Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
07-20-1987 Planning Packet
P n«; CX>MMISSI MBBi'IRG MONDAY, JULY 20, 19 7 7:00 1275 mltl R0IU> � -CODNC.L ,..... COUNCIL ,RBPRBSBNTA'l' VB -. i 11 . ·me AT'l'IDIDAIIC UBLIC BBARINGS 1.7:15 P.M.1170 Th 6 7 & 629 2.7:30 P.M.1169 We 01 Cry C s III,, 3.7:45 P.M.·17 L nd 38.2·0 & 383 s.9:00 ITBMS P l 'm ry 1174 330 z n, Pa E B d li i • ,ry u .r C 0 o d ... 'O on .. C 6.10 6 0 , 1 O f r 0 7.2 '' . • on, te sec of nd ub u s 4.f 173 Dav d nd T.ere a G rdell , 1230 Oro o a Variance � P blic Har ng 15.117 Walt r and _ • .n y Eric so , 33� Holl d· Publ c He_ ring . p 1 ,ca on thdr 176 Ric r Pu n , 2765 C co oin 0 V rianc ublic Hearing RBVIBlf 1178 ich Pa , 414 Sk c _ Pl n R v w , n ·o a - ADDI -_O I 8.p 9 1 . 0, ng 1987 mm I ' . f l.pp V s, g 1 e rive oa - 0 ug I I CJ) ic P.c PUBLIC ATTENDANCE CITY OF ORONO MEETING DATE PLEASE FILL OCT THE INFORMATION REQUESTED BELOW FOR OUR CITY RECORDS. NAME (please print)ADDRESS 1. NAME OR NUMBER present for (from agenda) 2.2^4 U a / (1 ^ ^Hul 13 • ^ __L.r-T)v 14 15 1 16.^ 17.J-/ -A''': / ^ *■" IM* I I i ■ 18. UA. I f -4-rtt tn'^ .289-^ (Oj^cc Po.',4I/4 V/^-P j II tA. M % ^ / TOJ Mayor Grabek Orono Council Members Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson Pr Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator Date: Subject: July 16, 1987 #1170 Ted Q, Feig and Timothy D. Johnson, 627-629 North Ferndale Road - Easement Vacation -Public Hearing List of Exhibits Exhibit A Exhibit B Exhibit C Exhibit D Application Plat Map Property Owners List Survey Discussion This is a request to vacate the existing drainage and utility easement located 5' either side of the lot line between Lots 1 and 2 of the Laurent Addition. This vacation request is in conjunction with the proposed lot line rearrangement which received recommendation of approval from the Planning Commission on June 15, 1987. No neighboring properties will be adversely affected by this vacation. The easement is intended to be vacated in exchange for a new drainage and utility easement to be granted 5' either side of the revised dividing line. The new lot line and easement will follow more closely the existing drainage patterns and yard maintenance pattern for the two properties. Staff Recooouendation Staff recommends approval of the vacation of the drainage and utility easement between Lots 1 and 2, Laurent Addition subject to the condition that as part of the concurrently proposed lot line rearrangement between those subject lots, a new drainage and utility easement 5' either side of the new lot line shall be granted. T 4^1110 i C!ITY OF ORONO GENERAL LAND USE APPLICATION PROPERTY LOCATION 6 Site Address Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) 3^-- (/S >"3 i /<•:><*/od Please check one - Is the property ^abstract or _■ torrens? —mr OF okom^^i^(for Conditional Use Applications only) Fli^iCE nFElCL..:7Z Please attach legal description to application if Winded Oh’f required survey. ^ t APPLICANT Phone (home) W 0 ■Name . O’V Address 'S <3 Phone (worK, City zip OWNBl (if different than applicant) Name VU*- Address Phone (home) Phone _ _ _ _ City _ _ _Zip Date Property Acquired (month/yeir) I (do)[ (do not) 9lso own the adjacent parcels of land. FEES - CONDITIONAL USB PERMITS $100.00 a)Residential accessory Use $150.00 b)Institutional (church, school, etc.) $150.00 c)Duplex Credit/Bldg $250.00 d)Commercial/Industrial Use $200.00 f)Land Alteration I Grading and filling - 101 cu. yd. or more Seawall, retaining walls within 75* of lakeshore PRD/PID - see fee schedule omm APPLICATIONS _$150.00 Commercial Site Plan Review (t consultant fees) $250.00 Vacation Easement Vacation _ _S15(U20 -Mi(T$ 50.00 EasEasement Vacation With Subdivision $2SCrr00 Pesoning $200.00 Appeals Other - see fee schedule PRESENT USB OP PROPERTY Present Zoning District IB Present Use of Property *^^^<^--c^///>Y^Residentia ^tn&:=.4spea DESCRIPTION OP REQUEST Describe request in detail: _______________________ _____T>iiAi^ UTli iry At^oi^ G> c/tST7j^» ^tAJk*T(t^O _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ IRBD SUBMITTALS Completed Application Form. I 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) r 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. Plat Map. (c-o^e 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 Da\;e 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 CCS'^—r ._ _ _ _ Date 3C.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 veri^c^ion of this request. '2c Owner's signature ^_ _ _ _ _ _ _ Date Ci Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25'days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Cemmifesion 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 schedule' meeting, to please make arrangeswnts to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building i Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. 1 £A$r BROOKS *.• • $0 GREEN /•tn * .» .✓1 1 2 ____«> *4 iAsr (5;-— IH • 1tfD-NEII.IN �IJUn E 1 1 1 1aar 1ADDM I & 8| iuia in 8M ►- £inoc K H K 5 r I ss <r lu •t «j S f saQ M 1*2 s^{« M M S < z >ft < ^ ..J IM H lA «• ft lA >•o 5 < ft 10 (0 lA 3 l§ i S o ^Ai tai p ft ,-J O lA < ly lU lA•naS8cj;^ <«.3 —-1*^^ mJ ]|y ►-IM ft M ^-fiSSK :2I38.•A ft 4 i«^ M IX M 1^ ft £ 5 X H M F SO 0$ fiSsi Sif (I #1170 0 € • N Z ftss ft UJ -J D tA •y .i ft in UI in m Q ui S ft ?gxsl^Pi •? Z 0 14. _ ;® o S o ^ lA (D «A K ^ a e Z Z S S W Xe 8 z z S3 ,A- N h* Hi I ft fAinm ft Ui Ia a* S • H :9 m ft ft 3 c.-a «S:iEa i<il iHi ft ifSJ S ft i«i« 0 I 2 ^ X Ko S o ft ly M «J ft S S !!j ftft ft ft K1 ft ft-i -i Q . Ui Ui Zft Q M H SZ Z Z UI y* I tt ft 5 U./S ^ ^ lilS ft o o S 3 X u u ftuiSJCg^_ ft M ^ -j *j in ______ft lAPA ft 2S--Ii•-» Z C Ui I ft < Si ihl i!|i t t c Jil^. c c I c I V c c Jf. m ''^T " c3 *lA^«^Vr.-2^ ^ tA“ U - t V aff.*o 'f •4*if '<«0 »»C I 1 1 i c:Z. To:Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson From:Jeanne A. Mabusth, Zoning Administrator Date:July 16, 1987 Subject: #1169 William Wear, 2950 Watertown Road - Preliminary Subdivision - Public Hearing Zoning District - RR-lB Total Area - 18.5 Acres 3.35 acres - approximate area of wetlands per City's mapping Application - Subdivision - Class III - Subdivision of 8 lots List of Exhibits Exhibit A Exhibit B Exhibit C Exhibit D Exhibit E Exhibit F Exhibit G Exhibit H Exhibit I Exhibit J Application Plat Map Property Owners List Soils Map DNR - Designated Wetlands Flood Plain Contour Map Flood Plain Drainage/Watershed Map Orono Wetlands Map Map of Developed Properties to West Sketch Plan Discussion - The applicant was advised prior to staff's review of the proposed 8 lot plat of the presence of designated wetlands within the 18+ acre tract. It is the applicant's position that the area of the designated wetlands on the City's map is far too ambitious and that with close inspection and testing that these wetlands may be redefined. The City will work with the applicant's surveyor advising of the soil testing (number of soil borings with appropriate analysis by either a soils engineer, soils scientist, agricultural engineer, soils conservationist) required for the redesignation. Review Exhibit E. The most western of the weltands has been designated by the DNR. Closer review of the Flood Plain maps (Exhibits F and G) would suggest that a wetland some 200 feet further west and part of a major watershed! and drainageway to Stubbs Bay, would more appropriately fall under DNR authority. The staff wil 1 ask for clarification by the DHR. If the wetlands remains under the designation and authority of the DNR, the applicant must also apply to the DNR if he wishes to proceed with the redefining of this protected wetlands. Septic testing will not be completed until lot lines have been determined. A preliminary review of the soils map (Exhibit D) reveals sensitive soils - heavy clays, high water tables - possibility of mounds. The proposed road will be private. The curb cut of the current road is aligned with Wear Lane south on the south side of Watertown Road. Note the applicant hac provided access to the north. Staff will ask the Planning Commission for a recommendation regarding need to provide access to west. Review the enclosed plat map that locates developed lots, area and desingated wetland areas. (Exhibit I) Mr. Wear has also advisea that he has installed underground tiles along the west edge of the property adjacent to Watertown Road. He claims that a layer of black soil under this section of Watertown Road allows water to travel under the road bed. Wear advised that he discovered this at the time he constructed the road for Wear Lane south.Additional tiling was installed to the north to transmit drainage from a ravine to the lower retention area at the southwest corner. Staff would recommend that the surface drainage be addressed at the time the grading and drainage plans are submitted to the City. Drainage swales, above ground, can take care of drainage from north. The City Engineer will be asked to address the best method to treat and direct drainage that flows underground via the road bed. No action is required of the Planning Commission. The applicant seeks your direction on the following: ACCESS 1.Is there need to obtain future access to west of property? A.) In reviewing the location of wetlands, unaeveloped lands and densities based on potential land development,is it important to achieve east/west access via this property? B.) What types of hardships are created for developer if 2 future access corridors are required by the City. C.) Do Planning Cr^nroission members have a preference as to the access corridor to be developed, if only one is to be sought? D.) Review Comprehensive Management Plan 7-11 Rural Transportation Policies - specifically 1, 4, 5, 6, 7 The Comprehensive Management Plan recommends that planning consideration be given in designing private roads such that if use level and/or looping can be achieved - "new public streets will be accepted.""4 1 M i i WETLANDS REDESIGNATION Planning Commission should advise the applicant if they have any reservations or concerns with the proposed redefining of the wetlands. It would be staff's intention to bring a revised preliminary plan back to the Planning Commission at some future date with the test data and written opinion of an acceptable professional regarding the extent of the true wetland. The plat maps showing information on wetlands, developed parcels and potential density will be presented in greater detail at you meeting. Exhibit J has beem enclosed for preliminary consideration. * m ’S' ' •y *»-v ■.V' V-V 'V ii -WA CITY OF ORONO SUBDIVISION APPLICATION FORM 1Jl.)r-*-rv Date Rec*d By *^7)^/^ - Fee Rec'd APPLICANT Name *A^ltU-l jA'Y^CAJgA^ Mailing Address L TeleohoneSf \V7 PROPERTY Name I^Telephone OWNER Av'Vf Mailing Address (Attach list if more than one) /)PROPERTY LOCATION i street Address A><^ Q^. r»T -*- c- Property Identification No. (P.I.D.) Complete Legal Description to be attached to application EXISTING LAND USE Number of Tax Parcels Development Size I b::bs Acres Dry Land Acres Wet Land Acres Total, all parcels Present Use (check) \j/^OV->T VTVtv Residential; no. of units Other (specify) - Present Zoning District PROPOSAL X Division for Tax Purposes Lot Line Rearrangement Only (no new building sites) Subdivision for New Building Sites Number of Building Sites:Existing Units New Units, Total Units Proposed Gross Density Minimum Lot Size: ^ Units per IB Acres Square Feet Dry Buildab'* Land Proposed Use: (check) X Residential Other (specify) _ > 49 mm 1 .Kl ‘(OVER)I • I: . ( »'H f »*••» MINIMUM MATERIAL NECESSARY FOR COMPLETE PRELIMINARY APPLICATION Application Complecod 2^ Preliminary Plat information on Certificate of Survey. B.^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) K)tfLS6hS # Stamped r legal sized envelopes {#10) pre-addressed to each of the names on the *f Certification by Zoning Department that Preliminary Plat Application is complete. Zoning Officials Signature _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _' '' ’ '_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _Date _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ MINIMUM MATERIAL NECESSARY FOR COMPLETE PINAL PLAT APPLICATION 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Payment of fees (park feesr filing fee, sewer and water assessments) Sigr.ed certificate of survey or mylar copies of formal plat. Title opinion. Easements, Covenants, etc. Developers Agreement and acceptable form of security. V Certification by Zoning Department that Final Plat Application is complete. Zoning Officials Signature Date FEES V Sketch Plan Review (Class I, II & III)$150.00 Preliminary Review (Class I & II Subdivisions)$250.00^ ' Prelimi (Clas mywTTYvR s^III ah eview d all non-residential) Pinal Plat Review (Class III) ‘(Plus any legal or engineering charges) $300.00 plus 20.00/lot $150.00* Applicant has read the above and hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, City Engineer, City Attorney, Planning Commission and Council necessary to process this application and further agrees to pay all additionr. 1 fees established by ordinance. Applicant's Signature Owner's Signature Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Conunissinn Meeting. Planning CosuAission Meetings are usually held on the third Monday of each sionth. uro ir. ti ; 0 L * X . *t <44 « l| Wt ‘vN<^ / >s •»,"■fiV t* •' •■ >i jiLii.3L -^ K n ir.flsa K Kl tt Ui UJ fsl Ui iiJ in ^mi i i:in ft *i 1^ooo 90 ni I K i t ?S •18 S Ml 2i lii »8 lU M ii=i O O ni M M H «J O «i > M >- €4 < in 3 AO < €4^ o o o s ine i $n s >« 2S O -J o < M -J A < •y >• M .^8“ri s < in ID m •J q Sj S in S K J M M SOjjf jgg J cr>z • • - ■^r-T If j O p -i e ft < e H _ Hi CSJ sSg*« m ft 94 I M M 2u. u. 3 1^ II. o O H N < O U ft M3 ui yj ^1 I ft ft H in S S 94 O i! ss§ in p o 6 90 «J CM O oo Si M 94 tt > w y. i8KM p m ft m mi U D*. i in H M y UJ =*;| ft 2k □ M M < O OO U. u K) «J sso o « 18 Klgui •M I H* -J K JS -i ft 3 lU M UJ Ui I 8^s§i ~ 8 1 m o e lij bj m 2 s|9^S9 at 5 ^ IIP -; ^ • “I ) » l' f t>. •» ■: •v^4 <' ,y Q ft CM O o 5 A Ui -J M s3A O ft K> CM O -J -J Mo >• 2 min UJ «J K < M ►—il2i S UJ I Uiro u Ki in M M 2 ^ M tt CD O UJ pn o > M Or p ft in 2UJ M O > M -J 5 ^2oo pn CM I <V in >- ftu Z A SS 3o «J < H U4 fi P A In A in < Kin » 90 ^ KM m in A 90 O ro o -J £ S U A 5 o o m V A •J mt O O O ft o K>_ K>O -J H < KM ft M IM |U UJ S2S SS r ft UJ Uii gPis O rj lO A pn e ft ^ t4o _ ft pn .J Ui >- NfiS?iP M o o O fto pn po o in ft in pn ft X H c?iI S2S I 90 KM O UJ feyas A U ft Ui A A < ft O H22 in 3£ O p CM A O O O A -i KM Oo pn 94 I A I KM pn ( i mf- m <•. -i: fl V£> O O O >-oc CO CO O LOcz m t;' cn CNJ I CO LU oo ocz •O *0 o I ro •—i ro 3K >- CJ3 LU LU UI on X o: in €X 00 < • 2: on X 2: 00 L-' oo •J. A o o 5a A Shi i (< Iiiilhii SF ^ • e I-*-e C^>- 10 SM HI 3 Is \ I s ti is #1 II O t- 1^^ .V te?^ •*' ■" «4^' •>." ‘' ■Jv/,WM ii'- (c « I1 .Si;o ^u S UJ tt I i!) UJ h- M V c>M H —^ sSiX Z 10 ^5 >•a :^£ «:ir 6E"'‘ui 10 in < UJ E § tt ui M < • I—- a H a *1. V < iU UJCO r o McS>.j “i! e < Z Ui f P|si Q.O UJ mJ K CO UJ a UJ z UJ tt PuC “‘"ftM tt O ....t,.,>., Im .M r b r^. ■If V ^ ■ linU -____■I • • • m, 1 • e 1 i ^ . B 1 S 9 ^ B __________---------------------\ 1 > r iI r t i To;Planning Commission ?'