water.) 3. Result in incompatible land uses or which would be detrimental to the protection of surface and ground water supplies. (Same type of land use as allowed by zoning) 4. Increase the financial burdens imposed on the community through increased floods and overflow of water onto land areas within the City or onto land areas adjacent to Minneha.ia Creek. (There would be no adverse impact on Lake Minnetonka or Minnehaha Creek. This would resolve a flooding problem.) b. Be not in keeping with land use plans and planning objections for the City or which will increase or cause danger to life or property. (Proposal provides flood protection) 6. Be inconsistent with the objective of encouraging land uses compatible with the preservation of the natural land forms, vegetation and the marshes and wetlands. (Generally, the house fit's with the original ground form of the site and preserves the most desirable tree cover. The adjustment of the land form has a positive impact on the health, welfare, and safety of the residents by providing flood protection as well as enhancement, stabilization and sediment control along the lakeshore.. 7. Includes development of land and water areas essential to continue the temporary withholding of rapid runoff of surface water which presently contributes to downstream flooding or water pollution or for land and water areas which provide ground water infiltration which diminishes the land area necessary to carry increased flows or storm v/ater following periods of heavy precipitation. (Runoff will occur in a controlled fashion by overland drainage and an existing sump catch basin. The flatter slopes will catch sediments and other pollutants, minimize erosion, provide ground water infiltration and reduce runoff velocity. Steep slopes will be stabilized.) Not only did the original lakeshore bank condition on the Waters' property create an unsightly erosion and pollution concern, but the entire bank along the Waters/Dennis properties has trapped water in their front yards creating a hardship due to flooding. As previously discussed, the regrading and excavation of a small portion of the lakeshore bank and overland drainage swale, as proposed, resolves both problems and therefore the variance is justified. Please feel free to contact me should you have any questions regarding this variance request. Respectfully Submitted WESTWOOD PLANNING & ENGINEERING COMPANY 'if! - - - - Greg KcTpischke Senion Project Planner/Landscape Architect GP:ls Plan Attachments H Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik & Associates, Inc. 2335 W. Trunk Highway 36 St Paul, MN 55113 612636-4500 Engineers & Architects Otto C. Botmtroo, P E Hobtfi W Huatna. P t Juaey/A C Amderhk, P t. Bretijord A Lembarg, F t. Btchoad t. Tmrtm, P.t, Jamn C Oiuwi. F t L August 11, 1987 City of Orono Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Attn: Jeanne Mabusth Building and Zoning Administrator Re: File No. 139-1177 Waters Property Ctem K Ccot. r £. krilh A Gof^Uitn. P.t. Tkumm t \o/r», P t . Mu hm/J H' / uttrf. P £ Hobart G !khunHhi. F t. A4«f>M L iufrwPe. P t Oonekt C Betgardt, F £ Jerry A Bourdon, F £■ Mart A Heuaom, F t lad K ktabi. F £. Mm beat T Heutmann. F £. Hobart H Pjrjjrrir P t l)a*td O Loakviu. Pt Jborma W Fatanon. P t. MuhaatC lymk. P t kuran L Wdlu. F £ Jeanat H Mulamd. P £. kamaatk F Aedanon. P £. kriik A Betbtman, P t. Mark H Hoijt. F E. Hobart C Hux^ak. A I A. Thotaas £ Angux. P t. Uoti L Youag. Ft. Cborlas A truixom lav M Pu mrbk r HufUtn M Ohon Susan M. tbarlm Dear Jeanne: We have reviewed the information submitted by Mr. Greg Kopischke of the Westwood Planning and Engineering Company. Mr. Kopischke is requesting a var iance for excavation within the 0-75' setback area for the Todd Waters/Dori Molitor Residence at 3061 Casco Point Road. The newly excavated drainage swale on the north side of the property will provide positive storm water drainage to the lake, benefiting both the Water property and the Dennis property to the North. Prior to the construction of the swale, water ponded behind both properties and was drained to the lake through catch basins and eight inch diameter clay storm sewer pipes. The storm sewer pipes are inadequately sized to convey storm sewer flows at the rate runoff reaches the properties, and ponding of water results. The posi tive surface water drainage through the swale will provide overflow protection to the Dennis Home which does not currently exist. The positive surface water drainage provided by the swale is a more desirable solution for storm water drainage than is storm sewer piping. The owner proposes to flatten out the natural slope of the property by use of retaining walls. Flattened slopes will result in less runoff as the water will percolate into the soils. Flattened slopes will also result in a reduced runoff water velocity, which will result in less erosion. Page 1. 57l4u city of Orono Crystal Bay, MN August 11, 1987 If the soil material removed was to be replaced within the excavation, the backfilled material would be more likely to erode than would undisturbed material of the same slope. Soil material that is removed and replaced loses the material cohesiveness provided by the surrounding soils. In order to prevent erosion of the backfill material slope grades should be minimized. The proposed grading plan indicates the elevation of Lake Minnetonka at 100 and the elevation at the walkout to be only 6 feet higher. The wave height and runup should be considered before the proposed site grading plan is approved. We recommend the City require the owner to provide a wave height and run-up analysis before the proposed site plan is approved or that the owner alter his plan so to address the eroding effects of wav-^s and wave runup Yours very truly, BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC. Michael C. Lynch MCLici Page 2. 5714e 'S ’ J 7^ \) 1 V z.1 *•* • fc; n Lake Minnetonka To:Planning Commission Chairman Kelley & Members City Administrator Bernhardson Prom: Mary Jo Knott, Septic & Zoning Aide Date August 13, 1987 Subject: #1180 Charles & Candice Nadler, 2509 Kelly Avenue - Conditional Use Permit - Public Hearing Zoning Administrator - LR-IC Single Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District - {% acre) Area - 1+ Acres Application - Seeks a conditional use permit to allow land alteration within 75 feet of the shoreline of the property. Pertinent Ordinances - Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Application Exhibit B - Plat Map Exhibit C - Property Owners List Exhibit D - Survey Exhibit E - Diagram of Proposed Improvements Discussion - The applicants have applied for a conditional use permit to allow land alteration within 75 feet of the shoreline of the property. The lakeshore ice flow heaving/pressure has caused a buckling effect for a distance of 32 feet parallel to the shore. The grade around the uplifted land is relatively flat. Twenty two feet of the rip rap in front of the raised ground has been damaged and no longer functions as a stabilizing structure. As a result, soil erosion has occurred in the area behind the damaged rip rap. The applicants are proposing to level the uplifted land and restore the topography to the former contours. At this time, the rip rap will be restored and the eroded area behind the rip rap will be filled in using a portion of the uplifted land. Similar to the land alterations proposed by Mr. Schmitt in his recent application. The area to be altered extends approximately 32 feet northeast of the existing trees (see Exhibit E). Sod will be installed to secure the newly graded area. After a discussion with Candice Nadler (the applicant), it was decided that constructing a larger walkway from the existing house to the lakeshore would need a hardcover variance. The applicants have decided against applying for the hardcover variance and all plans dealing with a walkway have been dropped. Staff Recommendation - Staff recommends approval of restoring the shoreline contours and repairing the rip rap, subject to suitable erosion controls implementation being installed during the grading work. The recommendation is based on the following hardships and findings: 1. 2. 3. Soil erosion along the shoreline banks will continue if rip rap is not repaired. There will be a gap between the heaved soil and the damaged rip rap if this area is not filled in. The grading work will enhance the safety and usabilitv of t-h<a yard area. ^ ^ * % k CITY OP ORONO GENERAL LAND USE APPLICATION PROPERTY LOCATION Site Addrexs Q>Sc a n f\ - Property Identification Number Please check one - Is the property (P.I.D.) ^'6 X-U7-13 niTf^^lC^ OFFICE abstract or 135020b^^toxrens? # (for Conditional Use Applications only)W CEH 200.00 CHECK TL 200.00 Please attach legal descrxption to application if noj'^<‘|^4,'|;^c^i){fn required survey. ^>010230 COOl ROl 710:53 APPLICANT Name f Phone (home) I Phone (work) |7 07/2<i/S 7 ?)