?;°Admtnis?rator Bernhardson Habusth. zoning Administrator July 16. i-98'' BaysIde Road ,1171 Landmark co^ . public Hearing - preliminary subdivision zoning District^- „inimuin dry lrIia - 2 aore minimum ^“"boundary information Refer to Exhibit D Total Area = 22 acres 9.4 wetlands ia^*hina to cr^^t6 1 n6W issue of Appl i-,Ve°ap;U-ti:n ^V-?ve"s the^ wetlands area, quest 5 ^”.""”3® a a\ ready developed. lots and a “P/V/oatlot. Lots 2 and 3 are ai ^he dry future o®* f,i“ii not be required for Lot Septic exceeds 5 acres,buildable area cxceeas. List of Exhibits Exhibit A Exhibit B Exhibit C Exhibit D Exhibit E Exhibit F Exhibit G Exhibit H ■ Application - property Owners List - plat Map - Zoning Boundcicy - Lot Line Rearrangement - Staff Sketch - Access - Staff Sketch - Access - preliminary Plat - Appeoved 7/13/87 Brief Review of Applicat ^ncess of purchasing landmark construct^ion is i^/'i^b/farm house ^PJ^operty the beach house from Mrs. ^|”^5nmentead propertyCombined Lots 1 and . home.tead^ p^ ^ rearrangement that ^^p^ received tma ^Juibit E.meeting. Review c.xhib ^lithin the^^eli^nV. K-i- „f lot 1 within the Staff would question the Induslon^o^^^^^ _ ‘he survey subdivision as we can determine u„e alonq thc^notth bod^ refers to a pr p plat map -»o\stered. *rhe legal 'TqL%^S^^l^s\rthe"^ip^^ --description for the tic 4^*rf* \ r»itii»] ^•i« 5ISI^ Slim sum SH«]S11¥#J rsa#is sine sime rasMm S1K» sHe SliK feasible. If an access corridor is extended through Lot 2 to serve Lot 1, this roadway may have to be redefined if Lot 2's dry continuous area is reduced. Lot 3 - The former access corridor (consisting totally of wetlands) to the Miner homestead that was never developed will be combined within Lot 3. Please note on your plat map that this too is d seperate legal parcel. The proposed access drive to the Miner homestead will also divide the severly limited building site of 2.4 acres. The drive as proposed creates a substandard dry contiguous building envelope for Lot 3 and cannot be allowed per Section 10.03 Subd. 6(B). Access to the Miner homestead shall remain as proposed to the Council via the east access easement. The existing structures on the property should be designated by the surveyor. Wetlands. The City shall ask for a Flowage and Conservation Easement over the 9.4 acres of wetlands. These wetlands should be designated on the preliminary survey with angles and bearings. Riparian Issue. The applicant should submit addendum information regarding their desires concerning the use of this tract. The inclusion of Lot 3 will necessitate consideration of private road designation and road construction by the developer. The applicant may ask for the City's consideration regarding extension of riparian rights to either Lots 1 or 2, or both. If this is the intention of the applicant, the City should be advised. The applicant should include in that request the surveyor's estimate of shoreline lineal footage. Note the lagoon configuration will benefit the applicant. No matter what the resolve of the final use of the riparian tract, the riparian property must be disignated as an Outlot on the plat. The Outlot shall be legally tied to an inland lot with a special lot combination that would confirm the Outlot of 1 acre as unbuildable and for the exclusive riparian use of the owner of the inland lot. The combination also insures both riparian Outlot and inland lot would be sold as one unit in the future. Access and Hoad Right of Way There will be obvious road dedication for the County Hoad. The proposed three lot plat will require creation of a private road to serve at a minimum the three proposed lots and Miner homestead in addition to the adjacent Anderson and Gardiner properties, review the enclosed staff sketches and plat map. The staff proposal would suggest use of the existing 33 feet wide alley of the ottoville plat on the east side of Lot 3. Additional 17 feet can be acquired from Lot 3 with a turnaround provided that would serve all adjacent properties. In previous 1 r C' discussion .'ith the County, the access at the alley intersection was considered very acceptable. Staff has presented options for a shared access road, the applicant is encouraged to present their own plan for an access road. Septic Testing Lot 1 need not be tested. Alternate septic testing shall be required for Lot 2 and 3 because of the severe limits placed on dry contiguous lands within the already defined building envelope. Staff Reccnaendation To table the proposed 3 lot plat subject to the applicant or applicant's surveyor submitting the following: 1.Designate all wetlands, existing structures and contiguous dry land area of Lot 2 to the west of the proposed road easment of 30 feet. 2. Alternate septic testing for Lot 2 and 3. 3.Present your plan for the use of the riparian tract. If more than single ownership use is desired, please have your surveyor confirm lineal footage of shoreline . 4.Access is the critical issue for this review. The City asks that applicant consider the staff proposals that deal with access on a more comprehensive level. it should be noted for the record that it was the City's understanding that the Miner properties were to be sold independently as a convenience to Mrs. Miner. A major platting would have taken far too much time. The City continued to approve access to the homestead parcel via the existing driveway easement with the recent lot line rearrangement. We are dealing at a minimum with access to four properties. Lot 3 as well as the Miner homestead property must now be served by the same road that serves Lots 1 and 2 and possibly the Anderson and Gardiner properties. 4 J ft- CITY OF ORONO SUBDIVISION APPLICATION FORM / Date Rec'd C->.2jC:'\' '? By CA-. Fee Rec' d f. II'?/ APPUCANT Name r 1 A ^Telephone V7 OWNER Mailing Address v Lc\k^ Ndm0 /M 0 A J /v c -^7 ' - --- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Telephone *F7'^-CCc ~b Mailing Address A»v- />¥9 Xf.v,X>f. ^ ^ (Attach list if more than one)'^ •» • LOCATION f Street Address ^ O / Property Identification No. fP.I.D.) Complete Legal Description to be attached to application ** ** ** •“* •• •• •• •• •• mm mm mm mm mm mm m m mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mam mm mm ^m mm mm EXISTING LAND USE Number of Tax Parcels _ _"X_ Development Size n.1> MO Present Use (check)A Acres Dry Land Acres V^et Land Acres Total, all parcels Qjjy , ^4. FmaCE OFFICE Residential; no. of un^,^ Other (specify) Present Zoning District /Ul ')lf^ -----m-wt—^co i CHECK TL 250.00 I PROPOSAL RECEIPT- THM YOU . Division for Tax Purposes Cm~F01 711:12 06/26/37 _ Lot Line Rearrangement Only (no new building sites) __ Subdivision for New Building Sites Number of Building Sites:Existing Units New Units Total Units Proposed Gross Density Minimum Lot Size: Units per “X / Acres Square Feet Dry Buildable Land Proposed Use: (check)V Residential Other (specify) > f f I ,1 I < r p ;# .(OVER)• 4 , *ni i' ♦’ if. » 1 N • m -i *. . .. 'x ' MINIMUM MATIiRIAL NECESSARY FOR COMPLETE PRELIMINARY APPLICATION Application Completed Preliminary Plat information on Certificate of Survey.0 (^^3^ Certified Property Owner's list of owners withir 350' (this list can be obtained from the Hennepin County Departiuent of Finance A-603 Government Center 348-3271) Stamped, legal sized envelopes (#10 ) pre-addressed to each of the names on the k. 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 Plan Review (Class I, II 6 III) Preliminary He^'lew (Class I & II Subdivisions) $150.00 <^2£0.00 y Prelimir:*ry Review (Class III and all ncn-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 Owner's Signature £>ate (-Aj/ey / / Date 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. I j.i Property owners list ror jbdnamarK ouiist. /-x-o/P OL-117-23 24 OUl Gerald L Rowlette 3775 Bayside Rd Long Lake# MN 55356 05-117-23 23 0006 Leonard Lofgren 3845 Bayside Rd Long Lake# MN 55356 05-117-23 23 0007 Emmet G Peterson Rt 1 Box 489 i Long Lake# MN 55356 05-117-23 23 0008/10 David Dianis 17308 Hampton Ct Minnetonka# MN 55345 05-117-23 23 0009 Lee C barren 3895 Bayside Rd Long Lake# MN 55356 05-117-23 23 0011 Chas E Miller 253 Charles St Long Lake# MN 55356 05-117-23 ?3 0012 Frank Lowry 332 Westlake St Long Lake# MN 55356 05-117-23 23 0013 Phyllis W Stenderson 340 Westlake St Long Lake, MN 55356 05-117-23 23 0021 Gregg f. Bette Perl 309 Westlake St Long Lake, MN 55356 05-117-23 21 0002 John Burger 3750 Bayside Rd Long Lake# MN 55356 05-117-23 21 0016 James & Jean Maus 3700 Bayside Rd Long Lake# MN 55356 0^. ’if i’j ik'.Vi 05-117-23 21 0005 Hazel Anderson 3780 Bayside Rd Long Lake# MN 55356 05-117-23 24 0101 Steve Gaidiner 3770 Bayside Rd Long Lake# MN 55356 32-118-23 23 0008 Robert & Lorraine Roden 460 Orchard Park Rd Long Lake# MN 55356 32-118-23 23 0006 Stephen Towle 5003 Mirade Dr Tampa# FL 33624 32-118-23 24 0004 Orchard Park Farm Inc. 3980 Watertown Rd Maple Plain# MN 55359 05-117-23 23 0022/23/24 Ronald G Olson 341 Westlake St Long .Lake# MN 55356 /< (4 X 05-117-23 23 0033/22 0007 Michael Filbrandt 3960 Bayside Rd Maple Plain# MN 55359 V t corned S • »n - 23 >* ^ \ fl I I Area • M Acret t Or^ • (^2 Acr^js - • ♦! b^t ! fropo^ed D I • di IfiQ /U--« e iSO- fot.t of Lo^ fi !Ho 20i T.tol Area Dr2 Area •; S.-2A<r»t TAcrcitL Q ,\ I u. far-c«\ ^ 1 Act Line A Lparr.c) 01 — hUr^h Ime of V4, fr«pe% ock Lm« * 2o'!• » te» rfrtyewoy ea*e west N£ ’/♦■ *f 4w ‘/4- of MW V4- «f Set S - m • 23 Jopotea It, irrtyeway *v«**eTT>€At — Dr ^ Parcel A 3 X ' l^tol Area » 7^ At^s t/ Dry Area .74 Acrri*' Line A ^ro^otrri L»oe ^ / (.AsrcelA) / V*' f.-* L»ne B V C&ftfi .c / PROPosrn 1 —t Cost t.ne of LaVe S orv <Ht-»y.i\e on LoWe 1 ( ! !: VJOSlfJMlN ’3XV1 9N01 Sijjnwvid oNv sdCAj/iyns gnvt ‘sasiNiGNs *DNI 'DdlGHOaG J NHjm f 19 - ll - q : in;^ ,.i ;r<iP3^ >»-i yj ** *A r> ,W ;«>v*o v> <i<j U® »W>*44C \i« p#^o>«pap 4*#J45 |0 410J ___ [\i r ^ • ; r ' \ » W: /f sSsil ■ J ’s • t;' •■ ■■•■! ■mIwI ( V'*W***^®* ^•*••►**11 «•) ^ 4| ■-t. *■ ri:^^ o»'^''> '* **' ill - s i* tAr^N ♦a ♦/ 314 ^— P#ui| 4«aM V* t • -1 4 rn ; * < - I^ 7 I o r I 41^ -. *^’r . ■ TTm*. j^iii jiT>i u 'j fi^ i* «0 sr Q \»»>»^ f ^ K ^^jiy i'|>* o*jy ti(j ’• w#jy y -f 3 i- «Oj •ft «5 4*1 JO OUii 4»*J w * c i Itc "3 77 i.CSi i 1^ l«» «4 «• ;’ 7-. I * «#j V * ^#i^y « 9#iV \ \ > H.. t if! » 9 f 2 in . s t® i H piosmiw ‘*i»noD nm ».s»h M • /li • •. ^»uin»s Nomi'. V> jniuvr.n nn jhj ^jv XX#to? '0*1 '(w»s '0i.¥ ‘ft. 101 h: lull KWl .MJ) H^iKvl dOi <vid A8V*i;Mi'>?iia r PRILIMINARY plat FOR LANOMAPt. CONMPtjCriUN IN 101 b3. AUO. SUB. ^03 #1171 AfiU luE NW U'JARI lR >JF SKIION SKI ION S - 11/ - MINNEPIN COUNTY. KINNtSOIA IKerfhvitst corner o? *>«c 5 - »n - 25 cm ii» \ \ Toto I Area • T 5 Acf#% t. Dr'i Area • 4» 2 Acr^fs t A. \ i ISO'f D • _____________ tL £4. )U > -I ;K,V.v I <1 Tokt hne o4 Lot ff A v4 H* 2 t ^ Q L«r\e A Lf arc«MA TVTal Area ' Df j Area Acrev • I V I w> 4«rf "J 0 • ^ iA*r\m • 1 J ^ L*nf > ► l»r*f cf j I .i.y.__1/^ee^*/ T-: t (#t 4e«^f ea^emon^ I weot line of - Mt V^e #4 'e ef MW Ve *# Sec f - in #*, Ca*^ tine of tab# &%reet •» ci«di«cate4 en, tbe eU^t %f Otto^.We en La We ncaoeWaVe oytLO T^al Area* lOAi^Ck*. Of, Af«a • 4*-vW*«»t C»rn9f^ ObCw? Nt V* e« H •! * M<n V*. «p| t .!»■» . !,• i-v: Sc e}» * : 6 - 1; • H/ •T# ffl T ' W •' (.Off IK t GSONbLRS. INC. FNOlNtENi. SU«»t»0l»S AW »IMIE*S I INC lA«r, MiSNCMM 0 ! AIMIN(. »mn A H yy 1 ]lAM! Ifiat part U'*- Nu'Ihvds* ‘riai'.er of ihe ‘>out fiwvil Qti-’'U‘r of if»e NorlNwf'St Ouattpr of Sfction S. lown^fiip 11/, kdinje ?3 lyinj North of j lino lescnheo as bo'iiniiinij <ii a point on the East line Of sdiJ Ncflhedbl (fudrter of the 1>outhweil '/uoftof of the Northwest Ouarier distant i>0 feet North of the SouthPdst i.Lrnvr fhtMt-of; thence North 69 degrees 20 nmutes West 2'i2 feel, thence Southwesterly to a point 332.5 teet Nor ttiwesteriy from sdUl Edit line as nedjured along a line luarinf) North 6/ degrees 20 rrmutes West from a point on said East line 25 teet North of the Southeast corner of said Nortt.east Quarter oi the Southwest Quarter of the Northwe t Quarter; ttsence SoulhwesterIy to i point ill teet North ds iru-dsured at right dtniles to the South line of said Nfjrtheast Quarter of the :>oiitn- west Quarter of the Northwest Quarter tror^ a p'jint on the South line of said Northeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of the Norttiwe^l tniarter ci’tant 362.7 f*‘<’t West of the Snuttieast corner thereof; thence Southwe*terly to a point on the west line of said Northea>l Quarter of the Southwest Quarur of the Northwest Quarter distant 25 feet North of the Suuttiwest corner ihertoi except the West 50 feet thereof, and e*cept that part lying Scjtheasterly of i line hereinafter referred to as "Line A" and Northeasterly uf a line hereinafter re'erred to ai 'Line B", said "line A‘ anr! line B" being described as follows: Cormencing at the Northeast corner of said Northeast guar ter of the southwest Quarter of 'he North west quarter; thence South along the last line of said Northeast quarter of the S»)uthwest quarter c' the Northwest lua-ter a distance of 234 fc-et to the poirii of beginning of said "Line A"; thence deflecting rijnt 4h degrees a distance of 90 feet To a poira, and said "line there ending, said point teing the pi-int of beginning of said "Line B". thencr? deflecting left 83 degrees tc said East line, and Slid "Line B". there ending, actorJing u' the (w.vernrkini Survey thereof. Subject to the right of Carl E. Anderson and Genevieve Anderson, owners of Lots 1,2,3 and 4, in Ottoville on Lake Minnetonka to cyntinue the er>( ruachmeni of their garage on Uie east 1‘a feet of the south 25 feet of the north 50 feet u* said premises such encroachment to cease when the present structure is destroyed or MMTi ived; PARCEL h West «,() ?,ot of the ^ollowi-g descnbr-d tract; That part of the Northeast Quarter of the Sc-uthwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Scctio" 5, Township 117, Ra'ge 23. lyi"g North of a li^e described as beqi'''-r>i a* d poi-i 0" the East li-e of said Northeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter dista"t 50 feet North of Mie southeas* cor-er ttiereof; tbe-ce North 59 degrees 20 ni-ntes West 292 feet; the-ce houfhweslerly to a [lort 332.5 ^eet Northwesterly from said East li-e, ris rifdixijfetJ d U.*dri*q North t/ 20 West from d pci'^t said East li^e ?b tee* Not tit of the Southeast ccr~er of said fkartheast quarter of the southwest Quarter of the Northwest Qiiarfer; thc-ce Southwesterly to a port Ml f>et North, as measured a* right a-gles to the South Ire of said Northeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of the Northw<-sl Qu<:rt«-r, froir a ixjrt o" the South li"< of said Nortt.'asl Quirtet of the Southwest I'nartei the tlorthwest Quarter distant 362.7 feet West of Mw- ‘>outheasf cor"er thereof, the-ce Southwesturly to a port o- the West Ire of said Northeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter dista-t 25 feet North of th© South west cor-et tnereof, accordrg *o the iV»ver-me-t S;n»e)r tfwreof. 1 *• .‘A > Alf . f r PARCEL C pill Thdt of Lake* as df»^icat<*d o*' th#» piat of Ottovilli* 'j*' lak** Hi'-'^efo^'ka. S<jytNerly of a deucribeJ ai follows: LomrTK*''ci*'t] at Nf>rThwost :or^or of lhf‘ Sv'ufhfasl quar’or of >r>r^rTwc*st quarter of Sectio** b, 117 fk.rtri. kd-'j!* 2'S of the bth HtiiJia-t booth alu"^9 If^ liTe mmm of said SoutfToast quarter of the Northirest quarter a dista^'ce of 234 feet; tne* derlecli-^ riqM :,jA^ 48 a disia'^ce of 90 feel to the poi'^f of be<jii"g of the Ii^'e bei»^9 described; Iherce d#- Mecti'^g left 83 degrees to the East li’^e uf said Lake street, a'^d there e'di'^g. a’^d lyi?q Northerly of a h-'e dos<:rif>ed as follows: at a poi'^t the Wes^ h'^e jt me Northwest quarter of 'Jt the Southeast guafter of the Northwest guar^er of Said Sectiu'' b dis»a**t bO ^eet North of the South- west (.or'^er of aid Northwest nuarier sf the Southeast quarter of Uie Northwest quarter; the'^c# South b9 Ueqrees ?0 Fasf to said Last Li'^e Lake Street, a^'d triere e*'d:-g. t AkCFl 0 lot S3. Audito*'s Subdivision Nmher ?03, Hennepin County, Minnesota. EXCEPI that part of the south 200 feet of said lot S3. Auditor'v Subdivisiun Nori^er 203, Hennepin Ccunt>. Minnesota, lying westerly of a line hei^inafler referred to as "line A", said "Line A/* t»eing d^ufribe^ as follows. CocBiencing at the s'^utheast sorrifr of said Lot. thence West alnrv; the south line cf said Lot a distance 300 ff»et to the point cf beginnirK; sail ‘Vine A*, thence deflecting right % degrees to the north tine ot said south 200 feet, and there ending; ALSO fxCEPf that part of Ifie rrorth 488.00 feet of tl»e south 668.00 feet of iiid Lot S3 lying westerly of the following described line: Commencing at the terminus of said "Lirte A*, theme North parallel witt* the east line of said Lot to the north line of saiJ south 688.00 feet an^J said line there ending. \ ■ i; 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 Zoning 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 (East): 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 I 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 Se«*’er 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 i1 1 ; I 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 ^wale 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 due to topography. b.) The primary site for Lot 1 is not in a swale but should also be moved northwesterly to reduce its impact on neighboring properties. c.) The alternate site for Lot 1 needs to be 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 Neighboriny 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 Recomaendation Staff recommends approval of the 2 lot plat for Craig Anderson subject to the following conditions: 1. Each lot must 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 bo 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. Plowage 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 iC surveyor determines those right-of-ways have never been so dedicated. * "sr- i "1 t - > -r ^ 'M > ^ ■S- i"i* ." .■ ih-v, 'f - 9. Park fees to be paid in the amount of $200.00 per new lot (2 lots at $200 each » $400.00 total). 10. Final Driveway and culvert access locations to be approved by City Engineer. 11. Applicant is advised that a driveway permit must be obtained from Hennepin County for the Bayside Road (County Road 84) access. :0 r- L.- CITY OP ORONO Date Rec' By . Mi d / / FGQ~Roe*d — ^ 4» O SUBDIVISION APPLICATION FORM APPLICANT N-.n\e Vv.. 2SO »- .v> c t? /• 2vO , 7 S 2^L6^ r*" - f‘ ii( jti 7 j T Telephone ^~Uo ~ Mailing Address 19^ Ocovao O > Telephone ^•~lCo - ?SorS3> W^3SL PROPERTY Name C srivCa^ Vl. hrvvA.c _____________ Mailing Address \S(oS TV~vO^ Loa (Attach list if more than one) 1 J ‘j 02COOOC l --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------^i‘-€f}t’‘-3iO.C€ PROPERTY LOCATION Street Address LervC. Property Identification No. (P.I.D.) (Ss ~ V V*1 — Complete Legal Description to be attached to applicli^i’on'' EXISTING LAND USE Number of Tax Parcels Development Size ^r? 0^ (fi ■4-Tect Acres Dry Land Acres Weu Land Acres Total# all parcels t Present Use (check)Ar,A^ T Residential? no. of units Other (specify) _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Present Zoning District /„ )C - IA PROPOSAL Division for Tax Purposes _________ Lot Lin^ Rearrangement Only (no new building sites) ^ Subdivision for New Building Sites Number of Building Sites;c> Proposed Gross Density Minimum Lot Sizes Procoied UseI (check) Existing Units Now Units Total Units Units per Sn Acres Square Feet Dry Buildable Land Residential Other (specify) (OVER)I*'A 1 i\ •:{ MmJ> ‘..'I JL L^itTOi •MiTi IMili rAW>T«] Hit id W> rAfma9tTlim» I '»j rtnmtr* rmmtJtfgW'i r.mrurnmwmmni rnnMiw>nriMmh r!Tr,mwnmmmr*mr,hr,r^»j ujfftiinura Til m 9*^9 ^■ru jrt7rfM0rt-> MMi: SfijJtWu / ' / ^ •'" ^v*/ ==^ V------------1 ?jl f* // Sv fi. /... ,,, i ^5 ^‘■‘’ -- « ^ 0 rj cn / ^ <Sf ^ ^ ^...,-• ^"-- 1 . ;* t ^li tt iS in imC9 o 1 <K1 in in tg M o U £ ^ »n o o s lO -ie o oo eg H M W M M M si^ 5 ID Ci a *o S iLi M in M > u in a LuUl.Jp 11 0 ST ETALK> in in o H m K1 in in O c Qc 1^ LU n in ss g** ® 3 ^S > •i« M Is £ s z a „CM cn ui uj £j 2 rlS(g85 = 4A C C ft ^o o uh i'u r OF liUhViY PC!'. KiFN'ini IS U)TS 12, U. lf>. AND la, AUDITOR'S SUHCIVISIOI. MU HSNNEPIN CO'.'NTT, KINN3S0TA #1174 I'hiMbr^rtify'toat'thlA it « true •«! rorreft r*pro8'>nt«tlon of « eurvo/ of lh» tfi 12. IJlUor'! SuMlvl.Sor, Ku»i»r 20:i. .lone tho 2/ Hrrr'U'Tr AlUlJ'. .u:.UvlM’.2n .<ual.r 2-V, H.rmpln Ccuntr. I’ d3«8 r.ol p'iTpcrt V? »!;ow lf.:>rtr*<' Oi!r.t» ar. rt)-.cn»jr. .8 . Se*l*' I* » l-«* ait* I 7-IR-77 c I Iron «»rt9r ^nivn H. clrfir. h*«. .Sc. I.*r.d .7urvayor Wk! h.innar k4i ri/%r• T •I* i li f ■r r^i©lDMl I ) z I jjiUKrt t:'-._____3240 Bayside Road Long Lake, MN 55356 July 14, 1987 TO: City of Orono Planning Commission RE: Application 174 It is the purpose of this letter to express my concern with this proposed subdivision. As 1 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 f/id 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. 1 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. BoYlan rnmiMrfiii 1 ' 1* i ' fV / ....v;-rV W ^i!!LJ<- /•i LMI s ,-v >T* »va V '' '-'A’n * • • > I m ■ -''"WSi-f WMM ! V-, wfir ■■ *-.<•■ "- f m St •a? *''«* . V <■ % w ■ ly 4 rr' ■'- •'■ -' 'lU ,iito;^.':^ ’”* M ■J® i^jiii^ jp r 1 V^ '" I**’*n.' *:^.. V y* ;X>L^ '-fi.tv yF -4 5" To: DRAFT Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson 72087.1 Proa: Michael P. Gaffron, Ass . Planning & Zoning Administrator Date: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 would 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. M Ii( r I 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. 4 2. Revise Section 10.03, Subdivision 9 (B) to make barns and stables subject to the height conditions of the conditional use permit.i 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. .1' 4. Revise Section 10.20, Subdivision 4 (B) to define tennis courts and swim.uing 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.) i 4 5. Add Section 10.20, Subdivision 3 (Q). Accessory buildings 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. 1 i 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. » code that iside ipal bles ions over by m by Zoning Code Amendment June 29, 1987 Page 3 of 5 r;r»r ir.;*” B. HEIGHT RESTRICTIONS =. the "R« District shall exceed^ the^^h^^^K^"^"^ hereby repealed'nd t"he"\Xl "„rianTua^ suL\uu\“eduT pla«/' buildCsh\\Tixele?to "Lj’of‘ allowed by the provisions of a condin floor area except asa or a conditional use permit. herlby" «p;ai:ranrtt'"fo\?:t!n'ril°gu'"’'“’ ^ <B, isplace: ^"9 language is substituted in its yp^*^ ^ Paddochs, subg;ct t^Vhe'arTo"'!nd"°h'''. accessory buildings and subject to f oond^ i°"s for such pools, tennis courts, or Dadd„ conditional use permit if covered with a roof and exceed 1,000 squLrfee't ' n^rrL.*’^ addTng°subdiv?s°ion 3“"Q^"a'’s'follows!""'"" area. AccessLrburidTngs"!n^e!!!s^T^ area, subject to tho. following re^'ictio;!! " " { Zoning Code Amendment June 29, 1987 Page 4 of 5 A. B. LOT AREA MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE FLOOR AREA OF EACH ACCESSORY BUILDING ♦MAXIMUM AGGREGATE FLOOR AREA OF 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 6.01 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 15.01 to 20.0 10,000 Over 10.0 acr< 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 FLOOR AREA MINIMUM REQUIRED SETBACK 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’ 10,000 100' 15,000 150' It. 1^ 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 H go back in Section 10.03, Subdivision 12. . .). E. Consider screening requirements? mi r ' ( It ; AT L s 10.03 ^ubd, 7. /One Building Per Lot, Except in the case of Planned R^ljjentja^ 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 consrr.ucted 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" DistrW^^hall exceed the height of the principal building except barns or stables which shall be subject to the approval of the Council. s _ _ _ rea Restrictions. In all "R" Districts no accessory buiiaing shall exceed 1,000 square feet of floor area except barn, stable or greenhouse. fpvTi’ tCfcV<S ( D. location. No detached garages or other acces sory buildin^g sh^d be located nearer the front lot line than the principal buiTdTng on that lot except on lots which have frontage on a lake. S'' Sc ...Cl : 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 ne. crrw 2, ' Variance From Lakeshore Setback. Any application for a variance from the requirements Df 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. All acces- sory buildings 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) A ii f ■ _ f ■i 1 X A ( I ta I c S 10.20 SEC. 10.20. R-IA ONE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT. Subfl. 1. Purpose. The "R-IA" 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-lA" 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 from any lot line. , iWluding but no Service Structures, Public service structures, i^tcrluding 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 "R" District. Prior to granting such permit it shall be found that the architectural design of ORONO CC 279 (4-1-84) i c s 10.20 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. rFw Recreation Areas. Private gun clubs, archery ranges, riding^rables, ski slides, provided the area is fenced and no part of the principal use is less than 100 feet from any lot line. C9v Guest Houses. A separate dwelling constructed on an existing undivided lot for the sole use of the occupants of the principal 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. », t*'• 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. ^4V/>ic>N^ Animals. The keeping of domestic animals for non-commerciar^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. / L.) Farms (Crop). Provided that the area is ten or more acces. \_/ Source: Ordinance No. 172 Effective Date: 1-1-75 ORONO CC 280 (4-1-84) ft ii 1 § 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 least equal to the total height of the antenna structure. r-within any "R-IA” One Family ResidentiaiDis^rTcttrioaiccessor^structure or use of land shall be permitted except for one or more of the following uses; Private garages and parking space, ools, etc. Private swimming pool, tennis courts, and pwhiPB^fs. 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 within the structure, and the use does not adversely affect the character of the uses permitte Jn the district in which it is located. A professional person may u-/’ his residence for consultation, emergency treatment or performs;; e of religious rites but not for general practice of his protesn'.on when such general practice will involve the need for more than three off-street parking spaces for the occupant and visitors. D. Signs. Signs as regulated in the Zoning Chapter. 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 f located at least thirty feet back frc-n the public right-of-way. Source: Ordinance No. 172 Effective Date: 1-1-75 r Source; Ordinance No. 177 Effective Date; 6-5-75 ^A^^Garages ORONO CC 281 (4-1-84) p 32 vU QQ J a 3su vS i • ID Z 5 -0 O A R o§ o v5z <1 zsv\. O i» Ui sJ <uol ..;1. 1 '.I . :■ ■■ :: e ■■ '■■* £V To Planning Commission Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator Date: July 17, 1987 Subject: #1056 Olai Hanson, 1390 Railroad Avenue - Variance Referred from Council to Review Additional Information Request to Table Until August 17th Meeting This item had been referred by Council back to the Planning Commission to review additional information regarding site conditions. Although this was scheduled for O'' July 20th, on July 17th applicant's attorney notified staff that a lot line location settlement is imminent, and that will cha.il£® the actual requested setbacks. Applicant ’s attorney has requested tabling until August 17th. Staff also feels the additional information deserves additional consideration. This item will be brought to planning Commission on August 17th with the new facts and a staff recommendation. TO Mayor Grabek Orono Council Members Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson 7 FROM:Michael P. Gaffron, Assistant Planning & Zoning Administrator DATE:July 17, 1987 SOBJ:#1128 Rainey Anderson, 780 S. Old Crystal Bay Road Revised Preliminary Subdivision - Referred back to Planning Commission Note: Council reviewed the original preliminary subdivision proposal on June 8th and tabled to June 22nd pending additional information regarding soil testing and potential revisions to the proposal. Applicants did revise their proposal to included 2 additional lots, extention of the road portion to be developed, and inclusion of a 50' road outlot to connect to the Kumlin plat at some future time. The item was tabled at applicants request with no discussion on June 22nd= After receipt of a revised plan. Council referred the revised proposal back to Planning Commission for additional review. The neighboring property owners were mailed a notice of this meeting on July 16th. List of Exhibits - A - Revised Proposal - Preliminary Plat B - Memo 6 Exhibits of 7-8*-87 C ~ Memo 6 Exhibits of 6-18-87 D - Council Minutes of 6-8-87, 6-22-87, 7-13-87 i; Pertinent Facts - Lots and Blocks have been renumbered. See Exhibit A, Each proposed lot contains in excess of 2.0 dry acres. The cul-de-sac road to be developed is now approximately 750' in length to directly serve the existing house and 4 new lots, plus designating Outlets B and C to provide for future private road extention to Lot 3 , Block 1 and future potential connection to Kumlin's plat road if this at some point becomes a public roadway. Loti, Block 1 will include the area south of the proposed road and this maintains the buffer that neighbor Blair at 790 Old Crystal Bay Road had hoped for. The access location 'las been addressed by City Engineer Cook and City Attorney Blatz in the memo of June 4, 1987. They feel the City would be hard-pressed to deny a plat with access location that meets the minimum standards even though we feel some other location would be better. A review of the septic testing information submitted indicates that soils are generally suitable for mound systems on all lots. However, the soil testing report submitted does not key the tested sites to scale on the proposed plat, and this must be done by the surveyor to verify that tested sites will not be encroached upon l»y the revised road location. * 9 •^*1 I ft 5 Zoning File #1128 July 17, 1987 Page 2 Staff again notes that the sr.iall ponding area defined by elevation 940 between Lots 2 and 3, Block 1 should be subject to a Conservation and Flowage easement and excluded from the dry buildable area. Note that extending Outlot B would cross this wetland, and a conditional use permit would be required at the time Lot 3 is developed. Lot 3, Block 1 as a result will contain less than 6.53 dry acres. Staff notes that future development of Lot 3, Block 1 would likely require a cul-de-sac if it is divided up; staff advises applicant that approval of the current proposed subdivision does not guarantee that the City would approve variances to lot area to divide this lot into 3 lots in the future. Staff Reconaendation - Staff recommends approval of the revised preliminary plat subject to the following conditions: 1. Access location to be at existing driveway entrance as proposed by applicant. 2. Plat road Outlot A to be developed now to serve Lots 1 and 2, Block 1 and Lots 1, 2 and 3, Block 2. 3. Outlot B provided as corridor for future private road access to Lot 3, Block 1. 4. Outlot C provided for future roadway connection to Kumlin plat road; this will stay as a private road outlot, not developed but available to create a "through" route if these private cul-de-sac roads ever become public roads. 5. Standard road and utility easements and private road maintain covenant to be filed with the plat. 6. Standard drainage and utility easements to be shown on plat along lot lines. Provide a 20' wide drainage easement along swale at neck of Lot 1, Block 1. 7. Conservation and Flowage Easements to be dedicated over the two major wetlands and over the low area below elevation 940' straddling the line between Lots 2 and 3, Block 1. 8. Payment of standard park fees of $200 each for Lots 1, 2 and 3, Block 2 and Lot 1, Block 1, and $100 for Lot 3, Block 1. Total « $900. 9. Private road construction subject to Developers Agreement. 