‘^G ' i Address ^ ^ h y City Zip S G. ?> 3 \ OWNER (if different than applicant) Name Phone (home) Phone Address City Zip Date Property Acquired (month/year) I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. FEES - CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS $100.00 a) Residential accessory Use $150.00 b) Institutional (church, school, etc.) Duplex Credit/Bldg Commercial/Industrial Use Land Alteration $100.00 a) $150.00 b) $150.00 c) $250.00 d) •/ $200.00 f) Grading and filling - 101 cu. yd. or more Seawall, retaining walls within 75' of lakeshore PRD/PID - see fee schedule OTB R APPLICATIONS _ _ _ _ $150.00 _ _ _ _ $250.00 _ _ _ _ $150.00 $ 50.00 $250.00 $200.00 Commercial Site Plan Review (+ consultant fees) Vacation Easement Vacation Easement Vacation With Subdivision Rezoning Appeals Other ~ see fee schedule PRESENT OSE OF PROPERTY Present Zoning District L f!-- I C rPresent Use of Property Ciur, (r-. Residential Other (specify) DESCRIPTION OP REQUEST ibe rDescribe request in detail: \Cv4e»^^ifiC«i^-tc /•p n--4 f; _ I REQUIRED SUBMITTALS 1. Completed Application Form. • 2. 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) 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. 5. Construction plan, if applicable. 6. Plat Map. The applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your application is not complete if the above information has not been included. Certification by Zoning Department that Land Use Application is complete. Zoning Officials Signature Date 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 O- ______ Date 2 ^ ~7 OWNERS SIGNATURE The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorized reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents, commission members, and Council members for purposes of investigation and verification of this request. Owner's signature {■ o.- \, i ... _ _ _ _ _ Date C. ^ ^ — - - - --- - - - - -- --- - - - - -- --- - - - - - - --- - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - -- - - - -— —^ — —- - - - - - Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council, and, if an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, to please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. . 200 scale IB i’ ' A- • 'p ;. _ HV/Y,CO RD NO ^b )I :* 6 I 4 2 2664 5 I8« 66 3(5 32 i . -r A SS:''V . B •• o \r ^ r\j <0 6 CJ 0 RPftO omiH. U8«4S0 4unritfr> .'H j.ta-z...1=^ • tea #1180 ff£OtSTCff£D LAND SURVEY NO. 142S SCMli •m Rfmt OMtg ; 9mortnqs O iron m m dkmUM ^ hmm mf 0W m4 mwmmkmw^ W ^mm,9l^wAkn $nMf M,4Y0V- intMMw mmkr h fMCf 4i^ I h«rtbgr e#rtlfy th«t In accenSanr* w!»h th»* mrvliteri ChApUr 50e», Plr*ia5cU 3Ut4it«« of 194V at I Ur« &m^9fd XhR follovinf-doorrt^l trtrt of Und In th« rnwtj of V^MVl•o|o nnd tiM StotA of Klrmosoto, to irlti Troct C, IlifltUr^i Ltnd 9my9y f*o. ft loo of tho Hofiotrir of Tltlov County of tooMoin. *>o boundorloa of which haoo boon aarfeod \y Judlclnl Uni!** i^rka oot purauont to Torrono Coso No* 1^91^, and that ti^o aunray ahown horoo^la a eorroot doIlnootloB of aald aurvoy, ditad thla of . _______ 1976. I W %i .i • • ’ ^ ~ - w - — ^ - w — w j Und SonroTor and Planner «U3 1 7 W78 ' i omm, KIIKCSOTA Thia hoflatarod t^nd Hunray was epprovad and arcopta Mlnnaaola, at a ramilor MctlnK tharoof bald thla Kayor AJjrlnlatrator r?fA*‘C^ DT/ISIOV, Per.nanln Co’mty, X horoby eortlfv that ^«f^ of* no dalir>iuant taioe for tU years ^ricr to for land doanrltod or, thla niat., tHi. ^ a., or 19^^. ^ ______T.X HrfRPI* COITTY STTnrfTCR ftirauant to Chootor fl^', Plnnooota Ltwo of I9f-^, tMa Pac^orai Lard Sumar aonnjvad tMa (yxO ^7 cf 1976. 1 i A /I /I y / /. \ IMi Paf^orai Lard Sumar hat tyr a dpi livor R)Trta a^ Hanna p/r ty f.urv'oyor BGXSTIUn tf TITLES, Monnapln County, MlnnoooU ^ # a • . X hofoby cortlfy that tho within Roclatarod Und Surrey Ito. ) H 2 was Mlod In thU offlco^Is ii-T AU U>V l1T,» 1976| at (Alt o'clock AJ3» ^ eopioi ware rcapara l with the orlflnal and waro found to bo tn;e anJ c^ • . •^00 thoroof. . K v Uiyno A. Johaocn, fUglstrar of Tltlaa, by ,^,V^Ai^oaa4 ------* r-^ n. .r^f.*. -Q • : • -k «■• , • ■ r- ia^ 1-oi.TML i«i^ tai.'i-S -. i\'tA. iv’’ • >. ■ ^ 'h ''> 'V'^ v" r5>‘*. Ms wtl -cr^ v'r W’^ ] \ \ V f W / / / \ X. \ \ \ \ To:Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson From:Mary Jo Knott, Septic & Zoning Aide Date:August 13, 1987 Subject: #1182 Lisa and Marty Dietrich-Blocker, 458 Linden Avenue Variance - Public Hearing Zoning District - LR-IB Single Family Lakeshore Residential (1 acre) Area - 25,000 s.f. (.77 acres) Application - Front setback variance to replace a foundation on the west portion of the existing house and to extend constuction along the front line of the house. Proposed Front Setback = 28' Allowed Front Setback = 35' Variance = 20% Pertinent Ordinance - Section 10.24, Subdivision 5 (B) List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Application Exhibit B - Plat Map Exhibit C -■ Property Owners List Exhibit D - Survey Exhibit E - Plans of Proposed Construction Discussion - The applicants have applied for a front setback variance to install a new foundation to the west portion of the existing house. When the house was first built this was a porch but now is part of the primary structure. The applicant is also proposing to extend construction along the front line (west side) of the house (see Exhibit E). A brief history of this parcel of land is necessary to understand the hardship. This land was subdivided prior to 1927 when current ordinances did not exist. There are 4 lots existing on this property; Lot 1, 2, 14, and 15. The house was built in 1927 on Lot 15. Since that time, the code designated this area to be in a 1 acre zoning district. The four lots total .77 acres. The lot size is consistent with the surrounding area lots. The house currently is 28' from the front lot line. The front setback in the LR-IB zoning district is a minimum of 35 feet. The new well is located 20' away from the existing house and meets the setback requirements for the proposed construction. The house is hooked up to City sewer. Hardcover is not an issue. Zoning File #1182 August 13, 1987 Page 2 of 2 Staff Reccaamendation - Staff recommends approval of the front setback variance to replace the foundation under the west side of the house consisting of approximately 146 square feet. The variance approval would also include the construction of an open porch which would extend 10 feet along that same substandard setback line. The approval of the variance is based on the following findings and hardships; 1. The house was built in 1927 before one acre standards existed and was located on the property prior to established setback standards. 2. The size and proposed improvement of the property appears consistent with the surrounding pattern of development. 3. The most affected neighboring property owners have been notified and the City has received no negative comments. n -4 lift uaue Kcc u / ' Fee___ |<■yC Re ce ip t________ In.i tials /) CITY OP 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 CITY OF ORDfiO FISAHCE OFFICE 1350200090 # Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Please check one - Is the property _ _ abstract or Q1 OEti 150. QO 150.00rsECA li . tSen.^RASK YOU rQi)i fjQi 7'jJ.*5J Attach legal description to application if not included on r^4u'i^ed’'^^ury^y,,^ygy a. .• •— «• .. ^ •• •• ^ ^ a. B- •• bb ^ B— B_ —b bb BB BB BB ^b ^b bb ^b a^B bb ^b ^b ^b bb ^b ^b ^b ^b ^b ^b ^b ^b ^b ^b ^b ^b ^b ^b bb ^b ^b ^b ^b ^b bb bb ^b ^b JK APPLICANT Name , yj^ *.' /(<,</></*/ Phone 'ork)'yif.^^. V't-: /'/'/«) ’ . * - k *'_ _ city; .4//;,*/Zip; Phone (home) --s /c-V . ’V'/ - ■-y Address: 7 -f' OWNER (if different than applicant) Phone (home) Name Phone (work) Address; Date Property Acquired j < / >.c City:Zip: (month/year) I (do)) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. PRESENT USE OP PROPERTY Present Zoning District __ Present Use of Property L-(\~ ±3 7 P T Ci r Other (specify) Residential DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $ 5. >-ic». cy Describe request in detail; t/<. . v .,v.» c/^ -i.y/ t ><J •, i f ,, y/-4- J'.t ~ff- -j'a/<* y*/ . I 'i'{- , ) %'3v VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area Setback Variances ( Other X Lot Width Front f t. I .■fBr..; A< »>-c ^ ‘'e.vak V Xi wXv___ Hardcover Side Rear)’ HARDSHIP Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty resulting from strict enforcement of zoning regulations; '-'tV a rr»~' ■ 11>- / 4 * / ^ b xtjM ^ A* i: tf ti ^ *C ti ' j ^ li 4* f • r\ ■ W / n / \ (K t i ^ DESCRIPTION OP UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code Requirements; J(\' r'« ajj-i /").-7ir»0 /t <r / r ■.. •->-T' C-Vif (t -t/< <; Kr >u^x-? •yp:y^<y-^ t\ I - t'f vy?