10. Surveyor/Site Evaluator to identify septic testing locations on preliminary plat to verify no conflicts with revised lot lines or roadway. ■ r-- 1 I I I TO:Mayor Grabek Orono Council Members City Administrator Bernhardson FROM:Michael P. Gaffron, Assistant Planning & Zoning Administrator DATE July 8, 1987 SDBJ:#1128 Rainey Anderson, 780 Old Crystal Bay Road - Revisions to Preliminary Subdivision - Referral back to Planning Commission 7-20-87 meeting The applicant has revised her proposal to include two additional lots per the attached exhibits. Because this is a significant revision, staff recommends referral of the application back to the Planning Commission for their 7-20-87 meeting, anticipating a resolution for preliminary plat approval will be brought back to Council on 7-27-87. With the additional two lots, additional fees will be as follows: Additional Road Footage: $225.00 (730'-280‘ = 450 l.f. additional at .50/ft.) Praliminary Review - 2 additional lots at $20/lot $ 40.00 Septic Review - 2 additional lots at $30/lot * $ 60.00 Total additional application fees = $325.00 The adjacent property owners will be renotified of the 7-20-87 meeting. MOTION: Moved by _, seconded by _, to refer subdivison application #1128, Rainey Anderson, 780 Old Crystal Bay Road to the Planning Commission for review of the proposed revisions, at their 7-20-87 meeting. Ayes , Nays i.'A A VI * A: W 1.'' ,7,. >-A i ■■■■'■V .<;■•? v; Si i ; \ yj^litVTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD JUNE 8, 1987 ^2 DIG ISLAND CONTINUED Mr. Wisdorf requested tabling any action to allow the Board to revie » the City's recommendation. He also requested clarification & direction from the City regarding the development plan that the City required. 2®Ding Administrator Mabusth explained the Planning Commission's recommendation to the Council that the Planning Commission would ask that all {hazardous conditions be removed prior to implementation or approval of the master development plan. Mayor Grabek requested that the Board now submit a plan of projects that will be completed by October 1987. Mr. Wisdorf stated they will submit a realistic guesstimate of what they intend to accomplish. It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by CounciImember Sime, to table this matter per applicant's request. Motion, Ayes 4, Nays 0. C*J^128J IAINEY ANDERSON ^PN^JLD crystal bay ROAD SOOTH SUBDIVISION PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL Rainey Anderson, Representative Herbert Leffler, and Surveyor Gary Gabriel wore present for this matter. .V, City Administrator Bernhardson explained the request for a 4-lot plat with potential for future divisions 8 2—acre lots. He reviewed the issues of access location onto Old Crystal Bay Rd.; whether there is a need to provide a future access corridor to the Kumlin plat to the north. Mr. Leffler stated that they essentially agree with staff's recommendation with exception to Out lot C. They would prefer Outlot C to remain as-is or joined with Lot 1. Because preliminary plat approval is pending additional septic testing information and there is a possibility of an additional lot to be platted at this time, he requested that the entire review be tabled until the June 22nd Council meeting. It was moved by Counci 1 member Sime, seconded by CounciImember Goetten, to table this application until the June 22, 1987 Council meeting. Motion, Ayes 4, Nays 0. CounciImember Goetten requested that the Kumlin subdivision information be shown with this application for a more accurate review. .8 i 1 .^MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HEU) JUNE 22, 1987 11119 NacMILLAN CONTINUED Counci 1 member Goetten found it difficult to add more square footage noting that an architect could re-draft the plan to provide the room for a tank within the original proposed square footage. CounciImember Peterson concurred with CounciImember Goetten. Attorney Todd Andrews stated that they were originally concerned about the potential subdividabi 1 ity of the property even though that is currently not their intent which was the reason for submitting some additional language to be inserted in the resolution. However, after speaking with the City Attorney Blatz, they are willing cc withdraw their request for insertion of the proposed language. City Attorney Blatz commented on her discussion with Mr. Andrews, pointing out that regardless of how the language was drafted it really is essentially meaningless because you cannot bind future Council's action. It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by CnunciImember Sime, to adopt Resolution #2204 of approval amending it to include the additional increase of 3% (500 s.f.) square footage. Noting the inclusion of the 13.5 minimum acre statement. Motion, Ayes 3, Nays 2. CounciImembers Callahan and Peterson voted nay. CounciImember Peterson was against the additional 500 square footage. CounciImember Callahan voiced his feelings at the last review. #1122 BIG ISLAND VETERANS CAMP* BOARD OF GOVERNORS - LOT 1 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION - TABLE UNTIL JULY 13, 1987 It was moved by CounciImember Goetten, seconded by CounciImember Peterson, to table Application #1122 until July 13, 1987. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. f#1128^lAINEy ANDERSON* ^ m •fnj) CRYSTAL BAY ROAD PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION TABLE UNTIL JULY 13, 1987 It was moved by CounciImember Goetten, seconded by CounciImember Peterson, to table Application #1128 until July 13, 1907. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. 4 mm - To:Mayor Grabek & Orono Council Members City Administrator Bernhardson From: Date: Subject Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning K Zoning Administrator June 18, 1987 ah i #1128 Ranie Anderson, 780 South Old Crystal Bay Road Preliminary Subdivision - Second Review of Exhibits ^ ^ tanExhibit A - Memo and Exhibits of 6/4/87 Exhibit B - Council Minutes of 6/B/87 , ^ Exhibit C • Resolution of Preliminary Plat Approval for Application #1047, Dennis Kumlin, 2665 Fox Street Exhibit D - Preliminary Plat Drawing for #1047 Discussion - The applicants are proposing to revise their application ® this time a split of Lot 1, Block 2 (with the existing house) into two 2 plus acre lots. However, as of this writing, no sketch or drawing of the Revision has been submitted, nor has septic testing for the existing house alternate site, or this additional lot, been submitted. Kumlin Subdivision. me ^ity — ----- has received preliminary plat approval, it would be improper for the City ^rreauirrhim to revise the conditions of his preliminary plat approval unless he%onsen?ed to do so. Mr. Kumlin has stated to that he does not want the road to continue past his cul-de-sac, and will "°t =«> anv revisions to provide for a future through road. Note also that Mr. KiOTlin's Lot 3 now contains 2.00 acres and would become substandard in area if reduced by any dedication for road purposes. Based on the above, staff recommends that a 50' Private road outlet be taken from the easterly side of Anderson's Lot 2, Block 1 for future roadway pu^osls, with tL intent that if this ever becomes a public road, Anderson's and Kumlin's roads would be connected to cr . te a through road. Staff Recommendation - Please review the staff recommendation in the 6/4/87 memo. Conditions 1 through 10 of that memo are still appropriate, but may e modified depending on what the applicant brings forth. I I J . I TO:Mayor Grabek Orono Council Members City Administrator Bernhardson FROM:Planning'* Zoning Administrator DATE: SUBJt June 4, 1987 ni28 Ranie Anderson, 780 South Old Crystal Bay Road Preliminary Subdivisin - Resolution List of Exhibits - c a A-L Memo & Exhibits of . «;/ift/87 M - Planning Commission M - Planning Commission Action Notice 5/2 / 0 - Traffic Survey 5/25/07 Discussioa ^ potential for future divisions This is a proposed ^7^°^ f^v^of 8 2-ac'*e lots. Issueswith an ultimate total density considered by the Planning Commission include. A Access location onto Old Crystal Bay g^ce^ considllations of lot layout, topography, srght distance, traffic speeds, and existing development. B. Whether there is a need provide^a^fji^ture access dIte'rmlnatiVn e%*'to’'w“h'"ich plat it should be taken from, or how much from each plat. C. Road construction staging. D. Ancillary Issues - Septic testing, wetland a^d^ rergrhf X. and lack of public roadway frontage, and use of Outlot C. recommendation. Two However, we can get a limited'ea'^o/ p\\"nning® Commission* s general feelings based on thoseaVOtes^^tion to approve ^ \rVeconAld\ ^hence s'^taff to Kumlin's plat, failed t ^ r-orridor should bebelieves that the concensus was that the corriao ---------- provided. p, Because the main ^upon was access location to Old Crystal r knowing who voted which way on each using the Planning Commission was split on the existing access versus an access aero _ _ _I r ; a Zoning File #1128 June 4, 1987 Page 2 w The main concern with the Old Crystal Bay Road access location is that Hennepin County Highway Department noted that while the existing driveway location meets the sight distance requirement for the posted 30 mph speed limit, it doesn't meet the standard for a 35 mph speed. They recommend a safer access across from Lane because they feel the traffic exceeds 30 mph at that location on Old Crystal Bay Road. Subsequent monitoring by the Orono Police Department (Exhibit 0) indicates that 2/3 of the traffic is going 25-35 mph or generally within acceptable limits, but 1/3 is exceeding 35 mph. Both City Engineer Glenn Cook and City Attorney Kathleen Blatz indicate that since the existing access meets the safety standard for the posted speed limit, the City would be hard-pressed to require a "safer" access. City Attorney Blatz s^so the issue of whether the City has some added liability by approving the existing access when we know a portion of the traffic exceeds the limit, does not seem valid. Traffic speeds are an enforcement issue and it is commonly known that a portion of the traffic anywhere exceeds the speed limit, hence the City is not open to added liability by approving the access location that meets the posted limit standards. On the other hand, the City might be subject to a legal action by a developer in a situation where an access that meets the minimum standard set by code is denied without a solid justification. Staff Recommendation - , Staff recommends approval of the preliminary plat for Ranie Anderson generally in accordance with conditions stated in Planning Commission's second motion as follows: 1. Access location to be at existing driveway entrance as proposed by applicant. 2. Dedication of 50' along east side of Lot 2, Block 1 for future roadway purposes. 3. Approval of the concept of staging the road construction as described in Item II A of the memo of 4/16/87, using road and utilities easements for the temporary cul-de-sacs. 4. Approval of a variance to allow cul-de-sac length of 1,100', a variance of 100'. 5. Standard road and utility easements, private agreement, etc. including requirements/thresholds for staging of road construction to be filed with final plat. 6. Require additional testing for alternate septic site for existing house, prior to Council preliminary plat approval. ir Zoning File #1128 June 4, 1987 Page 3 7. Conservation and flowage easements to be dedicated over the two major wetlands and over the low area along the northwest end of Lot 2, Block 2. 8. Payment of standard park fees. 9. 20' drainage and utility easement along northeast and east line of Outlot C. All outside perimeter lot line drainage easements to be 10' wide. 10. Outlot C designated as unbuildable for sal only to 790 Old Crystal Bay Road OR make it part of Lot 1, Block 2. Itens for further discussion - Item 2. Planning Commission felt that the corridor should not be taken from Kumlin's plat because it would leave him with substandard lot area. That plat has already received preliminary approval without the corridor, hence we seem to be locked in "as- is". Note, however, that Glenn Cook feels the City's future position in creating a "public through road" is stronger if part of the corridor is dedicated on Kumlin's plat. Item 6. We would prefer to withhold preliminary plat approval until the actual septic testing for an alternative drainfield site for the existing house is complete. Item 10. If the proposed configuration is approve. Council must make a determination what to do with Outlot C. Do you want it as an unbuildable outlot for future possible sale to 790 Old Crystal Bay Road, or do you want to make it a part of Lot 1, Block 2? Staff prefers the former, since 790 Old Crystal Bay Road has an extremely substandard setback on that north side, and would increase from 1.05 to about 1.75 acres in this 2-acre zone. A resolution of preliminary plat approval will be presented for approval at your June 22nd meeting reflecting Council's action of this evening. '7 A£.C ^' '' ^ Lr'C-~-o A So - /A/r-o -'we'o. I To:Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson From: Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator Date:May 13, 1987 Subject: #1128 Rainey Anderson, 780 South Old Crystal Bay Road Preliminary Subdivision - Continuation of Public Hearing List of Exhibits Exhibit A-H (Memo and Exhibits of 4/16/87) Exhibit I - MCWD Letter of 4/15/87 Exhibit J - Hennepin DOT Letter of 5/8/87 Exhibit K - Conceptual Ultimate Development Scheme Exhibit L - Access Alternatives NOTE: This item was originally tabled at the April 20th meeting pending additional information regarding septic testing. County review of access location, and neighbor Kumlin's consideration of connecting access corridor to his plat. Please refer to the memo and exhibits of 4/16/87. Discussion - A. Septic Testing Testing on Lots 1 and 2, Block 1 indicates that both lots will require a mound-type drainfield system for both primary and alternate sites. No testing for an alternate site for Lot 1, Block 2 (existing house) has been submitted. This is still needed, however, based on the information submitted for the other sites, it is likely that a mound site is available, therefore, we suggest that you review the subdivision based on the information submitted. B. Access Location Please refer to Exhibit J, the comments from Hennepin County. Old Crystal Bay Road is posted 30 mph in both directions at this location. The proposed access site at the existing driveway just h^eets the 260' northerly sight distance required for a 30 mph road, but does not meet the 350' requirement for a 35 mph road. Our concern is that, in recent clockings, southbound traffic averages 35-40 mph at this site. Hennepin County is recommending that the access be located directly across from Farview Lane. They would not approve of any access location between the existing driveway and the extention of Farview. They would likely approve a site located at the south line of the property, next to the Blair residence at 790 Old Crystal Bay Road as being better than the proposed site. It is important to remember that the applicant's short-term goal is to take four separate properties and make them saleable as building sites (or investment property in the case of Lot 2, Block 2). Moving the access northerly to be opposite Farview will destroy the character of Lot 1, Block 1 although a building site will still be created. This also would require a longer initial roadway construction. % Zoning File #1128 May 14, 1987 Page 2 of 3 On the other hand, in moving the access as far south as it can go, we end up with a roadway right next to Blair’s residence, which according to our airphoto basemaps is only a few feet from the property line. Staff feels compelled on a purely technical basis to recommend approval of the access location as proposed, since it meets the standards for the posted speed limit; staff also feels that there may be legal ramifications regardless of what we do, i.e. if we deny the technically acceptable access, the developer might take action; if we approve it and there is an accident due to excessive speed and the City was aware of a speed problem, does the City have liability? Staff suggests these concerns be researched by the City Attorney prior to Council preliminary plat approval. A third option to consider is lowering the grade on Old Crystal Bay Road, which the County would be ameanable to, but will not sharo in the cost at this point. It is likely that as the area develops, the County will eventually flatten the grade here. The City would be judicious in requesting an additional 7' road dedication along the west side of Lot 1, Block 1, not necessarily because the County requested it (the City has historically supported the County's requested 80' right-of-way width only on "minor arterial" roads, and not on "scenic parkways" or "collector roads" as County Road 84 is designated in the Community Management Plan), but to accommodate the bank slope for a future grade lowering. C. Future Access to the North Dennis Kumlin, who is completing a subdivision to the north of this proposed plat, has noted that a road corridor connecting the two plats will have a highly detrimental effect on the character of his property as well as the value and security of the property, and he is definitely opposed to such a request, especially considering that he received preliminary plat approval already. From a security standpoint, a through road would allow for added police protection of the area. Staff sees two benefits to having the road connected: 1. Emergency response time from points east could be reduced as much as 30-60 seconds; this seems to be a minor benefit. 2. If the City was to take over these private roads someday, it would be more efficient to maintain them as one "through" road rather than two cul-de-sacs. Any dedication of right-of-way from Kumlin's plat will result in lot area shortages, hence he would have to relocate lot lines. On the other hand, taking an entire 50'corridor from Lot 2, Block 1, will leave it at or slightly below 4 dry acres, causing future subdivision problems. I Zoning File #1128 May 14, 1987 Page 3 of 3 Staff must recommend from a planning standpoint that an access corridor for future connection to Kumlin's plat be dedicated on both plats. This does not mean the connecting road will be constructed now, but if the roads become public in the future, the City would be in a better position to maintain them. City Engineer Glenn Cook suggests that a 25* outlot be taken from each plat, however, an alternative would be to take a little more from Rainey Anderson, say 35* as an outlot, and acquire a road easement of 15* (rather than an outlot) from Kumlin. D. Road Construction Staging Staff is very supportive of the concept of staging of the road construction, and would note that the only case where it's been a problem was a unique case related to a specific developer. Staff comments on road staging as outlined in the memo of 4/16/87, still apply. Staff Recoonendation Staff recommends approval as follows: 1. Approval of the access location as proposed, subject to City Attorney review of the legal ramifications of such approval prior to Council preliminary plat approval. 2. Approval of the concept of staging the road construction as described in Item II A of the memo of 4/16/87. 3. Approval of a variance to allow cul-de-sac length of 1,100*, a variance of 100*. 4. Requirement of dedication on the plat of a 25* (35*?) outlot for future road connection to the Kumlin plat road. 5. Recommendation to the City Council to require a dedication of future roadway on the Kumlin plat. 6. Require additional testing for alternate septic site for existing house, prior to Council preliminary plat approval. 7. Conservation and flowage easements to be dedicated over the two major wetlands and over the low area along the northwest end of Lot 2, Block 2. 8. 20* drainage and utility easement along northeast and east line of Outlot C. All outside perimeter lot line drainage easements to be 10* wide. 9. Outlot C designated as unbuildable for sale only to 790 Old Crystal Bay Road OR make it a part of Lot 1, Block 2 (Planning Commission should discuss this). 10. Standard road and utility easements, private road agreement, etc. including requirements/thresholds for staging of road construction to be filed with final plat. i 1 TO:Planning Coininission FROM: Michael P. Gaffron, Assistant Planning & Zoning Administrator DATE:April 16, 1987 SUBJECT: File #1128, Ranie Anderson, 780 Old Crystal Bay Road Preliminary Subdivision - Public Hearing Application: 4 lot residential subdivision with private road. Zoning District: RR-lB, Rural Residential 2-Acre Unsewered. Property Area:20.14 Acres dry buildable 1 ! 8.97 29.11 Acres Acres Wetland total ; Proposed Lots:Dry Wet Total Description Lot 1 Block 1 2.55 0.66 3.21 Building site Lot 2 Block 1 4.40 1.10 5.50 . Building site Lot 1 Block 2 4.58 -4.58 Existing house Lot 2 Block 2 6.53 7.21 13.74 Building site (futu: i Outlet A 0.52 -0.52 1st phase road i Outlet B 0.86 -0.86 2nd phase road i Outlet C 0.70 0.70 Buffer to 790 Old Crystal Bay Rd. List of Exhibits A - Application B - Plat Map C - Property Owners List D - Preliminary Subdivision E- Partial Topography from Zoning File #360 (previous subdivision never completed) F - Soils Map G - Airphoto with Wetland Overlay H - Existing Parcel Layout INTRODUCTION The applicant owns 4 separate tax parcels. However, those parcels are not readily sellable as building lots because (see Exhibit "H”) Parcel 1 does not have 2 acres of dry contiguous land; Parcel 2 has enough dry contiguous land but contains the driveway access for existing house on Parcel 3; Parcel 3 contains existing house, but its septic system is on Parcel 4; Parcel 4 contains over 6 acres for a future potential 3 lot split but would be landlocked if sold off separately from Parcel 3. The above facts have resulted in the proposed 4 lot subdivision * [ 1 i ! that creates 4 more suitable parcels, three of which have a potential for further development. Staff suggested and applicant proposes a "phased" road development scheme that requires a short length of private road be constructed to serve this initial division, leaving a road Out lot as access for future development of the rear parcels, with road extension to be constructed at such time future development occurs. ISSUES/CONCEPNS/COMMENTS I. Road Access Location. The private road is proposed to enter Old Crystal Bay Road at the location of the existing driveway. The Hennepin County Highway Department has not commented as of this writing, but the City Engineer has commented that this access location does not appear to have the sight distance required due to elevation of the County Road where Farview enters, just to the north. The applicant is hoping to use the existing roadway location both to preserve the 2 acre minimum area of Lot 1 Block 1 and to maintain a woods buffer between their road and the Blair residence at 790 Old Crystal Bay Road. City engineer Glenn Cook suggested that one alternative might be for applicant to request Hennepin County to lower the "hump" in Old Crystal Bay Road, perhaps with some sharing of the cost . . . II. Private Road. A.) Staging. The proposal is to construct a private road and cul-de-sac on Out lot A initially, to serve the existing residence and Lots 1 and 2 Block 1. Under the surveyor's proposal, only Lots 1 and 2 of Block 1 front on the cul-de-sac, leaving Lots 1 and 2 of Block 2 to share a private driveway via Outlot B. Staff would prefer to see that first cul-de-sac abutting Lot 1 Block 2, moving about 100' to the east. We would recommend that if any one of the three 4-plus acre lots is further divided, the private road would have to be extended. If Lot 2 Block 2 is developed into two or three lots, the road would have to be extended the entire length. If Lot 2 Block 1 or Lot 1 Block 2 do a split prior to the subdivision of Lot 2 Block 2, perhaps only a partial construction of road Outlot B would be appropriate with a "temporary" cul-de-sac. These temporary cul- de-sacs might be shown as road and utility easements rather than platted cul-de-cacs, and the entire road be platted as a single outlot. B.) Length. Note that at full development, the private cul-de- sac road would be about 1100' in length, or about 100' more than the standard maximum. However, a review of contemporary subdivisions in unsewered areas indicated many cul-de-sac roads of that length have been approved: Tanglewood - 1500', White Oak Circle - 1400', Abingdon Glen - 1600', Devin I>ane “'1250', French Lake Road - 1350', West Farm Road - 1200', Hunt Farm Road - 1500', Orono Oaks - 1750' to name but a few. C.) Future Connections. City Engineer Glenn Cook suggested that a corridor for a future connection to the north via Dennis ■9 Kumlin's plat of Foxwood should be at least considered. This could be accomplished by taking a 25' strip either side of the 9 be a problem for Lot 2 Block 1 of Ranie Anderson plat, but would cause lot area shorAy"*^ Kumlin, who is coming in for final plat approval III. Septic Concerns. We have not received septic testinq imV'/ properties. Lot 2 Block 1 was apparently surv^v wlw-ii ' g^ven the test hole locations shown on the survey. We will require testing on Lots 1 and 2 Block 1 and also for an a Iternate site for the existing house. Lot 2 Block 2 wi 11 because it exceeds 5 acres dry buildable and is likely to be further subdivided in the future. IV. Wetlands. Conservation and Flowage easements will be required over the two major wetlands on the property. We would also recommend consideration of requiring a Conservation and the low area along the northwest end of XjOZ Z JBlOCiC 2. V. Drainage. The drainage *>asement shown in Lots 1 and 2 Block drainage and utility easement along the northeast and east line of Outlot C should be widened to 20' and .^®®P®^tively. All outside permiter lot line drainage and utility easements should be expanded to 10' in width. VI. Outlot C. Must remain under ownership of the Homeowners Association as an unbuildable Outlot, may be sold only for combination with neighbor to the immediate south (740 Old Crystal Bay Road) or maybe should be made a part of Lot 1 Block 2. . . site^^^*'^ avoid it becoming somebody's idea of a building STAFF RECOMMENDATION "ore input before final decisions and recommendations can be made: 1. ) County Road access location 2. ) Septic testing B. Issues for Planning Commission to address on a conceptual basis for this proposal: 1. ) "Staging" of road development 2. ) Whether or not a corridor for future access to the north is appropriate 3. ) Consideration whether low land northeast of existing house should be a designated wetland to be consistent with other projects, given that it's a pothole ^surveyor: which way does it flow? what are its boundaries?); also considering the north end of that 4 lowland will have future road and cul-de-sac over it. staff reco^ends that Planning Commission address the issues in ® ®?<J.9ive applicant some direction, then tlble unti? are^^eceived?*°’'"®*'^°" septic and County Road ac-»ss locatioi ^ t' :ty of o t.v Vi. M SUBDIVISION APPLICATION FORM Date Rec’d S-ZB-ST? By -nv^\ Fee Rec'd . (nj Re: APPLICANT Name /;J P ^Telephone ^'2^ ^ PROPERTY Name OWNER Mailing Address ■yg'o yr - - Telephone Mailing Address (Attach list if more than one) PROPERTY LOCATION Street Address Pis Property Identification No. (P. I. D. ! 7— Z j> PCOZ 5^ Complete Legal Description to be attached to application EXISTING LAND USE Number of Tax Parcels Development Size 20./-^ _^.^7 Acres Dry Land Acres Wet Land Acres Total, all parcels Present Use (check)Residential; no. of units Other (specify) _ _ _ _ _ _ / Prev^ent Zoning District PROPOSAL Division for Tax Purposes _ _ _ Lot Line Rearrangement Only (no new building sites) Subdivision for New Building Sites Number of Building Sites;Existing Units New Units Total Units' Proposed Gross Density Minimum Lot Size: Units per Acres Square Feet Dry Buildable Land X Proposed Use: (check)Residential Other (specify) »/■ ^ . *mr ^ .* • - E I » — (OVER)i t «*p. T a :>;-i ' *v ?; 7 *XiipH MINIMUM ^TERIAL NECESSARY FOR COMPLETE PRELIMINARY APPLICATION % "Application Completed 2. Preliminary Plat information on Certificate of Survey. «ithin 350- (this 1 Ce^te? 348-327n® Hennepin (Tounty Department of Finance A-603 ^ » ' • a^r tist l"Ah^ro%%"u"r^°"aldrt^^^^ Pre-adaressed to each of the names on the completI!"^°" Department that Preliminary Plat Application is Zoning Officials Signature __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ ** •• W «« _ MIHIMOM MATERIAL NECESSARY FOR COMPLETE PINAL'pLAT MPLi^TioN 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. Zo^in^MfioL?^ stgnaturf^"”^'”^ Application is complete.—- - - - - -- - -- - - - - DatG FEES Sketch Plan Review (Class I, ll & III) Preliminary Review (Class I & li Subdivisions) Preliminarv Review (Class III and all nor.-rasidential) Final Plat Review (Class III) $300.00 plu> 20.00/lot $150.00*_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _MPlus any legal or engineering charges) ^o“Tar:n r/dft°S f er-^ah^firhir h^ fnd°^u"r\^he^r-gr"^el iipplicanfs Signature ^. Owner ’s Signature 4lDmitt Date a7* . Date,jf-og ^ . ' i i 3 inn in ^ eg Ma uio <a r-g lUa £ 5 ro oo K> tn cvi O' fO inin I s ! 10 cn cQ lU ILI M M <K h- K a r UJ Ui o a a K O O UieeiE 3 U C < Ui UI h- H M < > > ONa a ^ >- < < CO < a u. -4 2C sa »»4 o oo K> in OJ I I fO o CO K> O < K O Z Ui < #1 1 r:^ *4r"^ hijsj f «ooo o az UI I V Ui ott o> w CSJ IN i 3 Oin K> inin ar Ui 2k: I o a a r UJ Ui^ r.o a a Uin -1 Ui £ M> a a 23 o o o £ CO O eg mJ ao a 9 Z 0 in 0 £ Z a a CO KIo03Zin KI j m 0 ®3 g§g U U M in ina 90 eg I N 3 UI M > a Ui UI 2 5a r r z o o eg ^ CO CO eg Ki o Z Z M M <z z U U UI < < M“ z z a a UI Ui 93!; > Mao aa lO sin 9a o COo <T M g CO ooo KI eg I rP O COa a ►- z in < in K1 inin I o z a < CO CO < h 5 CO a X i«:o < a a •8 •-f •-< P o z CO o eg a c c c >• ^ < ^ to oo a o < h» KI 10 ^ >• K.S eg liSo COaa Z CO< a— UJli^ z < CO >•au I o o o o o 'I a a IS! M M < < a a < ►- c-> < Ni o >- CO < K 3 KI O oo 90 90 CO eg 1 X N O ^ a a aa a h- H* lO CO < < X X KIinin o o h-co I o in CO eg KI o Z Z a a Eg Xoa a a ►- H to CO inN sO eg I- <N Oa 0 >•<0aN CO a 0 >•>-0< a ID O'< ^ ID O'0 to to CO a KI toa in <in ^ >- ^ a a in < in cNi < a I o a M N a CD <O a •-« c CO ^oSS Kco>• Si 151 P" z ^ h- o a a o < < S3 O < N O >- Ch < 3 ^ >- >- o o a a CO Z Z N- M M CO o < < to o a a oa >• < in CO o to o a a o < a to 10 2 ^ >• < ato u z eg < riSi^ o < T = •p* >- o o a CO z h- M CO o < to o a o CO oa >- < ID O' toinino < lO h-a CO a >- SSi "‘o<>- a K a o <Z N M o >- < CO <1a n* 3 “5oo< aa aa sm a 0 3Xa1z h* to CO eg z » X M K o a o in CO *®CO ej to o o z M c^ KI inin S H X CO a Xo <CO a K <Z in N 5 a >• a ^ < o a 3 c^ ooo to to to a J X K o •H a I o in a CD a m o COaa Kaa COaa h* aa c^ KI H in a in a a a o M •9 > < n o §a ina«oa ►-<NI V <3 Qa >• <CO to §_. to CO <t >- to Ua J o a h- •H o CO •H 3 O O CQ eg CO «o CO o fo o ID Oa >- < -H ID -.S CO ^ Si uiS3 e> o < a N o o >- a a < o CO 3 . c oa >- < to CD o oa o < t— ^ CO ^ >- k >5a * 5• • a ^ O 3 t-* CO a z a o a to < q: X a V < a CO CN KI a in < in CO o§ I O O CO CO o K' O COa >- a a a Z M X <u a Si a H O <a o >- CO < 3 a ooo S a < h-a to a I cn CO CD CO oa^ o >- it\ < KIID in in CO CO < H- CO >• I o 0090 (0 in § c s§ 3 o a X< in CO 8 a cc a z o o < q: o o Z a < < >- \ . a < a a a a z 1152 ((i os> K> ^ ^ CJ Ma • lU Q O L&i cn (O §M I c!^M -J V) K K e IS IPiT" oo S 5I a a CK M CD Ojt CJ (O >• >oSCJ ii.3 ^ O CO (O •-< MM I ^ -J Ch ^ O O LU UJ CO o to o a ^ q: p^ fn >- IfL <0 (O >- a o o 0 $>• o o o o tt K> CJ V < -» o P^ K> -j in (0 0 inooo to CJ I to CJ to I §§s» Ul Li. Oo°g ts^inM Mu uM M to tt to O 13Jl.