* ^ t T/vf _i^. n*~^7 it i H . f f - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - REQUIRED SUBMITTALS . 1. Completed Application Form 2. tertified 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. mm mm mm mm mm mm ^m mmm mm ^m mm mm mm ^m mm mm mm mm 9m ^m mm mmt mm mm mmm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mmm mm mm mm mm mm mmm mm mm mm mm mm m* mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm ^m ^m mm mmm 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 cf this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her Icnowledge. 'V • /I ■ • Applicant's Signature jtrc/c 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 I.. fT !. <-/ /(t Date c"/'.-* S 5'7 Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council, 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. \ o LiK oP O voa ^£>7 Q/*n Ck^aUi^ <c>i7^ cv!^ IS ^hvo Ju.'C cc^ Btockei-^s Jidc'S^' o ................... . ^Ct) C/uduuc > f?^-79§7 5T3 -7'2 7-S7 7-7 "N . / > G P % s \ \ \ I * 5T\tES third TH4CT ^ 1 o\-* .V 30 ADD.♦V TRACT ' S V P'lO'l u i* r < 'p 7 ‘t/l Kl<10 \ 'Vjl^ \ -M ' 4o7^ -•za'*5r. iS«T oJm'/ ^•. \ 1 \ - ■ \^r>T) ^ I ! Property owners list for M. D^etrich-Blocker #1182 06-117-23 41 0088 Thomas R. Williams Jr. 425 Tonkawa Long Lake, MN 55356 06-117-23 41 0023 David Victor Albertson 2100 Shadywood Rd. Wayzata, MN 55391 06-117-23 41 0026/27/28 K. L, Trettel & W. I. Lewis 1501 W. Fayette Ave. Springfield, IL 62704 06-117-23 41 0011/10/02/03 Vincent Johnson P.O. Box 8 Mound, MN 55364 06-117-23 41 0014/15 John R. Gerhardson 351 Lakeview Ave. LOng Lake, MN 55356 06-117-23 41 0016 Donald & Catherine Meyer 485 Park Ave. Long Lake, MN 55356 06-117-23 14 0014 E. W. Spencer 405 Tonkawa Rd. Long Lake, MN 55356 y;i»TTFlCATE_QF-SHS^^^ N 1 25.00 ..IZS.OQ - - /25.00 - - \jV Sa_I \ . 3 Ul Q C)< q: < Q. LEGAL DESCRIPTION; Lots 1,2,14, and 15 Block 2, MINNETONKA SUMMIT PARK, according to the recorded plat thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota. GENERAL NOTES Denotes iron monument Denotes cross chiseled in concrete Denotes existing spot elevation Denotes proposed spot elevotion Denotes surface drolnage Dashed contour lines denotes proposed feotures Solid contour lines denotes existing features at .t .-metro land Proposed top of foundotion elevation Proposed basement floor elevation Proposed garage floor elevation = benchmark : SimVEYORS 2340 Doniels Street Long Lake, Minnesoto 55356 Ph: 475-1433 1 y csftify that this •urvsy, plan or rspor! .yoi coorad by m# or under my dirtct lupervuion ond 1 am a duly Rsgitterad Lond Surveyor undo 1 0 low* of the Stole of Minnesoto. ^f I9S7 REG. NO. 13^2-^ ^CALE |-'40' BOOK 5 PAGE 75 FILE NO. S7II9 .. \ it ;1 •1 1 i 1 1 ■ i 1 1 1 ^ “n •"A -n-O “ O tjj ^ m ^ 2mip o ^ ■jj -o ^ om-3J O C ? S * 09 I !; 1 1---’ it______________ 1 T i 1 i % % 3a°- To Planning Conunission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson // FroB:Mary Jo Knottr Septic & Zoning Aide Date: Subject August 13r 1987 #1183 Jack & Kathryn Swenson, 3020 North Shore Dri*»' After-the-Fact Variance - Public Hearing Zoning District - LR-IB Single Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District (1 acre) Size of Area - 154,080 s.f. (4.7 acres) Application - Hardcover variance to allow a deck platform within 75 feet of the shoreline of thoir property. Pertinent Ordinances - Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 - Lakeshore Hardcover Regulations List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Application Exhibit B - Plat Map Exhibit C - Property Owners List (not received but address labels submitted) Exhibit D - Survey Exhibit E - Diagram of Existing Structure Exhibit F - Option Exhibit G - Hardcover Inventory of Lakeshore Structures Discussion - The applicants have applied for an after-the-fact hardcover variance to allow a deck platform within 75 feet of the shoreline of their property. The structure to be reviewed has four basic parts to it; landing, stairs, platform, and dock (see Exhibit E). The addition of hardcover was reviewed. Approximately 310.4 s.f. of added hardcover is proposed excluding the dock (see Exhbiit G). Staff noted landscaping parallel to the channel but was unable to determine if it qualified as hardcover. The landing stairs, and platform do not meet current standards involving dimensions of an accessory structure. Based on current City policy, an accessory structure of this nature should not exceed 4 feet in width. This structure was constructed in May of 1987. Shortly after, the rip rap was installed. According to the applicant, a similar structure existed at the same location for many years. Staff Recommendation - Staff recommends denial of the variance of continuing to let the landing, steps, and platform remain on the lot. The denial of the variance is based on the following findings: 1. 0% hardcover is allowed in the 0-75' setback from the shoreline. 2. The applicant has not presented any viable hardships on justifying the proposed structure. Staff offers an option to give the applicant a safe access from the grassed area to the dock. The rip rap in front of the dock is 13'10" in width. The option would give the applicant a complying access over the rip rap and up to but not exceeding the grassed area. The extension over the rip rap area would include stairs. All structures must be under 4 feet in width. / \ Kl uate KCC • u ~7 ' > */- !( V Fee >t :^,/'}(_• ,_^_ _ _ _ _ _ _ Receipt Initials <X j ‘J CITY JP 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) C^'^Y 0^ ORtWO PROPERTY LOCATION Fmr£E OFFICE 1350200000 # Ka^f?7v\ VJa^7->\ta lEO.OO 1350200000 # ---------------------------------OtSEff 150.00 Site Address _ Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) Please check one - Is the property abstract or )C CHEStrexA? 300.00 RECEIPT-mm YOU Attach legal description to application if not included on re^j^^dr^^jo^py^ - --- --- - - --- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -7^ T'^^A/SY Phone (home) ^ 7l - ^Drk"'APPLICANT Name> i^^\T4vk>v«0s Ci. Phone (work) Address ; •=*/ vtu City; V.Us.^ata_ _ _ Zip; OWNER (if different than applicant) Phone (home)_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Name Phone (work) Address:City;Zip; Date Property Acquired (month/year) I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. PRESENT USE OP PROPERTY Present Zoning District Z.7n - / Present Use of Property Residential^ Other (specify) DESCRIPTION OP REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $ FUDC j Describe request in detail^ A<^r r >i t ir ' A'TF/M<e M VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area Setback Variances ( Lot Width Front Hardcover Side Rear) Other HARDSHIP Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty resulting from stricc enforcement of zoning regulations iIvp-f fK\_ _ _ _ - VJf A. L:><T<~k_ at: < vV-rA /Art--_ _ _ _ _ _ _ DESCRIPTION OP UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning (^de Requirements t .lWA.^xb«v AK^J■ ^ t; A -bicr->t:?..V ArrFV-jV<l-i'M. ~L’~bcr —tr'> _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 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. mm mm mm mm ^m mm ^m ^m mm mm mmm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mmm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mmm mmm mm ^m^ mm • m mm mm ^m mmm mm mm mm mm mm mm ^m mm mm 9m mm mm mm ^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 )cnowledge. Applicant's Signature Date OWNERS SIGNATURE The owner hereby aclcowledges 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 verificatior^-^of this request. Owner's Signature Date L Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council, 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. rif t f>r Survey fr,r J.'tr ts I-. Art'.chtint;! in ?LO''ici; i 'i.'ij tf, CrvEtHl Bay Pr.rk us tV'ilowr.: Ccr-noncirr ut tno Soj*.r»e:.stori coiner of ijOt 7, I.Loc'; t-r/.-nce Soutnwcoteri/ aior.*: thi South";vSter-iy iino* of u..io Sot, V u cistunco cf 3'’-.C ffci-’. to th-^ Dolr.t of ir.; of t;.i! line to Sr. Sercrl'u*t.'; tiK-t»ro hort'nwect- erl.\ at inti*! to tho ric^t of 83*^11* to tl;*? Kurthwertsriy xin« ol‘ Mo''/. i, th'^re ternirritjn , eil in Cryrtal IV»/ fork, an*' the locution of h'l I »*xi*3tinr >ull in,: I'-rroop, ]t p’:r.;o: t V- sf ov c Ui'tr ‘jr ;»rovf"i<rntr. or encronchnontr. Scale: Date : o : 1" = lOu* A-7-JB Iron rvirker Gordon H. Coffin Hr,'. ! Lfiiid .‘>ur\’e. or • nd r'Lnnn*-r Lonr J'ln''>>uot a 1)V he p<'np Wnfe-f- 5'V:'^ s'I—Qodl«f\3 f Dr.t 3S" r* pr^Lp *3C7*-w:l^ I'Vvfcer -'/•sl'.n.q o 5'1'ruc'fur ’e- iL 183 I’lf t of Survey fcr J.'irtfy 1-. Anscyitlnf;! in ?Lo<*k:; i 't-sJ 'j, Cryptnl Pay he:.r<. .1;. Cou:;ty, Kiimesola Certificate of Survey: I hereby certify that this ia ► true tr.d correct repretenieMon of a r’l'-vi'.' of the b'>imdaries ol ‘ Lots T. to i?, in^i'iwi'.’c, i.'Lccif I, y to (* ircLuslvi, r.Lock b, ••no frvit rwirt cf Lot L In Pl'K'lt hr\‘. of '.AjI 1 in RLdcI. 1 whlci cr*; rot Irciuded In tro boat r:u.;ncl cor.r.eclir.,, IVjAVi 11 Is. U Cr;/rt»;l •’ay in L-i'cc *'innct''n’c= , trd th;*t part of Lots 6 ar/ 7, Block i, Lot 7, oior-c ti, anu of ->rirl of '.'1? w Avor.uc vacated lyin^; Wastcriy of tne Wosteriy lino of eal'i boat cbanncl w.tich lies flortyicaoto-i^. of a line described as roii'ows : Ccrrionrlnc at t.)i3 Loutneasteri corner of IiOt 7» T.loc'i tf.c-rce Southwecterl.' aior.i; the- Uoutheas teriy line of s..1b Lot 7 o cistunco cf lent to the oolnt of b<*ci.M in; of t;.a Una to be dercrll-ed; tnc-nco Northvest- erl.\ at 'ar.i-le to the ritlit of E3'^U* to tlie Nurthverteriy line of Mock 1, »r> there terniratln , eil in Cryctal Bay rark, ^ an.-' thr LocbMnn of «U »*xJstini; l inr.c U-rreor.. -It does not pur.;cr- -'• sh ov ot.V.cr i r-:»rove ’‘ients or encronchnwnts . Scale: Date : 1" = 100' 4^7-78 Iron marker Cordon R. Coffin Rff. i O..*o4 Lfitid STirvsyor end r’lnnner Lonp L>'ke, r.lnr**or>ta rvio 5+ruc.Aure. (3'7'\ \ 3'io') iy HARDCOVER INVENTORY (0-75* TOTAL AREA » 59,100 S.F.) 3020 North Shore Drive, Orono Zoning File #1183 Structure Garage Dog House Landing Stairs Platform Existing 733.3 s.f. 25.3 s.f. TOTAL 758.6 s.f. Proposed 733.3 s.f. 25.3 s.f. 240.0 s.f. 40.0 s.f. 30.4 s.f. 1,069.0 s.f. Total Hardcover Existing = .0129% Total Hardcover Proposed = .0180% Total Hardcover Allowed = 0% I To:Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson Prom: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator Date: Subject: August 11, 1987 #1184 Gerald T. McCourtney, 1055 West Ferndale Road Variance - Public Hearing Zoning District - LR-IA Pertinent Ordinance - A. Section 10.22, Subdivision 1 - Excessive hardcover within 75 to 250 setback area. Total Area = 32,670 s.f. 1) 0-75' setback area = 16,800 s.f. Hardcover = 0 s.f. 75-250' setback area = 15,870 s.f. Allowed hardcover = 3,968 s.f. or 25% Existing hardcover = 5,679 s.f. or 36%*t Proposed hardcover = 5,958 s.f. or 37.5%*o Total hardcover increase = 279 s.f or 1.5% *1 Existing Hardcover Principal structure = 3,954 s.f. Deck = 715 s.f. Sidewalk = 410 s.f. Drive = 600 s.f. *2 Proposed Hardcover Principal structure = 4,518 s.f Deck Sidewalk Drive 430 s.f. 410 s.f. 600 s.f. TOTAL = 5,679 s.f.TOTAL = 5,958 s.f. B. Section 10.23, Subdivision 6 (B) - Side setback variance required for bathroom addition on north side of house. Required = 30' Existing = 15' Proposed =15' or 50% List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Application Exhibit B - Property Owners List Exhibit C - Plat Map Exhibit D - Staff Sketch Exhibit E - Survey Exhibit F - Building Floor Plan Review of Application - The applicant proposed additions to bathroom, family room, dinette area and laundry room totaling 564 s.f. of structure added to principal structure. Approximately 285 s.f. of the proposed additions shall be placed over an existing deck area resulting in an overall increase of hardcover of 279 s.f. Zoning File #1184 August 11, 1987 Page 2 of 2 The bathroom addition on the north side of the house will require a side setback variance of 15 feet. The structure will encroach no further into the existing substandard side yard setback area at 15 feet. The width of the lot at the building site is approximately 170 feet, the current zoning district, LR-IA, would call for a minimum of 200 feet of width with a 30 feet side setback. For comparison, both LR-IB with required width of 140 and LR-IC with 100 feet required width call for a 10 feet side yard setback. The property was created and developed prior to current zoning standards. The lakeshore additions all meet the required setback of 75 feet from the rip rapped shoreline. The 929.4 elevation appears as a slight indentation behind the rip rap and bermed shoreline. The setback as always is determined from the defined rip rapped shoreline. Note from that same survey referenced above. Exhibit E, that the new additions do not encroach the average lakeshore setback line. The application will also call for a hardcover variance of 279 s.f. or 1.5% for the proposed improvement of the subject property. A) Is the final total of 37.5% in hardcover too excessive for this property? B) What areas of existing hardcover can be reduced to minimize impact? 1. Turnaround area within drive is an improvement that must remain for safe access onto West Ferndale. 2. Are there other areas - deck - sidewalk?? C) Are the hardships claimed by applicant on the application acceptable? Over 50% of the area of this property is located within the 0-75 protected area. Total Area = 32,670 s.f. 0-75' = 16,800 s.f. or 51.4% Staff has received no negative comments from surrounding neighors. The proposed improvements on the whole appear to have minimal impact on the property. The majority of hardcover is structural. Paving and other outdoor improvements have been carefully installed and in staff's opinion minimized. The 16,000+ s.f. of grassed lakeshore yard provides adequate treatment area for the hardcover on the property. Staff would recommend approval of the side setback and hardcover variances as proposed based on one or more of the hardships and findings noted above. • I ! • ♦ * ' \ ^ \ ^ ^ • in I > om o J r r* ^ '1 D -• rr t *j > ^ ^"S X ► * • - i r - ^ * .». i .. .1 :: •' 13 J * ' " 1 t ^ • > am > 01 \ i r . 'i c ■:> L* < < t X > a m *1 a. * '•’ u .> •• *■* » D 3 1 r *’ '• 7. 1 V5 V 3T 1 i < % 1 I ••i "*» . ^ < ♦! • T • 1 '• *1 n :r »* *♦ a? aa o a O Crt m o 3 To:Planning Conunission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson From: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator Date: Subject: August 11, 1987 #1185 Gary Carlson, 965 Edgewood Hills Road Renewal Variance - Public Hearing Zoning District - RR-IB Area - 65,340 s.f. or 1.5 acres implication - Lot area and front setback variances: A) Lot area variance Required * 87,120 s.f. or 2 acres Existing = 65,340 s.f. or 1.5 acres Variance = .5 acres or 21,780 s.f. or 25% Front yard setback and setback from road easement Required = 50' front lot line Proposed = 30' front lot line or 40% from undeveloped road easement* or 46% Variance •= 20' Proposed = 27' Variance » 23' * There are no established setback standards from access easements. For this review the road easement shall be considered as a private road because of the 6-7 residence lots served. List of Exhibits Exhibit A Exhibit B Exhibit C Exhibit D Exhibit E Exhibit F Exhibit G Exhibit H Exhibit I Exhibit J Exhibit K Application Property Owners List Plat Map Contour Map Spot Elevations Sketch of Proposed Turnaround Gaffron Memo Planning Commission Minutes of 10/17/83 Council Minutes of 11/14/83 Site Plan Approving Resolution for Application #789 The current applicant proposed renewal of the original variance application approved by the City in 1983 (review Exhibits H, I, J & K). The proposed building site and septic test envelope will still apply for this review (Exhibit J). The severe slopes to the east require that the house be positioned closer to west si.;e taking advantage of the more gentler slopes along the west edge. Tl.e location of the only suitable septic sites on the property also places restrictions on the gentler sloped areas for building (Exhibit D). Zoning File #1185 August 11, 1987 Page 2 of 3 Registered Land Survey 1098 was approved in November of 1963. Ordinance 22, effective as of 10/15/59, required that newly created lots meet the 1 acre area and 140 feet in width standards. The majority of these lots were developed in the late sixties and early seventies. The City granted a recent lot area and lot width variance for Tract E in 1979 so that the Jacksons could proceed wih construction of their residence. As with the 1979 and 1983 reviews, the City was concerned with the extent of the land alterations required to develop the building site. Each of the properties developed within this RLS have had to deal with the steep slopes and severely restricted building envelopes. The current developer has been advised that all filling and retaining wall construction outside of that required for the house foundation, redirection of drainage from downhill septic site and turnaround drive would have to be reviewed as a separate conditional use permit application. Review of the Issues - Access - In the original approval of 1983, the applicant was required to provide a turnaround that would serve all six residences. Review the sketch of that turnaround (Exhibit F) that proposes use of the easement area over adjacent Tract I to the west. The developer of RLS 1098 planned for a turnaround area but never set forth conditions under which the turnaround was to be constructed. The City must once again ask that this applicant construct the very necessary