\i A-.: to CJ o o o c^ o o 6 Im 2 CJ o o tn o K CJ a CJ to oe in „ tt a into O LU UJ __ tt B = 1 •-4 p >-H £ tt z§<ue z q <UJ D H 1K -J 0 Q 6 sgiij E S Q. o M 1c^ »i4 1o Z Z 2 o 0 U O < tt N0 O O >- 04 in t- H 0 il55o n *1 0isUJ CJ < CD CD 0 2 0to < Ma>- Q tt O tt»-4 to o o ^ ^ 10 CJ >- tt to u r z •L R ^ ^N 3 >- >- ■-I O -J —t >- < ^ to a* lO •J m < in Si Ch o inCJ to u a 3< < < o !5s- U U 0 2 < Ki ■■: \"i I i- J (( **tiif-K \' . T: ..:f,v. . • '* w‘ . %it A L* *..: tf . [/•> .. exH, b Li ; • i!- • • tr r Mm »;: I.- -.!:•1: i.l : ( A-^.. c —^ .;^ : . it *.i \ 1|5 I tf 1 I M •t? •• > f • • ♦•r ^ ;!.• * • • !• !? if; lilf i: V‘ }-: if. ill •»-•: •n . »:n Ji* *ijt - .ti5:i i . it;! • »‘t-J £ f!:i • Jvf -Iz **s t. 2 *» • t « h \ I -. ; 111 ;i . !;> »i\i ri -ni !h • 5?: zm :t: { / /t^' X O<n oc kJ o I- «o *t QJ •X — S q: V q: !i!i if f- f. ^ I |M|in ) 39708 431.0/ 575.97 ZC5 ^A3f^e5.- 1743 73 J HJO ,pO SOUTH €80 '■ >6XC !}>f // ^ o > r>* ^Ni v<» ^ 3 vS a 5 775.50 z I ^ 4 r e>fH. Zl N< t ss± '.'I ■fw. ‘<fv* 560 55* 3o ■VOfho'iv .^95. SO Ur r. r4 , 1 i 1 • > 4-. -. April 15, 1987 Mr. Michael Gaffron City of Orono P. 0. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Re: Sonins, AppHcations for #„35 Robert Hanning Jr. and #1,28 Ranie Anderson Dear Mr. Gaffon: cltionr'’®Both%Jlicantrwin°reQSi^^ “"’"R eppli- Managers of the Minnehaha Crelk MatersherDistrict^"'''’''^’ inTlud°e^-D’’sffct's concerns for the Robert Hanning project (#,,35) I' S properties and will not restr??t ffood°flo2r^''“'' flooding on other 3. The project complies with the municipal stor^^ater management plans. include:**"* District s concerns for the Ranie Anderson project (#1128) 1. 2. 3. 4. of the ^oposedX“?opTOn?f*^ to ?" cMtl^i? ?{l?i'i' bran"?'®^^® ^ beeanaly«d and met for runoff pro^u*c'i ’n"g® or sSd. ‘"e disturbed area be completed with seed and mulch '* ■ i.-i Minnehaha Creek Watershed District Hennepin County Department of Transportation, Attn: Les Weigelt Zoning Applications filed with City of Orono #1135 Robert C. Hanning, Jr., 4220 Sixth Avenue North - Requesting Conditional Use Permit and Variance to create a berm along County Road 6 and place fill in a designated wetland. #1128 Ranie Anderson, 780 S. Old Crystal Bay Road - 4-Lot Subdivision Please review the above referenced projects and submit your comments to me as soon as possible. Sincerely, Michael P. Gaffron Assistant Planning & Zoning Administrator ^ '• exu. HENNEPIN DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 320 Washington Av. South Hopkins, Minnesota 55343-8468 935-3381 TTY 935-6433 May 8, 1907 I. Mr. Micheal Gaffron ///’ Assist. Planning and Zoning Administrator .y/jj. City of Orono , ' P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN. 55323 I 9 Dear Mr. Gaffron: / ■J RE:Proposed Plat - Ranie Anderson Plat CSAH 84 Opposite Farview Lane-south junction Section 4, Township 117, Range 23 Hennepin County Plat No. 1530 Review and Recommendations Minnesota Statutes 505.02 and 505.03, Plats and Surveys, require County review of proposed plats abutting County roads. We reviewed the above plat and make the following comments: i - For future improvements, the developer should dedicate an additional 7 feet of right of way along CSAH 84. The proposed street access location meets the absolute minimum sight distance requirements for the posted speed limit. However, to provide a much safer location and to prevent a short offset distance between intersections Hennepin County reconroends the proposed street be located directly opposite Farview Lane. Any new access to a county road or any revision to an existing access requires an approved Hennepin County entrance permit before beginning any construction. Contact our Maintenance Division for entrance permit forms. All proposed construction within County right of way requires an approved utility permit prior to oeginning construction. This includes, but is not limited to, drainage amd utility construction, trail development, and landscaping. Contact our Maintenance Division for utility permit forms. The developer must restore: all areas disturbed during construction within County right of way. Please direct any response or questions to Les Weigelt. Si/icerely, /; David W. Schmidt, P.E. Transportation Planning HENNEPIN COUNTY an equal opportunlt\' employer w -fJWtUl\ ;<■ ^ • ■■ I i=-XHiig}r- A/ mA ® CONTINUED being set "a“nV Callahan felt adamant 7An^nT S*^**®^ ANDERSON p|i?“ ™»STAI, B»y road ^«^iminary SUBDIVIST om CONTINUATION OF FOBuTheARIng Gary Gabriel, was present tequest"for°a^V jQ"^"^®brator Gaffron expl ned th r>r\- 4. • ^^^tiguous lanr^* d ^ do6s not h^v© 2 existland but contains th^^ri enough dryexisting house on Parcel driveway access for- house, but its septil svstiL ^ contains exLtlno 6 acres fo/" ?" ^^^cel 4; and Parcel Pa"rc^rr^3^^ lanll^^^ed ^ ".ore-suit?bl e parle^\" a°r"e"o"*" ^®=bs:'the°“e\\'’fon“oVr ‘ Staf/^e ‘"’^'='’ extent of the real f°t developme"nt*°occ:rl.°'’"^^e“"‘®‘' ®“ch ®tim“e %\t"u°r^ foreran "®ef® the'’sioht *be^ niph road but do©» ^9ht distance required property next to the Blair south line of the the B?ff' end up w!th ^^oad* ‘=*^5'®^®!tne Blair residence. ^ ^ roadway right next to from the side Property l!;^^°“®® ^® °"ly about 10 fle[ this Point approver.^ ^^abilrtres prior to Counc/l''p^r^^^m^nlr'y -<t '•• T»r—n ant mt i <1 J MINUTES OP THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD MAY 18, 1987 * #1128'ANDERSON CONTINUED Bellows stated she was opposed to approving the proposed access creating a potential traffic hazard. Johnson felt that the required sight distances were somewhat conservative and therefore the proposed access would be acceptable to him. It was noted that there have been no cited accidents at that driveway intersection. Cohen, Kelley, and Hanson agreed with Bellows feeling it was not a good access location to serve a subdivision. Chairman Kelley suggested the access be located about 45' south of the proposed location with adequate natural screening from the Blair residence. Bellows noted the issue of trying to line up new roads. Regarding future access to the north, it was recommended by the City Engineer that a corridor for a future connection be along the plat of Foxwood by taking a 25' strip either side of the line between the two plats. Dennis Kumlin, who is completing the Foxwood plat, was present and stated his concern that a road corridor connecting the two plats would have a highly detrimental effect on the character of his property as well as the value and security of the property and he is definitely opposed to the corridor, noting that he has already received preliminary plat approval without such a corridor. Bellows noted that taking a 25' strip from the Kumlin property would ‘create a substandard lot, and suggested that the entire 50' outlot be taken from the current applicant's property. Johnson felt that the Foxwood plat should contribute to the outlot. Hanson felt that the outlot was unnecessary. In response to Chairman Kelley's question. Assistant Zoning Administrator Gaffron stated that adequate septic sites have been located for mound systems on the new proposed lots. No testing has been done for an alternate septic site on Lot 1 (existing house) but based on the information from the other sites, it is likely that a mound site is available. Assistant Zoning Administrator Gaffron explained proposed cul-de-sac easements. 8 . MINUTES OP THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD MAY 18, 1987 #1129 A^BRSON CONTINUED pSbffc "hearing wa^'^loser"""^ Motion 1 - 2. Dedication of 50’ along east sid« of Lot 2 ninoir 1 for future roadway purposes. concept of staging the road of 4/16/87°" in Item i/a If the memo (1^ ' road and utilities easements fS?the temporary cul-de-sacs. «s>einenx:s ror If l^inn'^®^ a variance to allow cul-de-sac length or 1,100', a variance of 100' J-engcn lg/e'em"l|f l°f easements, private road for staoina of' requirements/thresholds final plat. construction to be filed with lite^'^fi? IfiVilnV for alternate septic preum/na ry %T.t Vp|lova ?.“""' P ^ ^ ^ ° C o u n c i 1 dedi^ated^Jv^^Vth flowage easements to be major wetlands and over the low area along the northwest end of Lot 2 o Mot,l; standard park fl„.°" ^°‘ "• Motion, Ayes 3, Nays 4. Motion fails. Motion 2 - “elilin«y^pUt ’"l|p^°o^;ar®|||j||t''lo"“^ ‘° entr^:i%% P-|o^e7brappUclnr 3 OuVilfli a ? easements to be 10' wide. to 7 90 md ” unbuildable for sale only 1? Block 2. "sKe it part of Lot mm: ::k :h J W minOtes op the planning commission meeting held may 18, 1987 1128 ANDERSON CONTINUED Motion 3 - approval siTbje^t recommend preliminary plat Council^'for action.* Application referred to to rr”St^Pe;er^'’<^n*rtTs*.“*-^Woodrow Love and conceptually approved at the las^t variancesthe fire^^ r «HFtovea at the last review. she reviewed tne area of concern bv the t Mrn ck« f -tevxewea shoreline is erodinq and noted that the construct a seawall applicant proposes to site plan and buildina nirnr^^^ future. The commercial Coitmission's recomn,endaMon at thi’s* ™*eet’'fnV'°" ‘’^^""^"3 officrfor°rcaretake'y'a'’n^^ Plan designates an first buildinq olan tk^ apartment as in the premises would increase^the on the some direction frorilaLinouse. Planning Commission regarding this coSeZSld'hire“:°L”a;^“%‘V"''^^f<^ ^»e toning unit in the B-rdittrLr ° ^ ^si-luatial Bellows asked about the siding planned for the building. “a'i-nttL"nVf%*eVtoo“alpe«a?ce%rin^ prop?sirL*nVoapfng*^Mr\" inquiry of the.... p... "• r,‘.vr‘ brsilgh\lTdifferln^^ ®l®^ntion will provide a reouired'^^r*^ ® minute change toae a required secondary access off the roof deck. mm l^m^ L®JsI5 •JOM [•^T# L«V¥ ^•Ci IrnJUm IO iC«l H 9l mti«! [•ymiwi ^r«r«i 4TO^ ■i.-•-"Sc- TO:CHIEF KILBO FROM: OFFICER ENGLISH DATE: May 25, 19 87 SUBJ: Traffic Surveys for Cty Rd 84 and Old Beach Road 1. 2. Chief, Myself and several other officers have finished our traffic survey of County Road 84 between Fox St & Farview and also the survey on Old Beach Road The following disclaimers should be made: The survey for Cty 84 was for southbound traffic alone. Thf' stretch indicated in the complaint is comprised of a one block distance. For southbound traffic, the new speed zone (from 40 down to 30) occurs in the middle of this one block distance area. Therefore, cars going approximately 35 to 45 mph can be readily expected in this area. For Old Beach Road, it is a difficult road to perform a traffic survey on for more than a few days as become readily visible to persons who use the road with any degree of regularity. Working tnis area for more than a few days tends to throw off statistics as to the true nxjmber of violators . With this in mind, here are the statistics for five days on each road at various times and days of the week. on Cty Rd 84 the general norm to travel 25-35 mph. ^is was true in 185 of 270 cars logged (68.5%). 22.2% of all cars were traveling 36-40 mph. In 9.2% of cases cars w^e traveling 41-50 mph (25 vehicles). From these is apparent that there is a problem vrith people raaintaini g the posted speed limit for the area. On Old Beach Road we found that 81X (145 vehicles) within the acceptable range of 25-35 mph. 8.3* of the vehicles were traveling Ltween 36-40 mph (15 of 180 total vehicles) A surprising 11.1* of the vehicles we-e traveling between 41 to 50 mph (most approximately 43-44 mph). It.Is ^Is^t relatively high degree of speeding does exist on thi road. MESS. KEY Fe , c ■ 1 L NBR \ KJ9AKJIWJ rWUIWC. ucrMn • i ^NTROL NUMBER (OCA) CONT. AGENCY NCIC IDENT. (CAG) ^ / Fm , N I 0 , 2 , 7 I / ^cto \n I / OA^TE REPORTED (HPD) n.rr / 5 I Jr/ TIME RPO (TRP) ?c7 j5;>/ LOCATION GRID NBR (LGN)7T DATE/TIME REPORT MADE DAY: ISImItIWITIFTs // V i/fj PLACF COMMITTFO (Pi C) Om ^ L^IBR HRD SQUAD OR BADGE ^ <SBN) TIME ASIG (TAS) TIME ARR (TAR) T]/T -------------TIME CLR. (TCL) /I I i5'i/? I/I ^ 3>l/| i>-> I I/I 1 / L NBRTi/rs7 L NBR ISNB/ DOC._________ DCS:22sa/[3 UQC__________ UCS 111 I 1/i OFFICER ASSIGNED y^z OFFENSE □ JOR INITIAL£OMPLAINT Q OTHER PRINCIPAL: ^'<•9 < '^ptic/5 OA" QMJ 3(>, ZK Ai </y, 37,c/i ?i/ ----------------------------------------------------------------‘^--------1---------- COPY TO: CO. ATTNV □CITYATTK’Y. □COURT □CHIEF OTHER DISPOSITION: Unfounded Cleered by arrest Ref. other agency Inactive Other HRO Codes P — Phone R — Radio A — Alerm I — In Person V " Vituai M- Mail T — Other COMPLAINT n OFFENDER Q VICTIM Q D.O.B.BUSINESS ADDRESS BUSINESS PHONE HOME ADDRESS HOME PHO'JE OTHER REPORTS INCLUDED ' ' ................... Impound □ Prop Inventory □ ImpI.ed Content □ Accdtnt Report □ Tegt Q lnflu«ne« R*ppr, □ PhrTOi Q REPORTING PE RSON0OF FEN DE «□ VICTIM □D.O.B.BUSINESS ADDRESS BUSINESS PHONE HOME ADDRESS HOME PHONE SEE CASE FILE -ROLL CALL Warn & Release Dept. Assist Message Deliver Treated & Transported Advised Citation Issued Detail Completed G.O.A. OFFICER'S SUPERVISOR'S SIGNATURE :'.V City of OROIV »*• > ‘ •» > RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 2031 A RESOLUTION GRANTING PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVED FOR A property located at 2665 POX STREET application no . 1047 subdivision application the ^cAV'for ^ June 26, 1986, filed a formal property legally described aa Lot 5 n, ® Plab of a Minnesota, (hereinafter "the property"'); and^ ' Hennepin County, Minnesota Statutes^^4^62.358 e*t^^ s°eq^ and Thi^c ' «rth dfly 2lf l?86f Il'„hrc\°t7^:i a l'rpe"riof^ PubUc'he"ir?ng"o:1 this application were given the opportunity ®ifo'spe!)<’'rtereonr'a1;^°"''®"'^ Orono City °cf<fu^c^il^conside/e*d^ the^sThd*^-^"^ *“9P®b 1986, the Ku.lin, (h^ereinafter ???ii:fn“?in°dln“g^r FINDINGS DistricArequirLg^a^minim^^ Residential Zoning each newly created lot. acres of dry contiguous land withi* and ?.95'’'a°crts^of°"dry*® slch'"lot^ "t «®tlandcontiguous land standand. sfies the two acres of dry the^Ub?/ol cSrb Irts onto“ors1:rL^t'’but''^^®K°,®^ required 200 feet of frontage along a public roll without^^hVleiltf^"furtll"%l%\artes"" ^ots 1 and 2 aleamiurtllllplil IZHTot ^ rtitlllllrlrlol’bo^h nrtllfl that Lots 1 and 2 have adequate and all standards of Oro^o-s" ol-sitl'^slpUc lodl"^*'® drainfield, meeting PaoelnfJl Rim r*Tsi»i SI^sIiJ V --—• T T'^'l • f, -f TO Mayor Grabek Orono Council Members pj_3fjnin9 Commission Chairman Kelley Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson PROM: DATS: SUBJ: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Zoning Administrator July 14, 1997 #1148 St. Edwards Episcopal Church, 865 North Ferndale Road - Conditional Use Permit - Second Review List of Exhibits - „ « c o7A - Planning Commission Action Notice 6-16-8/ ?!5rencfo8e"no “ct“a; sent to Mt. Martin, representative o£ the loDircant, aarising of the church's options regarding day cate/pre-school classes use of their existing church school facility in the lower level of the structure. n written resDonse has not been received as of this writing but Mr Martin advises the church vestry has opted to allow the use of the existing church school area by both the Wayxata H°me Base and the Montesorri School of Waysata Bay. Both ^^encies shall be limited to 29 occupants (students, teachers, aides, etc.), the proposed schedule for use is as follows: AM 8-12 - Montesorri School - limited to 29 PM 12-3:30- Montesorri School - limited to 14 — Wdyzdts HOIU6 Bas6 - limited to 15 The responsibility for monitoring this joint use operation shall be St. Edwards Church. 1. Fire alarm system subject to the review and permitting of the City of Orono. 3 Exits designated as fire exits shall be appropriately maintained and clearly designated with signage for young occupants. ■■ f zoning File #1148 July 14, 1987 Page 2 Staff Recomendation - / ^ i To approve a conditional use permit for a day care/pre-scnool instruction class use at St. Edwards Episcopal Church located at 865 North Ferndale Road based on the following findings: 1, The proposed use of the church is in accord with the intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Management Plan. 2. The operation of the day care/pre-school instruction class would not pose hazards to the public safety or welfare nor to property owners within the adjacent neighborhood. 