turnaround. To be consistent, the City may ask for underlying road and utility easements over the 25x50 easement area. Septic Testing and Location - The original septic testing is adequate for this review. Gaffron's original memo has been enclosed for your review (Exhibit G). He advises that the only available area on the site for septic development (review Exhibits G & J) will restrict the building envelope requiring placement of the house closer to the west lot line away from the steep slope conditions to the east. Site Grading and Site Development - The applicant has not finalized his building plans but does plan to construct the new residence within the building envelope of the Howell's original plan (1983 application). Carlson seeks a 30 feet setback from the west lot line (front) and will not encroach any closer to the 25 feet road easement than 27 feet. Carlson has been asked to submit more accurate information on the amount of fiii to brought to the site to develop the building pad and required drive and turnaround. He should have this information for your meeting and may also have finalized building plans for your consideration. In addition, the applicant has been advised that major land alterations involving retaining wall construction not considered part of the foundation perparation, drive way construction or redirection of drainage away from septic drainfield, will require a separate conditional use permit review. The majority of the homes on the south side of the road easement have left the steep slopes remain in their natural state providing much needed stability of the banks. The outdoor recreation areas appear to be limited to decks and the more gentler sloped front/street yards. Zoning File #1185 August 11, 1987 Page 3 of 3 This property is located in a rural residential district and not subject to hardcover standards. Staff Recoanendation - To approve the renewal lot area variance of .5 or 25% and front yard setback variance of 20 feet or 40% as proposed, subject to the f’.ndings and conditions set forth in the original resolution approving the 1983 application. Staff would add the following finding to that resolution; 1. RLS 1098 was approved by the City in 1963 prior to the current RR- IB, 2 acre minimum lot standards that became effective in September of 1967. The majority of the properties within the RLS have been developed under less restrictive setback standards. and add the following to original condition (1); . . . Applicant is further advised that land alterations not covered under Section 10.03, Subdivision 21 of the Zoning Code shall require a separate conditional use permit review before such land alteration can be implemented. and additional conditions: 7^ The alternate and principal septic test areas must be protected with temporary fencing prior to any land alteration activity on the site. 8. The principal structure on Tract B shall be located 27 feet from the road easement that intersects the property at the southwest 4 corner. UtlUJ K<J(J Cl Fcg > I• t .•( Iv. u • • • fv J * •*. .• V. RccGipt_ Initials CITY OP ORONO - VARIAMCE 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) ^!>{i^tU0oa /-Ji//z IP.rJ. PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) _ _ _ _ Please check one - Is the property _ _ _ ribstract or torrens? Mcoo! Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. APPLICANT ^ Phone (home) ^^ ♦ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Phone (work ) Address ;^ City: Zip: .NER (if different than applicant) Phone khome) ^yS - .2 6 ^ 7^^^ (work) 2 4- ^Name Address:fv>'7 ^ city./^/A' Zip: ^ Date Property Acquired • ^ (month/year) I J^oT ((jdo not) also own the adjacent parcels of land PRESENT USE OP PROPERTY Present Zoning District _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Present Use of Property C'A y^y/^/2..'.Residential Other (specify) DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Describe request in detail: Estimated Construction Cost $ VTJIIANCLS REQUIRED Lot Area Setback Variances ( Other Lot VUdth Front Hardcover Side Rear) HARDSHIP Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty resulting from strict enforcement of zoni'.g regulations:^_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ DESCRIPTION OP UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code ReouirementsI \ • * 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 Ov;ner 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 suppl ie<jf\^s/€/u^anrd correct to the best of his/her knowledge. r~7C/X / / / Applicant's Signature / f-p//— • Date ' O / 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 purpqses of investiga tion and verification of this request. ^ / Owner's SignatureA - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _Date Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of eac)i month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council, and, if an applicant is uiiable 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. •i n -n 3: a: aj > :< - o r: n Tj m > aj N. -c ► > m -S O O *0 >- O o 3 30 aj m )► ro •< o N> r -f o> o o 15 01 30 01 O 04 > >0 o L. O 01 C O 0» m CO 04 aj > fs> o 3u 01 o n H rj Z ni I •• l/» 30 t* >n » X m 00 Cl -Hs? H U1m O I o X 04 r- i> r- M w o o o o vn F X :r Tjm > V. -< > m O aj o aa o ^ « n 30 >-:cm *nao o•o > o tj 30 2 >•rc ri \> O o 2 M X- o ►: o N > 2 H O ► O O 32 M H > :< •n >* m ao o Tl >: 30 2 o m Tjao > 2 O> a zi o ni T. T.Q \A o o o 0® o a rv> CJ ca o X X o o M i-t ro r- r* I 01 30 01 O 04•o r- S n n 9 200 -H C O 50 2 X -< -H M » r- o -< r- vl I r\> 04 TO o o o o s /Bd > -4n X o o o > o 0 \ rj O' \ CO 01 o o -n ti 53m 2 X o n 2 as M ni -o o » m m 30 01 H m M 2 H H -< > =te o > m m Cl -o Cl M ni Xn 03 ^ n K r~ M O m fo s;:l3 2 H ^3 00 CD M o 30 2 H oz 11 ►nH 01 30m 3m 01mS5•i g 118 m m TJ 01 X S = i o ► > H H m m §i 33 30 m Os 0 01 o •-4 > I- 09 > Hn X o o o o o o }f GD ca r > -< > •H> 3 •o 0 01 n o o mr.oou 1-” d 3x •-I > r- TJ r* *0 ►H *0 01 09 n 01 X X 01 M > 04 r- TJ •o r* 30 ►- O) M #0o>o o 01 0 o» 0> 01 o r> I •-« m •— O ^ Cl I m i\> 2 04 O O ^ O ►- X O »-i o f- o r- IM O) 30 O r > •< CM >» > •O ”1 1 O 04 S3 *0 •- 09 O m m oo an > > sn o o M X o n I 01 01 04 o rj X X m m O' I ; »-i ■H «-1 X X m CT Nj Cl I n r> ;: 04 i£ X o h-t o r- o r- 04 01 XJo 5K -< o N> r -I o> o o;z X k M 01 30 01 o 04 >o cs c. c. cm CD TJ > Cl X3 m H X m 0 M 1 •• 01 ^ TO W > n 30 X m CD r- ► 30 O H I rv9 04 o o o 2 04 c. > r> c-< o rn N 30 > n ClH CJ ni >02 u 3 = ^ r- TJ f- >n 01 30 X 01 cj ni w J- r— >0 O C9 > 30 C. O 04 O 01 n 04 > f\> 30 01 o -4 m I r- W 2 •-17CJ r» as X 04 M CD r-<i-gr-V- -4 30 O moo m o 01 01 m TJs H TJ m • TJ M > ►- C*4 oi X' o (((((<t C C ;i^[g©(grjwrr:;;v, ^ ^ . H . ! I S LO P e ANALYSIS i /r v« s Lo rc • L3 site: AdCA . 6S»45I ft'’ { \\ r- s-0' • i/r .* /a> 3i(3WEfcI^3eeSE TTTvnr V i* ""7^ r\ — w»— V i.:it;;.’^ uj ■^TrTTTTrnr A SITE f^LAN \\ /"»SO' i "If •• •!1/^ •4./ =ti fct\^l!;4^=HerTS£ A • 7T > I t ( • % _____ "Xfxr* inirin ( •mmTTT" 4«r*«» ?M<ih U•*•«•«•fMtet. M*i»nr«t«a tTMl " "HI 1*1 OlU 6' TO; FROM; DATE: Jeanne A. Mabusth Michael P. Gaffron October 12, 1983 SUBJECT; Dick Howell - Variance Tract B, R.L.S. 1098 - Septic System Review The applicant wishes to build a new home on an existing lot of approximately 1.5 acres with no City sewer or water available. In addition, he is asking for a front setback variance to allow construction of the house near the west side of the lot presumably due to the extreme slopes and to keep from encroaching on the drainfield sites. Note that the application shows a different house proposal than the one shown on the site evaluation report submitted. The longer, narrow configuration would likely encroach much 3ess on the drainfield sites. The primary and alternate sites tested are located on a relatively flat area halfway down the steep slopes. Part of this area has been used recently as an access for the neighbor on the south in order to bring materials in form septic system repair. However, from the perc test results, compaction in this location was not a problem. Adeauate area appears to exist suitable for trenches on both primary and alternate sites. The site evaluator did nute that runoff diversion will be necessary to protect the sites from excess surface water. Based on the information submitted, I recommend approval of the application. Approval of the front setback variance appears to be necessary so as not to encroach on the drainfield areas. The applicant should be informed that an actual system design and final site grading plans must be submitted prior to issuance of building permits. MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD OCTOBER 17, 1983 H- PAGE 4 1782 OLE OVERBOE #789 RICHARD HOWELL 965 EDGEWOOD HILLS ROAD VARIANCE 5. Travelled road and sewer lines within 60' right of way appears to be located 20+' from the street/front property line of Lot 10. 6. The proposed improvement is consistent with recent improvements on surrounding properties. 7. The proposed substandard street setback for the garage structure will not create safety or traffic hazards on this residential, dead-end street. 8. Applicant is placed on notice of the current hardcover limitations and that a future Council may not approve future variances. McDonald seconded. Vote: Ayes (6), Nays (0). Richard Howell and architect, Barry Petit, were present. Mabusth stated that the Howells are asking for a variance to construct a new residence. Rovegno asked about the driveway plan and noted that they should have a turnaround on the p-operty. Barry Petit, architect, noted that they would have a loop dr iveway which would create the turnaround on the property. Sime asked if there was going to be a great deal of filling because of the topography of the back yard. Sime asked if a retaining wall would have to be constructed to help the erosion problem. Richard Howell stated that there would be extensive filling in the back yard and possibly a retaining wall. Barry Petit stated that they were examining a nier system for the back yard. Mabusth noted the private access easement that intersects the property for 50' along the north property line. Rovegno moved to approve a variance for Richard Howell to permit construction of a new residence based on the following hardships: 1. Severe slopes on east portion of lot restrict building envelope. 2. Only area available for on-site septic systems intersects the building envelope. 3. The proposed development of Tract B is consistent with development of lots within surrounding neighborhood. HIKUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD OCTOBER 17, 1983 PAGE 5 #789 RICHARD HOWELL 1790 GEORGE TORKELSON 670 TONKAWA ROAD VARIANCE 4. The proosed development of Tract B will create no traffic hazards nor be detrimental to the public health, welfare and safety. 5. The proposed development of Tract B is consistent with the rural and on-site septic standards of the City. 6. Applicant is creating turnaround on property by constructing a loop driveway. Such approval is based on the following conditions; 1.Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant must submit septic design and final site grading plan. 2.Staff to ensure erosion problem will be addressed at time of building permit issuance. 3. Applicant placed on notice that there are hardcover limitations. Goetten seconded. Vote: Ayes (6), Nays (0) . Mr. and Mrs. Torkelson were present. Mabusth stated that she had a call from a neighbor who had no problems with the variance request. Mabusth noted that the Torkelsons are requesting a variance to construct a detached garage 24' x 26' to be located 10' from the principal structure. Mabusth noted that they have privacy fences on the sides of their property. Mabusth presented photo Exhibits 1 and 2. Goetten noted that in talking with Mrs. Torkelson that they needed this garage for additional storage for their boat and other things. Goetten noted that the applicants would be very cooperative by removing additional sheds and fences on the property to reduce the hardcover. Sime moved to approve a side yard variance for a detached garage 26' x 24' based on the following findings: 1. The narrow lot width. 2. An established residence has existed on the site for over 30 years without a garage. 3. No additional land available. REGULAR MEETING OF THE ORONO COUNCIL, NOVEMBER 14, 1983.PAGE 7 #779 DONALD MAAS/ PARK GUN CLUB City Attorney Malkerson stated that it wouldn* t under a quit claim deed, because in a quit claim deed you would be giving up ownership. Malkerson suggested the applicant granting a road and utilities easement to the City. Donald Maas stated that board of directors would probably rather have an easement so that they could retain ownership of the road. Mayor Butler moved, Counci]member Adams seconded, to amend Resolution # 1579. Motion, Ayes (5) , Nays (0) . 1782 OLE OVERBOE 4460 FOREST LAKE LANDING VARIANCE RESOLUTION #1580 Zoning Administrator Mabusth noted that the Overboe's had signed off on the resolution and had no problems with it. Counci Imember F:;ahm moved, Councilmember Grabek seconded, to approve Resolution #1580, A Resolution Approving A Variance To Municipal Zoning Code Section 34.452, to permit construction of a detached garage 1.5 feet from the front/street lot line. Motion, Ayes (5), Nays (0). #789 RICHARD HOWELL 965 EDGEWOOD HILLS RD VARIANCE RESOLUTION #1581 Mrs. Howell was present. Zoning Administrator Mabusth noted the Howells were seeking a variance to construct a new residence. Mayor Butler moved, Councilmember Frahm seconded, to approve Resolution #1581, A Resolution Granting A Variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 34.842, to permit construction of a new residence. Motion, Ayes (5), Nays (0). Mayor Butler noted that there is no street sign designating Edgewood Hills Road and stated that for emergency purposes there should be one. #790 GEORGE TORKELSON 670 TONKAWA ROAD VARIANCE RESOLUTION #1582 Mr. and Mrs. Torkelson were present. Zoning Administrator Mabusth ceted that the appl icants wisli to change the applicnl.i -n to a 26' x 28' garage rather than a 26' x 24' garige. Mabusth noted that there wouldn't bo that muc'n ot an increase in hardcover. Councilmember Frahm ’S-oi if the applicants had considered porous pav«. K CITY OF ORONO City of OROIVO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. _ _ _ _ _ Granting A Variances To Municipal Zoning Code Section 34.842 - File 789 Whereas, Richard L. Ho'^ell (hereafter "applicant") has an interest in the property located at 965 Edgewood Hills Road within the City of Orono (hereafter "City") and legally described as Tract B, Registered Land Survey No. 1058, Hennepin County, Minnesota, (hereafter "the property"); and Whe r eas, the appl icant has applied to the City for variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 34.842 to permit the construction of a single family residence on a property that consists of approximately 1.5 acres instead of the required 2 acres to be located 30 feet from the front property line instead of the required 50 feet. Minnesota: Now, Therefore Be It Resolved by the City Council of Orono, Finding s 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File No. 789. 2. The property is located in the RR-IB Rural Residential Zoning District. 3. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on October 17, 1983, and recommended approval of the proposed variances based upon the following findings: a) Severe slopes on east portion of lot r-;strict building envelope. b) Only area available for on-site septic systems intersects the building envelope. c) The proposed development oi Tract B will create no traffic hazards nor be detrimental to the public health, wel fare and safety. d) The proposed development of "Tact B is consistent with the rural and on-site septic siawdards of the City. e) Applicant is creating ti.r*'.*'ound on property to serve emergency vehicles by const : :-:ting a loop driveway. CITY OF ORONO City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO._ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 4. :he City Council has considered this cipplication including the findings and recommendations of tl. • Planning Commission, reports by Ci ty staff , comments by the owner and other interested persons, and the e f f cct o f the proposed var iances on the health, safety and welfare of the community. 5. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district: that granting the variances would not adversely effect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a f ire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the owner , but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to pieserve a substantial property right of the owner; ard would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Z ning Code and Comprenensive Plan of the City. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon the above findings, the Orono City Council herebv grants variances to Municipal Zoning Section 34.842 to permit the construction of a single family residence on a property that ct.. sists of 1 .5 acres in area instead of the required 2 acres to be located 30 feet from the front lot 1 ino instead of the required 5(3 feet, subject to the following conditions: 1. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant must submit septic design and final site grading plan. 2. Applicant must provide City with temporary erosion control plan to cover entire construction period this would include all preliminary grading. 