3. The church has ample, unused classroom areas, the community is in need of safe, clean classroom space for the instruction of pre-school children. Approval is based on the following conditions: 1. Fire alarm system, fire extinguisher and appropriate designation of fire exits to be installed prior to day care/pre-school class use. 2. Permit shall limit the use to 29 occupants, to include not only students out teachers, teaching assistants and aides^ e-/C • 3. Signage for use is limited to 12 s.f., a building permit is required for all signs. > s, • mS jil ZONliiG FILE NO. 1148 QjapY Qp ORONO ROTICE OR PIiMINIHG COMMISSION ACTION ciy'stal*Bly, MN 55323 473-7357 _ _ _ _ TOt Bill Martin COPIES TO: St. Edwards Episcopal Church 865 North Ferndale Road Wayzatar MN 55391 -_ _ _ type of APPLICATION: XX Conditional Use Permit DATE OF MEETING: 6/15/87 VOTE: 6 For Against Planning Coamd-ssion recoamiends the following: XX Tabled for reasons noted below W0TB3 AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS: Tabled at your request in order to provide additional time for you to review all available options with the Church vestry regarding the day care use of the lower level of the church structure. Under 30 occupants (pupils, instructors, volunteer aids) can be used in its present condition. Fire inspector to review required number and location of fire detectors, fire extinguishers and fire exits. over 30 occupants - building must be sprinkled - building can be used in its present condition. Staff will reschedule your application before the at the Planning Commission meeting of July 20, 1987 and will be referred to ?Se Counc“ for final action at the July 27, 1987 meeting. The ^^ition of your church vestry should be submitted in writing and received by the City no later than July 14, 1987. 1 1 To:Mayor Grabek Orono Council Members Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson From:Mary Jo Knott, Septic & Zoning Aid Date:July 15, 1987 Subject: #1165 Steven J. Fay, 3u45 Casco Point Road - Variance - - Public Hearing Zoning District:LR-IC Application: Frontyard setback variance to construct a detached garage partially within the defined front yard area. Per Section 10.03 Subdivision 9(D) List of Exhibits: Exhibit A Exhibit B Exhibit C Ei.liibit D Exhibit E Application Plat Map Property Owners List Survey Hardcover Inventory The applicant is requesting a front yard setback variance to construct a detached garage partially within the defined front yard area. Percentage hardcover is not an issue.(see exhibit E) The building permit was issued in 1974 and was under the 1967 ordinance of 1/2 acre zone. It is currently i.i a LR-IC (1/2 acre) zoning district. The principle structures on the lot currently meet zoning standards. After evaluating the proposed site for the garage, we recommend granting the variance. This is based on several factors. The first, and foreraost point is that this garage will serve as a storage area for a boat. Without the extra storage space this boat might continue to sit out side all winter. The second factor involves location of the proposed garage in relation with the existing house. The overall integrity of the house would be enhanced by the placement of the garage. Also if the garage would be placed back to line up with the house and accommodate front yard setback, the applicant would need a side setback variance. This would also increase the size of the driveway and in turn increase the hardcover area. The staff recommends approval of the variance as proposed using the following findings: 1) The garage will be useful for boat storage 2) The proposed garage placement will fit the design of the existing house. 3) The hardcover will not increase dramatically. Ti. *r>:.,V:/ f^^¥Tr \ LiA F 'i-i •WW' m Hardcover Inventory Existing house A 16.66* X 25.08* B 32.33* X 22.3* C 10* X 11* D 2* X 6.08* 417.8 s.f 720.9 s.f. 110.0 s.f. 12.1 s.f. Patio in backyard 12* x 25* « 300.Os.f Overhang of roof * 2.8* x 25.08* = 70.2 s.f Landscaping stones = total 731 s.f. 1* 1’ 1* 1* 2* 1* X X X X X X 114* - 90* = 70* = 94* = 120* « 114 s.f. 90 s.f. 79 s.f. 94 s.f. 240 s.f. 114* = 114 s.f. Side walk =total 560 s.f. 24* x 5* = 120 s.f. 16* X 5* = 80 s.f. 36* X 4* = 144 s.f. 54* X 4* = 216 s.f. Concrete wall 1' x 55* = 55 s.f. Driveway 70* x 17 * = 1190 s.f. Proposed Garage T!* x 22* = 528 s.f. Existing hardcover = 4167 s.f. Proposed hardcover = 4695 s.f. Total area » 17,477.5 s.f. Hardcover allowance (30%) = 5,243.25 s.f. mm # cl A I NO -VARIANCE APPLICATION uuue Kcc u <>. - y • y / Fqq H iso .Qi>Rece ip t ^2 c 7 Initials ^UG 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) L PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address CASCO Pu RO. Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) jp^'* Please check one - Is the property 'L^^^'^stract or _ _ torrens? Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. ■> *'« iC< APPLICANT Name N F A Phone (home) ^ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Phone (work) Address; PT Pvi^_ _ _ _ _ City; (, _ _ _ Zip; ^S'3V/ 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 DSE OF PROPERTY Present Zoning District Present Use of Property I Residential Other (specify) DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $ ^ "4 »1 ^ i-i.. _____ Lot Area _____ Lot VJidth Setback Variances ( Front Hardcover ■ i =* t Side Rear) Other W # n *> IV' I. IT • • f I \ •I *' .« * ■ HARDSHIP . V ^r nji_ - : { :\ 4<»- ;s W' S.’iV'‘U e'liVvac yuu,.4 DESCRIPTION OP UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS ^kZoning ■f io.'^'^A REQUIRED SUBMITTALS Completed Application Formfy. G Property Owners List of owners within 150’ (you can obtain Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Govt Center348-3271). stamped, legal sized envelopes (#10) pre-addressed to each of the names on the above list with no return address. Certificate of survey including hardcover calculations as required. Plat Map. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your variance application is not complete if the above information has not been included. Certification by Zoning Department that Variance Application is complete. Zoning Official's Signature_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Date APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay all fees and/or unusual expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. Applicant's Signature Date ^ / * 7OWNERS 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 _Date _\'/oio/}7 Applicant must have ail 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 unable to attend a scheduled meeting, to please make arrange- f" authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. % 4k « r 'ii *' Eh W U K inu: ct: S zo M Eh D U i-q < U ccu >oo Q < £ o 2:oa: o % u 0) >ou O 'C rH J*H rH fO Cl) CP OJ 4J ca) vJ (Ua CD (0 o Ma) >ou o u U fd fu x: o (D o OJ 4J X.c 0) ^ o < Q) a CU'-" T3 0)cn o (1) >ou (Uco Na'o o Jh fO c cu ^ -H Vh CP oc > •H o 4J U in 'O •H Vh X CO Cx^ ^ O Q) O tP*rH fO 4J X C Q) U < •!• Q) CQ U tj- a a > •H O 4J U W T3 •H M X (0 w x: 0)co N a •H CP fd 0) cd c •H 4J cn •H 4J X o W rH (D Co N c •H w PCocc COwg u: u << CQ u w c (0 N c o LO CN w U-4 W f\N (/) 4^ W 44 (0 44 if) in Io o in CN I in ^75 iww N c< 44 if} Vw fv> 44 <£\ Cr C r^ oo in Io in CN in ro a) o 6 yj 44 if} 44 if) 44 CO o o 0 rH 1 O O in CO co •H -p o 0) p •H o JKt 17 1 r .f A .. • . 1 • *j» ' 0' * ■“■ «k 0 0 CO 0 rH fH rH fd • >1^iQ Q) l*w % ■«..'v ••‘.NVV //)) nj C fd rH CD rHsx cd HD fH •H P X) >1 44 O o CP rd 4J O o 44 5 0) XI fd0) c c ^ O >1 o •H N rH -H 10 a 4J •O -H -H 0) 4J'd CO -H rH >: 44 p (d o -H e (DU ^ HD <U T5 (D (D in rH >1 U ro ^ X r' a 0) I •H 4J rH P e ro (D r- C O N *2 -Xc o 4J fO fd >o B 0)u c (D U 0) (0 fd (Du uc •H 4J 0)c oc a c cn «U (0 C Vj -H « O (0 0 X3 0) 3 w CU Cl-U g 0 tT> »w « <1 0 0) c c ox; M C W 0 -H 0 4J c ou •H (0 0 4J -H >1 Q4. r-t C rH C (U ta 3Cp-h u .h 0 <0 Q W C JC (D fd XI »W <1) •H 4J ^E M CT'-H M • 4J f-| fc CO 3 0 C >1 CO 5 p p C 4-1 -H - V •H C rH c >i'a <0 X « a (1) u 0 <H <1) w (D 0 0 x: N r-< w w u x: p 4i d 4J (D O 44 > P >1 o CD P X) U CP ® 'O fd CQIP -p c 6 (D >1 p x: X) *H 4Jo Qlu 4J u fdu Q)c (Do O (Da o O (Du c a 0 S4 XI04J10 ro c c d •0u03 c x;•H •H 4-)0 >4J d 0 0 H c 0 0 0 p 44•H 0^P if} 0 c u Ccr> M c 0 0 CD fd 0 M G) -H X)CP •H p >1u® ^ 4J E d p fd d r-i fd a E w P 4J rH fd X E fd p E 3 c C P > 4J tr-H c X 0 0 rH 0 0 CO 1 0 0 0 x:fd d 0 4J C 0 x:P CO c C 0 -H jg 0 4J 0 CP 0 fd 0 x:d 4J x:a P c •H •Hx:4J P 0 0 •H 4J P 4J 0 O >1 c •H fd 0 P U CO •H X •H > CO 0 0 *H 0 >4J ^d "O 0 T3 X > TD •H -U d fd P 4i H p 'O 44 X3 P rH 0 ^ rH •H C 0 0 rH U U 1 E r-*0 0 c •d 1 c 1 3 »4-l U cc•H C -H (0 rH 0 0 •H d 0 0 (0 0 0 N 1 CP 1 CP 0 u CO 0 1 ^ d fd CP 0 x:TJ •0 43 4J 0 4J fd c •H u 0 0 0 C € c c c 4J -H 4J 4->•H c c 0 >00 0 c •H fd 44 0 0 CS3 d u u 0 CO rH E •H N N CL P p 0 0 •H U C 0 c 0 P CP XI p 0 C TJ •H P CL *H CU 0 fO •H 0 a •H 0 0 CU 4J 0 >0 •H P p p p c (0 0 fd 44 0 •H 0 0 0 p 0 0 u fd 0 *H >€ > >>0 0 aT) U U 0 >00 0 > p p c < 0 u d 0 0 0 0 0 0 fd •H P TJ T)TJ u ax:x; 4J CO p O' P P P 4-)p 0 fd fd fd d p ^0 f-? 0 •d 0 to c >x:CO P 5: 5 CO •H 0 tP4J O' >1 tT''0 0 T3 0 P 4J u C c <0 3 0)>0 TJ rH u 0 'd •H C •H 3 *H CO 0 (0 0 rH 0 •H p 4J -H 4J ® 4J 0 0 0 ^ d •H X d CO X 0 > w axi a 0 ® x: *H 4J •H -H *H 0 P 0 .H <u X -H X P X P fd P rH x;0 4H 44 W 3 w T> w CU x:a < -P -P 0 0 • < • CQ • • 0 Q bi bi i-r -O'l > /1 7C.9'/. C /*r I i p: -N H.^ROCcx>tIti XTB S /-'N — I 7 c* JrJ“ **~ O *7 G pct.Kc? — / c<r ^ Qi'ij (Jf( • ; V- .V:.V-:.\ 70?y // . ■< < > <3C%0 Z CCC^CUc><^n(^ 0u0<^^^ » .XiMl. &MJU_ »•' '►:■•.--------1* .r'VLt_:- ;"-lrf’«i r . *. #■ .': rr ;io T 5; 7 - V.' U-. %..* i.— •>« I • • • * * ; * ^ . »kt rniM—mMh 1 ' liitir i ; ■ K> 3%5$IL lAl QC M IL s % i Ne S 3 Ki S O sgse w o K 9^ §s . Ul U M M P £ T |5 CM lA □ •H 5 ^ S o a tt S al b (D O iiS >-. K> cn M M ^ ^ X M K)ss»ft N 4 9 3 o S^5x«2^ f532*i§i» ID m SO M O K H »«) ?r t; • *N. .i; • I i »t u - Ul lii yj uj o•-« S p a o 8gi:i CM u «• n £in in i:j3"«• e^ U UJ u 7 g“55o Shuin n a ^ O UJn g g § o B a n 8 og *8gm o 8 O K» -3“o8S: :ii M in M <SSilsS in g u O <sgs *MlgK> o *j :j CM ^5 K» in in N U m s §* n M u iS siSSil c c P B ^ S UJ S9 § S ^UJ m CM O P ^ u31 _ in u M in >- £ > Io CM UJ o UJ o Z < Kl O o n a3li S m ^ in >- ^3 8 SSE M PO o CM U I 10 in B u < O ^H 2 »Ui^g to in H tt q: M UJ UJ ^ H H O B Ch s'" = ^33 CM p>« i^s p> ^ —Z O M BOBu o o > H O 885 H 3 lO < < U H P >- O < m 3 o CM B ® fc o z M ^8 S S M K>mo pmCM u >• >• a m I 40 << < N> < U. U. o O Ul UJfas o ^ B O M O am Kl CM I N O in :§ U Io CM O Kl fas 19 40 O ^ M M S 8 O ^ B C^ m H m a in BMr >• ' B O B B m o u s CM Oo •J u u UJ ti 55s z %s B B UJ Ul K> CM I inoUl »H> m < m Io CM 323, B B ° 15! •J CO (0 3 ^ 88 n“- < < CM H “1 “> i-H lO O o B CM M ;4S H UJ Kl CM I K O S H 4J < ^ m B -J < ffi UJ o B s'" ^ u *9 y r P-i u P-4 Ul*"1 _ ^ £1oz z u o sCM in Ul Ul Q CM O CL ^ °g fa CM O Kl O UJ o m B o < •n u b! < < U H o 3 CM >• ®3 B O § B OUl go •t ;:3 € 11 oe> No Ip «-l <<I o* g r^S ^ u •H UJ Ch -J Kl u in B inMuKl O Q B CM U < 2 =Si:;§* I ffi U < < o _ Z O H CM O *9 UJ < O B c^ N Kl «• 9 O >• J5?Su3RS ao K lei>- N B < UJ C dJii c I* c r c ^ »w. Sn 5" • 111 I lAl B ■ Elk>J CO i H (O 83 ^1 St E i £a Koo i i € € € € Ui ^ u.M oe o o € r r I hereby certify that th*.s Is s true and ccrrucL r‘‘;:rcaentati‘^r. of a su;"vey of the hci;ir.dari‘J0 of L«ot 5*^i Sprir^ Piirk, and th^t part of Ivy Place, v'icatcc, ios- cri>ed <!£ fcllovs: ae^lnnirg at the a>ost Northerly corner of stld 1/;*: 3"; thence Korth ftest along a strale^.t line betveen said nost !;ortr.2rl; eorror and thr* lasterl^ corner of aot 7c, Spring Park, a distance of 3C feet; thence fouth 37^ir* .^st a dlrtance of 147,cl fee*, to an iron narker set oroviously by others on the cent'^rline of said Ivy Place; thence South 4^.®04't3” !5ast a ciatv.nco of 7"^.'•'Z ''oet; thcrce South 25®2?‘3f«*’ Seat a dist.jnce of 57.71 f-»et tc an ijon .*nhr<-=>r set provicusly by others at the point of Intersoctiori of sale centerline vlth Southwesterly extension of the Southeasterly line of sail lot 57; t'erv'e !-ort‘•.asterly tc- the rest Southerly corner of said .jOt 57; thence Norih-er.terly t'* the nost Masterly corner of suld l<ot 57; thence Northeasterly to the point of beginning, and the location of all existing buildings Ihortor. It dees not puroert tc shew other. iinprcve»nt8 or encroachments. Scale: IbU : 1" = 4C 9-ic-ai Iron raerkor fouid Iron marker set Gordon h. Coffin ?y^Vr., 6064 l^'.nd Surveyor and Plarr.er long Like, Minnesota - .-sniz:. ±"=:>p' m * Tftees ' 1 Sl I i '3. -1?*^ To; Froa; Mayor Grabek Orono Council Members Planning Commission Chairman Kellev cr?v°»^ Commission Members<-ity Administrator Bernhardson Mary Jo Knott, Septic & Zoning Aid Date: July 15, 1937 Subject; #1166 Hartmut Ginnow Merkert ift^n t u- Variances werxert, 1840 Lakeview Terrace South - Zoning Oist: LR-lA Application; Front yard setback 4. Section 10. variance to construct a 2nd story deck per List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Application Exhibit B - Plat Map E^hibi^ D: Kr" Exhibit E - Ordinance 22 n ■ PermitExhibit G - Deck Plans 500-1000' Hardcover; Allowed 35% or 15 165 f Existing = 2,279 s.f. == 5.2% ' ^ Proposed = 2,696 s.f. = 5.7% construct^a ^econd^ storey ^deck^ to^the^^^"^ setback variance in order to Percentage of hardcover is^not an 4 southwest side of the home when the lots in that are^ were undir®?®* subdivided in 1959 notes that the majority of the princioaordinance. The staff current standards and are closer t-n <-h structures in the area do not meet proposed deck. The propos|rae°k houL w!t^ evaluating the 3 other^sidel of the ho^have natural screening 3 seasons out nf’ a area would . 2 feet from the houH and touid nL h» has a wellalready has a patio. The east side of the L‘’"'^"'i'=hed. The north side pipes coming out from it. Both the back^ and . ® ^he septic system accommodate a 20'x 10' deck. The P1 an^‘he house could applicant why the deck can not be olaied nn^ Com„iggio„ should ask the house that would result in a either of these sides of the resolve the questionI“dVaUng\?th ioca?Ln"n?-th” il able‘^| Staff recommends approval of the varlano^s a proposed deck then the reasons why this variance was approved. proposed. There are several JK Other houses in the area «^-'-s»tiea. proposed deck. closer to the street than the 4). Tne proposed deck would have a natural screen most of the year. MvU-Fi. V .■"»' ?5s??r^r; i\?ra iHiF mm • i •JA'k > ;T#RI iT.wum IP'.-I mi MTMWwiTfTin; mmmcE ft 150.00 X15Q.00m fou Oi/18/87 rvey, / hardship .esul tin, strict 7^ h *v -f f ii Svtu w:—IA ai C^ Oj i->v \ 1] ? ♦ \s i) i,J • * ( co^pl^„ith zonin',' r - *** «■» 4 ^IRBD SUBMITTALS ______•• _ ^ m»«b on the%bovVlilo"i4^oP®;ot“n^ddroVs‘'‘^'''®“®'* **='’ “* ‘hoi._r;r .. ....o.. The Applicant and Prooertv^'riJiil c..i,io.uo„ 0, doolo, ---^ . . . f^)9_0ffi«ial• s Signature_ _ _ _ _ _ _ complete. Amacwre • ^ ^- - - - - -- - - ftppj.xcant li02r©bv acTT*ooe ^ - ^ - li.i ■.:0 / Applicant’s Signature ®***^®HS SIGMATURB J -i _u_ / Date (-, *T> I . . .-5 -P'i^ » ^^Der’s Signature r applicant is unable to fttena""^"®K «"<i Councilments to hav<» attend a scheduled mep»^^nrr ♦. , and, if an Building a .oning^^^i^/e^-^u^rc^^n^^-pll,! ^tl.“{b^e4£H W» W K trict c- r /-< > I-11 •ning ±lJ1 :ain Iter the 1" = 50' 5-12-87 Iron marker a I hereby certify that this is a true and correct representation of a survey of the boundaries of Lot 5, Block 1, LONG LAKE COUNTRY CLUB ADDITION, and the lo cation of all existing buildings thereon It does not purport to show other im provements or encroachments. COFFIN & GRONBERG. INC. LieMark S. Gronberg Lie. No. 12755 Engineers, Land Surveyors & Planners Long Lake, Minnesota •fcv- .'i - • ( • Sj< •i 773 p6 130 w •> ClTy OP orono U')r-5 > I * ♦ {It) , > >^>m ^ • r •■' V‘5 * ^r**i r>,:'-:; -2 {,■> ?!' {») WOL ■eld ^E C oWaNY IKE Vie 5*3,v ON g'■'"•7: (?i-f J-. {3) r^) (/ A)>).*» , '•-V 0«) '5)2 ^ - f i A ^ ^ ' ' V- ?