3. V.o other va-'iances are granted or permitted for this str uct'ir e. 4. Author ii’es granted by this variarn;- ■ run with the property not with the ovvner, but are permissive only and must be exercised by appl ication for a bui Id ing permi t wi th in one year of the dat a of Council approval, or this variance v/ill expire on that date (November 14, 1984). CITY OF ORONO City of OROINO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. _ _ _ _ _ _ __ 5. Violation of or noncompliance with any of the terms and conditions of this variance shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authc itygranted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 6. The undersigned owner has read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of himself, his heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agrees to .he recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 14th day of November ,1983. ATTEST:CITY OF ORONO City Clerk Ma yor (1 Property awner(s) (3) Property Owner(s) r ♦ # City of OROINO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL CITY OF ORONO NO. STATS OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this Public within , 1983, before me a Notaryday of_ _ _ _ _ _ and for said County, personally appeared known to me to ne the per son(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC MY COMMISSION EXPIRES This document is being recorded for the benefit of the CityofOro no per Minnesota Statutes 386.77. Bruce j. Malkerson, City Attorney State Deed Tax Duo Hereon; Exempt This instrument was draftee by: City of Orono P.0. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 r 3 T ' ' t L To: DRAFT Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson 7208*7.1 From: Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator Pate June 29, 1987 Subject Zoning Code Amendment - Oversize Accessory Structures as a Conditional Use Discussion - The recent MacMillan tennis court facility application brought into focus a zoning code problem relating to accessory structures: although the zoning code prohibits most accessory structures larger than 1,000 s.f. in floor area in residential zones, when the Council determines that an accessory structure over 1,000 s.f. is appropriate, it is nearly impossible to justify the variance to allow such a structure because rarely is there an actual, definable hardship as required by law. Staff would suggest that to address this problem, accessory structures in excess of 1,000 s.f. could be allowed as a conditional use, with an accompanying set of standards that relate allowable floor area to the acreage of the property, to the proposed setback from adjacent properties, and to the height of the structure. These factors relate mainly to the visual impact of the structure on neighboring properties. Additional factors to consider include intended and potential use of the structure and its impact on the residential nature of the surrounding area, i.e. traffic concerns, noise, odor, etc. An additional concern that Planning Commission may wish to address is that there currently is no limit on the number of accessory structures on a given property. Technically, a rural property not subject to hardcover regulations currently could be almost totally covered with 1,000 s.f. buildings 30* high and 10' apart, as long as it also contains a principal residence structure. Staff wouId like to see a limit on the total accessory structure floor area on a lot. Also, staff feels that the types of accessory structures currently allowed to be in excess of 1,000 s.f. (namely barns, stables, and green houses) should be subject to some floor area limitation and that other permitted uses that may have a structural aspect (tennis courts, pools, etc.) be likewise addressed. Currently, these have no limitation under the code. Zoning Code Amendment June 29, 1987 Page 2 of 5 Proposed Revision - As a starting point, staff would recommend the following code • •revisions: 1. Redefine "peak building height" for accessory structures - so that height is measured to the peak, not to the mean height. The downside of this is that we would have different standards for principal structures vs. accessory structures. 2. Revise Section 10.03, Subdivision 9 (B) to make barns and stables subject to the height conditions of the conditional use permit. 3. Revise Section 10.03, Subdivision 9 (C) by removing the exceptions (barn, stable, green house) and noting that accessory buildings over 1,000 s.f. are allowed subject to conditional use permit. 4. Revise Section 10.20, Subdivision 4 (B) to define tennis courts and swimming pools over 1,000 s.f. as subject to conditional use permit requirements if they are enclosed (i.e. have a roof). (Fences around a pool or tennis court would not alone instigate the need for a conditional use permit.) 5. Add Section 10.20, Subdivision 3 (Q). Accessory buiIdings in excess of 1,000 s.f. (use of the word buildings will exclude non- roofed structures such as tennis courts and pools) with standards for allowable floor area based on acreage and required setback a function of floor area and peak height. Proposed Language - The Municipal Code of the City of Orono, Minnesota is amended by adding Ordinance No. _ _, Second Series: SECTION I. Orono Municipal Code Section 10.02 is hereby amended by adding the following definition; "BUILDING HEIGHT- ACCESSORY STRUCTURE" - The vertical distance from the elevation of the adjoining ground level to the top of the cornice of a flat roof, to the deck of a mansard roof, to the uppermost point on a round or other arch type roof, to the highest ridge of a hip or pitched roof. Zoning Code Amendment June 29, 1987 Page 3 of 5 SECTION II. Orono Municipal Code Section 10.02, Subdivision 9 (B) is hereby repealed and the following language substituted in its place: B. HEIGHT RESTRICTIONS. No accessory building or structure in the "R" District shall exceed the height of the principal building except as allowed by the provisions of a conditional use permit. SECTION III. Orono Municipal Code Section 10.03, Subdivision 9 (C) is hereby repealed and the following language substituted in its place: C. AREA RESTRICTIONS. In all "R" Districts, no accessory building shall exceed 1,000 square feet of floor area except as allowed by the provisions of a conditional use permit. SECTION IV. Orono Municipal Code Section 10.20, Subdivision 4 (B) is hereby repealed and the following language is substituted in its place: B. POOLS, ETC. Private swimming pools, tennis courts, and paddocks, subject to the area and height restrictions :.‘or accessory buildings and subject to a conditional use permi* if such pools, tennis courts, or paddocks are enclosed by being covered with a roof and exceed 1,000 square feet in area. SECTION V. Orono Municipal Code Section 10.20 is hereby amended by adding Subdivision 3 (Q) as follows: Q. ACCESSORY BUILDINGS IN EXCESS OF 1,000 S.F. OF TOTAL FLOOR AREA. Accessory buildings in excess of 1,000 s.f. in total floor area, subject to the following restrictions: Zoning Code Amendment June 29, 1987 Page 4 of 5 MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE FLOOR AREA OF EACH ♦MAXIMUM AGGREGATE FLOOR AREA OF A. B. LOT AREA ACCESSORY BUILDING ACCESSORY BUILDINGS Up to 2.0 acres 1,000 s.f.2,000 s.f. 2.01 to 3.0 1,500 3,000 3.01 to 4.0 2,000 4,000 4.01 to 5.0 2,500 5,000 5.01 to 6.0 3,000 6,000 0.01 to 7.0 3,500 7,000 7.01 to 8.0 4,000 8,000 8.01 to 9.0 4,500 9,000 9.01 to 10.0 5,000 10,000 10.01 to 15.0 7,500 10,000 + 1,000 sf/ac 15.01 to '*0.0 10,000 Over 10.0 acres 20.01 +15,000 Note that no conditional use permit wuld be required if, say, an 8.5 acre lot had 9 - 900 S.f.buildings, since the aggregate is less than 9,000 s.f. and each is less than 1,000 s.f. in area. BUILDING MINIMUM REQUIRED SETBACK FLOOR AREA FROM ALL LOT LINES 1,000 S.f.10’ 1,500 15' 2,000 20' 2,500 25' 3,000 30' 3,500 35' 4,000 40' 4,500 45' 5,000 50* 7,500 75' 10,000 IOC’ 15,000 150' Zoning Code Amendment June 29, 1987 Page 5 of 5 C.DEFINED PEAK HEIGHT MINIMUM REQUIRED SETBACK 0 -15'As in (B)above 15.1 - 20'As in (B)above.but in no case less than 20* 20.1 - 25'As in (B)above,but in no case less than 35* 25.1 - 30'As in (B)above.but in no case less than 50' D. Accessory Buildings shall be setback from all other accessory or principal buildings by a distance no less than 10' (maybe this should go back in Section 10.03, Subdivision 12. . .). E. Consider screening requirements? f ( A.-! L s 10.03 \Subd. 7. yOne Building Per Lot. Except in the case of Planned P^ldentjal Developments as provided for hereinafter, no more than one principal building shall be located on a lot. Subd. 8. Lots to Face Streets. Each lot shall face on a public street or appropriate private easement, Subd. 9, Accessory Buildings.£ A. Time of Construction. No accessory building or structure shall be constructed on any lot prior to the time of construction of the principal building to which it is accessory. B. ^Height Restrictions. No accessory building in the "R" Distrre'^'^all exceed the height of the principal building except barns or stables which shall be subject to the approval of the Council. iixcmiq lArea Restrictions. In all "R” Districts no accessory bu^??^Tg shall exceed 1,000 square feet of floor area except barn, stable or greenhouse. -..v C' tiiV.S f D. Location. No detached garages or other acces sory building^ sh^d be located nearer the front lot line than the principal buiLdTng on that lot except on lots which have frontage on a lake. Source: Municipal Code Effective Date: 9-14-67 1. Location of Principal Building to Lakeshore. No principal building shall be located closer than 75 feet to the natural ordinary high water mark of a lake abutting the property. This lakeshore setback shall be determined as the mean horizontal distance between the natural ordinary high water mark on the lakeshore and the allowable building line. 2. Variance From Lakeshore Setback. Any application for a variance from the requirements of Item 1 above shall be referred to the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District for its approval before final action by the Council. Source: Ordinance No. 155 Effective Date: 2-14-74 Subd. 10. Conditional Use Permit Required. acces- sory huiIdings on through lots located in "R" Districts shall require a conditional use permit. Subd. 11. Dwelling Use Prohibited. No cellar, basement, tent, trailer, or accessory building shall at any time be used as an occupied dwelling. ORONO CC 255 (4-1-84) ( § 10.20 SEC. 10.20. R-IA ONE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT. ( Subd. 1. Purpose. The ''R-lA" One Family Residential District is intended to provide a district which will allow a combination of low density residential development and limited agricultural activity. Planned residential developments may be allowed by conditional use permit. The district shall have immediate access to highways and public sanitary sewer. Subd. 2. Permitted Uses. Within any "R-IA" One Family Residential District, no structure or land shall be used except for one or more of the following uses; A. One family detached dwellings. B. Public owned parks and playgrounds. C. Municipal buildings. Subd. 3. Conditional Uses. Within any "R-lA" One Family Residential District, no structure or land shall be used for the following uses except by conditional use permit; A. Schools. Public schools and parochial or private schools which teach a curriculum similar to a public school provided no building shall be located within fifty feet of any lot line of an abutting lot in an ”R" District and that a fence be erected fifteen feet or more from all street lot lines where the abutting use is for open play, and nursery schools providing fifty square feet of playground space per pupil. B. Churches. Churches including those related structures located on the same site which are an integral part of the church proper, convents or homes for persons related to a religious function on the same site provided no building other than a residence shall be located within fifty feet of any lot line of an abutting lot in an "R” District. C. Clubs, Camps, etc. Golf courses, country clubs, tennis clubs, public swimming pools serving more than one family, scout camps, YMCA camps, YWCA camps, church camps, or private non profit parks, playgrounds and other similar uses. The principal structure for any of the above listed uses shall be 100 feet or more from any abutting lot in an "R" District, and accessory structures shall be a minimum of fifty feet irom any lot line. Td.) ■^Public Service Structures. Public service structures, irnriuding but not limited to electric transmission lines, buildings such as telephone exchange stations, booster or pressure regulating stations, wells, and plumbing stations, elevated tanks, lift stations and electrical power substations, provided no building shall be located within fifty feet from any lot line of an abutting lot in an "U" District. Prior to granting such permit it shall be found that the architectural design of ORONO CC 279 (4-1-84) S 10.20 r C service structures is compatible to the neighborhood in which it is to be located and thus will promote the general welfare. E. Greenhouses. Commercial greenhouses provided all outside storage is fenced in such a manner so as to screen the stored material from view when observed from the public street or adjoining lot. rF.y Recreation Areas. Private gun clubs, arohery ranges, riding^^ables, ski slides, provided the area is fenced and no part of the principal use is less than 100 feet from any lot line. ^(G^ Guest Houses. A separate dwelling constructed on an existing undivided lot for the sole use of the occupants of the pLi.ncipal buildings, including their domestic employees or their non-paying guests. All regular lot requirements shall be met by the guest house. H. Planned Residential Development. Limited to detached single family dwellings only and subject to the limitations of Section 10.32. » * *I. Duplex Credit. One duplex may be located on a single lot as a conditional use upon application therefor provided that public sanitary sewer service is available, and the lot is adjacent to a commercial or industrial district, and the duplex is constructed within 200 feet of the commercial or industrial district. A duplex is defined as a two-family unit residential building. J. Apiaries. (Kj Animals. The keeping of domestic animals for ncn-commercialr purposes including horses for the use of the occupants of the premises, provided that any accessory building used for housing such animals shall be located not less than 150 feet from the nearest lot line. A minimum of one acre in aggregate, exclusive of one acre for the principal building, must be available for each animal unit, except as hereinafter set forth. A minimum of two acres of open pasture must be available for a single horse and one additional acre must be available for each additional horse. When the horses are kept stabled and do not require pasture for feed purposes, the minimum pasture requirement may be adjusted at the discretion of the Council. Such minimum pasture acreage shall not include low lying lands unusable for pasture or grazing. Any person keeping such animals must comply with the provisions of the City Code. *){XI L.y'Farms (Crop). Provided that the area is ten or more acres. V_y Source; Ordinance No. 172 Effective Date: 1-1-75 ORONO CC 280 (4-1-84) S 10.20 M. Antenna Structure. One independent antenna structure with antenna or combination of antenna attached thereto, subordinate to and servicing the principal use or structure on the same lot and customarily incidental thereto that is not attached to another structure provided the height of the antenna structure does not exceed 65 feet and the antenna structure is set back from any lot line a distance at lease equal to the total height of the antenna structure. Source: Ordinance No. 177 Effective Date: 6-5-750- Within any "R-IA" One Family Residential District, no accessory structure or use of land shall be permitted except for one or more of the following uses: ^^^^^arages. Private garages and parking space, ^^ff^^^ools, etc. Private swimming pool, tennis courts, and C. Home Occupations. Any gainful occupation meeting all of the following requirements when engaged in only by persons residing in their dwelling, when there is no employed assistant, when that occupation is conducted within the principal structure only, when evidence of the occupation is not visible from the street, no signs other than those permitted in "R" Districts are present, no excessive stock in trade is stored on the premises, over the counter retail sales are not involved, the entrance to the home occupation is gained from witnin the structure, and the use does not adversely affect the character of the uses permitted in the district in which it is located. A professional person may use his residence for consultation, emergency treatment or performance of religious rites but not for general practice of his profession when such general practice will involve the need for more than three off-street parking spaces for the occupant and visitors. 0. Signs. Signs as regulated in the Zoning Chapter, E. Temporary Structures. Buildings temporarily located for purposes of constructing on the premises for a period not to exceed time necessary for such constructing. F. Gardens, etc. Gardening and other horticultural uses including aviaries and decorative landscape features. G. Roadside Stands. One roadside stand offering for sale only farm products produced on the premises provided that such stand does not exceed 200 square feet in area and that it is located at least thirty feet back from the public right-of-way. Source: Ordinance No. 172 Effective Date: 1-1-75 ORONO CC 281 (4-1-84)