■ i7x‘ ® N <i3( •X \ O'*) / A \o K^lo* (ll)-^ 4* 0 4. J f^5j na, ' y' /•’ >?>y,v, Q L i j -‘X. L ~ -__^ ^mmMA oSkr i.irr^ vV s. S' .'^ X -t V? API (?^ i • ■'/& ,•? s/A >1 v-^’v > ■ »« ‘.i v'^,. /'I C.X 'c;-. < I 3 (/ih /A- • t f • “ i^}0 1 ■» . c J* /=fc-^4212: t' /’^r: \ \ >■'^/ r>\ /*• ms^. ti \ Preserve Iho ii!« T ®* Rcsidonlial Build- ing Lois WHEREAS, the Village of Or- ono has no community scwaco system and depends upon septk soil .-orption s>4! tc^ for the dispo-^^-l of waste; such disDosal metnods are apt to create a *cr- lous problem affecting the health of the community where applied m residential areas serving more V^HEREAS^YkuEAS, other communities have serious healih problems by reason Of the enlargement oTres- lot e/^ substandard Inli by septic tanks systems; and whereas, the Planning Com- mi^ton of the Village of Orono has recommended to the Council sor^t prevent the samesort of serious health problem Orono^"''*"® ht=uk^ the general welfare and health of the residents of the daft of°Ihii' 'V'" '''"<‘*0date of thu. ordinance, no build- g permit shall be issued for the erection of a residence in any resident.al zone of the ViUare «cep.i. upon^a^uilding lot c ac^and area of one ® minimum line'- bu ilding, therf Y'l thattncre are several built up resi- are suLS ^'^^ige whichare substandard and overbuilt W , frns of this ordinance In be^sued'f permits may minfl ^ meeting the minimum requirements estab- ViHaee ‘hevillage Council feels that such building Will conform to the gen- era characteristics of iho neigh- hoihod and will not have an im- incdiate and spccilic adverse •■ffect upon the public health. the?If°" “ recognized that the enforcement of the minimum prov isions required by this ordin ance with respect to lets held in time 0* the passage of this ordin- a.ice might be an arbitrary depri vation of a valuable right irom said owners. Therefore, where a Jot which fails to meet the mini- mum standards of this ordinal-I^e held in a single, separate own- pfMiip at the t*me of the oas- afnai‘‘y^ ordinance, the Coun cil may issue a building permit Provioed that there will b^no immediate or specific adverse ef- ect upon the public health. ’’''rcer'Y^ **li ordinance su» e-rccucs and repeals any provi-“ru" 'i'»rdiL«ror-on.,n ordinances of the Village w.uch are inconsistent herewith except tnat provi..,ons of S ordnances establishing higheJ s-andara.s than those prescribed in are continued Scctic.n 5. It is recognized that the establishment of definite -pnndards for all lots in the omire t illage is impossible, as Xre ?c?av^tk ‘" torola.x the standards, or to en! torce stricter standards Se Cornell reserves Its discretion to a7d?hcrfh ‘he standards hereby set for good cause wnc-never the particular facte of t.he s^'tuation convince the Coun- cil t*iat the public welfare particularly the public health re quire such modification. ' ordinance shall lie aid’ Minnetonka snd Jk if k ^‘■’>'^^ta. Minnesota, iv ^uDon ” he effective immediate^ ly upon such public “ion. nf Village Council ft ' ilage of Orono this 12th da.v of October, 1959, by a vote of 4 yeas and No na^a. H. R. ROSS, Mayor Attest: O. E. JOHNSDN^erJt (^10-15-59) ’ ' I Y* Y/y ' C> % ^ -1 » 1. •' . ^ . *A k.#< • • . * ii * Jk > ( Y’l- ■ 4.3'»W5 c''mL: : i t^.'^Wf.. - £ 1 !r '.■■ ' ':::^ ji- X ''f% </A 7>7rr?^iV / ■ r > ti >v j I>^ ♦ y f ^/■4 * t /(/—i rax’TaaL f)\^/ ♦ -r-.*• ?!►«'7-.J N/V^'iL ciBlxaaj- <7\-'7jY^)J -> .•r^ <c;5ii,?ii:a-L '•\** ___I P/f ;h -b ■f -Tj/>k3r-V/l?d CJ3LLVSr3*X ‘i-71 ’^;> arr^sc"--!!■•'I :-lu .:3cz::3( '. «w I Y%> .i^I ^i^''f' G7 “ / cj-Sisartu / - '<7'ai "ai "7 < R ■Ncr *>' r^'C i, • t ' 1 • 1 1 •■4 • • \' if . ' • ^*. O- *K-' - ■ . ’ / r • ’ . * , 1 ' V ^•••. ^ , ■-• . :«...- --------; ! Ik'IK .-. •. ^v./»Tv Tg^ •\W 1 t'.v V -'tA •* * > .,*! # « 4/> ♦; <* » ^ ’r '' ft j* • • * t J Ti li b3?S=* r- >. J r. '^sk 2&. . iW-™ .4* -r '. # <WAT-%-ri Mi.-. . m. ✓ ' ■ ► i -ir-»'r ; I<f •»' #' \ 1 *wt ^ > i Humimn '^V;V -' ^ • •*. . r 4 f ^ Tox Dates Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson Mary Jo Knott, Septic & Zoning Aid July 15, 1987 Subjects #1167 Len Bachkes, 2813 Casco Point Road - Renewal of Variances Soiling Diets LR-IC Applications Renewal of hardcover and side set back variances to construct addition to home. List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Exhibit B - Exhibit C - Exhibit D - Exhibit E ~ Exhibit F - Previous File of Variance Application Council Meeting Minutes Resolution Variance Application Plat Map Property Owners List 0—75' Hardcover *= approx. 300 s.f. = 6% (no change proposed) ./ *• * 75-250' Hardcover; Existing » 2,361 s.f. Proposed * 2,696 s.f. (1% « 91 s.f.) 26.0% 29.7% (No change proposed from #1028 review) The applicants are requesting a renewal of variances in order to construct an addition to the west side of their home. There are no changes in the plans from the variance resolution granted on the 9th day of June, 1986. Staff recommends approval of the variance app'lication subject to the findings and conditions set forth in the enclosed resolution. l•I•}cfcJ•l ^f#r« l•T•T=1 .h’ • ».r .^l j> V- . ... 4»»** ,V'. ^ r; ^ »3 C/ ^ ^ ' U. C ^ •* c N r -^t V : * :r. >■ * *k yn i\ ^t -1 >k • 1. 4-) ( t it 0 ^ n. c V* ■J t’ - . •' 4.' <0 <'i r» V 0 L. • f^as r* > >•0 •» 1 ^T)t iin• •^ «4* •*- • «i•• * i«»»* , c * • .♦c*J\► - tj *rn ♦V i 1/ . ^ '•1 il. c ••V •.. .. 4 •« '-• #• *, f - I. X r- ^ o V ^ c . o a c — X- 'IT • O Q. r, 2 2 £ ^ ^ ^ -- ^ n § i: t-^- O L. c Or! . c s ^ ^^ ^ f ^ O r, t; ‘5 c .« ^ t.‘ .. iu o ■ • s •- r; ■< '• o s O - -- m '•'• ^ O --•HOo r '•^-I JT) 4 - •- .1 A- a: « ^ « 1 4T'- -4 T.7 t.1!If*.r'* L. r» a. C 0 V • < ' •>•r»0 .. 4 H 0 »• • «-» V r: 1 w « C j n G C c • • w \? O « c >• • c,50 tc 3 I 4^ 1) v/: o I— a: 4.) I ti c ▼ ^ •.• 0. L V c *3 V fo :. M *— 1 w *^ ■'■' -J c:•* .•1» V r. . <v ■*■*‘ c .> c i:U ■•''« . r> • w ©cc t. ^ — G*r t' 0 0^ C !? 0 ir 1U < HI c iij -< -S H t- 1- c i2 0 c 0 X 0 :o ^ v« -4 4, H #-* 0 0 "k. S?' . • \ .5 ■' r.-!,; ' •II •' / / / / / / • •//vv vb ‘Vj *1 * ' t^’5 ’ ' • . • . ' ■ -i. ^ t'-. ^ w- V < » f • ■ •. ••• / * * *■ ' • • ] /r* f‘ f.^** . : *'• *. .1 ^ . :■ . V • •'- ••• I'-* I ..v;--.. - *■ •' ’'"‘(31' • ,' M'.■• •"'>- •.•* •Nr- r’ '■%i5' / U </*. « i 0 / '■'3 }. 8 ■3m 9B9i K ^ 1“ -♦ .‘4 '' mt>Ji ... V ji^.-'T? ; i urn m;: yrwEti >Ja?/7T I o«rai^i^Knr;i :B:n •lfW« •1ft Vtl •»•![•Ktl m A A\ w- ► — I '‘i I ' Vv i. H MINUTES OP THE REGOLftR OROHO COUNCIL MEETING HELD JUNE 9. 1986 il027 PILLSBURY cont:inued object to the weflf ^^e neighbors Acting Mayor Adams stated that hp» fon- ♦-i, was very attractive however! the Coun^ff proposed wall all other wall requests that may follow this^reouest'^if CoVcrimeX!%a"lerel'\"o"7p?o%e1:re*h^along County Rd 15 tn tho height variance variince al ‘o^ngXaLe?tf lotnrid"^' ''"'^ht de1fgn^''L'"fichf !ff >^®<=°nsider their_______ actXtaLn!^^ Councrl's comments. No further ^^4A0^^y LEN BACHKBS 28x 3*casco point road VARIANCE RESOLUTION #2007 mtttirf S^^hkes were present for this v«LncrrXX°\o®cn"''1.'^‘*''r the minor t'J'J hardcover increase in the 75-250' a?ea b) 0 ^ no faX^!e\%\-irfbJe°X It was moved by Counci Imember Hamme^el secnnri^x^ Htp #1029 LEO CLIFFORD* 4760 NORTH SHORE DRIVE VARIANCE (RENEWAL) resolution #2008 ^ouncYlmXber Hammered “X adoot^!,'’"'' ^^oonded byrtro:!'k%-^:Xys°0^ - xxx-ia'x! 11 te other neighbors sed wall cons•der quest if to find 1 is not he voted » unique tided by variance e height sr their further Dr this i minor 1% (91 b) 0.5 house, ble for ided by drafted ded by #2008 ances. City of ORONO mm m RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 2007 A RBSOLDTION GRANTING A VARIANCE TO ZONING CODE MID SECTION I0*2S' ^ owner Of th^pr^ert"^^ tJ^ereinaf ter "the O.ono T 1 rN n _ 1 rer/ 'vacated ;rthe"lgrstrt the property ”); and County, (hereinafter ot tHe Side lot li^e „rr%^ a^?o7o"irs “e^eee NOW. THRRWrtBB _____ 4. iy required. Minnesota: BE IT RBSOtVBD by the City Council of Orono, findings 1- This application was reviewed -,- v ■lewed as Zoning pile #1028. ^ _ _ _ __ 2 , —- -nj,v^o. Residential^zenin^Diee^ill Single Family bakeshore May ^9* *1^86° Commission reviewed this - haJed upen^le fol l-TuTf^n^/, - -"pto a'amfl! Pottirn"or«readmon°l ty only forOf the existing *>°ose i ^ Fv\ ^ j(? _ • . ^ removal ara hfrdTOw"eredeeff.''®" readily feasible for f^-v ^ t f V. > City of OROIXO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 200 7 th#» Council has considered this application includincr lTu\^r% V/lll prop«ty“« conditions existing on this not mere fv " Other danger to neighboring property; would Seoessarv L af^f ® convenience to the applican?rbur is nootte, ^ alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty is necessary to preserve a substantial property riaht o/\hf>. applicant; and would be in keepinq with the soi 4.^^? the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. ° CONCLUSIONSr ORDER AND CONDITIONS oran<-«: a the above findings, the Orono City Council herebv 2lo- sefbaci °z^one ^hllV'V'nlyTsTllA'' wh“re"a^ir1^oot'fetb“i i® from th? sidefollowing conditionsf °*^ normally required, subject to the =»„u‘.r. *.53 u%"/;‘sv.:r:rrrs j; ss be approved only with concurrent removals of existing hardcover. advised that the boathouse structure at the f non-conforming structure and is subject to the Applicant is further advised that the l«rtt^6%“and°n!f °7”' “ stout 300 squarlin n^Vc;. ^4.^ additional structures or hardcover are allowed the 0-75 setback zone without approval of the City Council. granted by this variance run with the property exercised b^^tfnT'^V permissive only and must be thi date of 1 building permit within one year of Page 2 of 4 m- op5*^ onbm WfT5 Mura l^lTm [•ra# o«ra L*r«ra Mira ^ ■ ■■ ■■'j;LsJ / 1 . »i OBONOj City of OROrVO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 2007 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) ) ss. On this _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _day of the parsonCs) described in and who executed the foregoinq instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC //, MY COMMISSION EXPIRES # STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) S S • COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) « On this /7^_ _ _ _ day of ^ a Notary Publ^ within and for said County, personaYly‘'appeared ——['• _ _ _ _ _ _ __ known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as hi^* (their) free act and deed. 1986, before me ^ SSS&-' ■ -J // /7S7 MY COMMISSION EXPIRES Page 4 of 4 •liHT •XO yjmsrmnf 3- : V:. . • %m : mm •W«l mi [•r^ra ILLLil£l^Z£LL fO XE 75.00 .15,00 YOU T15:l3 )6/25/S7 HARDSHIP Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty resulting from strict enforcement of zoning regulations:_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ DESCRIPTION OP UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe unusual property conditions preventing Code Requirements_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ * f1 ance with Zoning REQUIRED SUBMITTALS 1. Completed Application Form 2. Certified Property Owners List of owners within 150' (you can obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Govt Center 348-3271). 3. Stamped, legal sized envelopes (#10) pre-addressed to each of the names on the above list with no return address. 4. Certificate of survey including hardcover calculations as required. 5. Plat Map. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your variance application is not complete if the above information has not been included. Certification by Zoning Department that Variance Application is complete. Zoning Official's Signature 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 Icnowledge. Applicant's Signature (J.Date A OWNERS SIGNATURE The owner hereby ac)cowledges 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 Yh. 0 Date u/?\ A•/ 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 on applicant is unable tc attend a scheduled meeting, to please malce 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. red or and/or es that lis/her further Itants, estiga- ore the on the )eduled if an rrange- Ise the 3 TJ.eg S a <H P-4 o^oo(1) -P CO o o<^ s P-4 C C lO c; -H in oo Or o ►-fO 0 o U.'y' ‘ft I Pros: Date: Subject Wayor Grabek Plann < .Members Orono Kelley ‘ --nistrato. Zoning District - lr -1c Application - Vari*a« ^ construct a 2nd-s°tory^ th^''®' average lakesh W-t Of KKhlbits ‘-’-e-season porch’a*„d'®de|?!’°"®I*iat of Exhibits ^ B: E^t S : ^ne- Eist E^hfbi^t p : "sta^/T, «d/or Non-obiectlons On Survev «;k Exhibit 0 - calculaf Hardcover and Average Exhibit H - Elpva4-<Z '-aj-culation By stafi^ S,‘SJ J : '■■■"“■ ■ Section 10.08 Subdivision 3 VlA»ft4. wm_____Paxtinent Pacts; - Hardcover Existing 0'-75* 75'-250 250'-500' I-akeshore ’o Lake Setback 235 A1 lowe<? 9.6% 45.3%0% 25% ^^SEosed Variance 30% 0 (No Change ) 20.5% (No Change) 25' 25* 110 NoneDiscutsion: ___ This addition ___________ i es by a " about VIS s" Ail© Cxtv T aThe Cit “«i^acover. —s.f, «atT Vs "5"3“3rrpermitted in lon^d addition entir^^ ^ variance approval 1984 before that PolicyVas iV^fl'eVt'; **^'>“'’9 “„°aV ¥ Zoning File #1168 July 16, 1987 Page 2 of 2 proposel'porih"and^deV/ wTlrSlse^ a* 25?" «j;"°aohment. The This has a potential view encroachmeni- encroachment. properties. The Elsen's at 2879 have stated no neighboring their lake views across aoDllo^n^^o ° no objections, and staff notes along applicants southeast already limited by the hill slightly encroached btthe^thrL^t«««n views from "qos might be by the leek since ltweL•^%t llrlct^gher ‘:'°"“" taken* Ip ®by“rastio?Mned^^^ "C”' 75-250' hardcover is plastic undL'^rock^beds alono the ®*bensive driveway. the erosion - applicant should Iddless this helping to control net increase in hardcover Planning, r-« *• there is only a small decrease overall hardcover on this prop«ty!^°" ways to Hardship: deck lll“g ?Srrake “s\di o^f thirhoSst^^'^Thl^la^fck®® "^’inally an 8' x 22' out to. This "g^ru colsileled rhardL?n “l%‘^°°’^ variance to allow ?hl ^loosed sfo I f 0^'’ ^rant a on the property ‘s What harHchir^ * * ^dditional structure hardcover variance'’to'lv “lage la^VsholO's^^tb'llK" lustrfication exists to grant the Staff Recoamendation variaOOOs“fo “r“VoOs™ToTtf*??riroooOL ®"‘' *''®'*<»®can de»,. ..8trate to the OlanninO “ '^''e applicant justification for the prooosVl il adequate hardship and 10.08 Subdivision 3 (A)*^ attached bhe provisions of Section ftel iiriTi • 1 • "A* ^:T#RI OiC«1 m1^*^. --^ TO. hardship ^ .Scemenfof Practical diffzoning reoula+-i«no . Desor^brun^^oaf Code Requirements f ^ndltions prev« ^quired sobmittals i- Completed Application Form this Yist^from^Hen^nf'^ r^® owners348-3271). ®Pin County Department < nam«®on' tirabovV l!sw''tV°'’®® P"^'«ve list with no return addi Certificate of survey including hardcover c 5. Plat Map. remember ^that your **variOwner mu*-t sign t "ot been in^cltdedf^ certification by’z”n7n‘rD;pa%%""r;ha'rva";ia7;;' Zoning^Official^s Signature ^plicamt ■ S SVGNATDRE - requesteV'jfy \he*^Zon^ino^Ad*’® Provide all unusual expenses incurred in rev^®’'’'®e°'' the information supplied ls7 ^PP^lknowledge. ^PPAied is true and correct Applicant's Signature OWNERS SIGNATURE authorizes *reasoLble°ejltry ®onto “tagents. Commission member«^ property by tion and verificl?irol“hi:"leql|||'" owner■s._si_gnature th^"d^"® cSleslon Meiting"'^Vli° i"^° ° reiltw"re7in°/s"rf“ t"he"‘pi ^P“-ntsTuir be"p applicant is unable to Itt.id""^"^. an Building S agent attend Wnra V f’ . •i.: . KlKMfF TmJmT^TZ^r:^ ISLlVU •BT3 ?IM( V'7F- ' V/'-.. —-•* 1 * . JUL-9I98T July 9, 1987 C>6t(/ 0|J OA.ono 1335 South B'LOwn Rood O^no, MW 5533/ Attn: Mji. UichaeZ P. Ai4t6tant Planning 6 Zoning Admini6t^uUoA RE: Land Uie Appttcotcon <^//6S PeoA. M^, GaiJjjA^n: Wc (tovc puAcluu M the. ^peAXy iimedO-xely adjacent to 2S95 Caico Pocnt Road on the ueit and nonth (e.g. 2S79 Coico Potnt Road). ”^‘'5 T“‘ ptoiM ion a tlLCee oeaion ponchand deck additcon and have no objections to the paoposed conitnuction. SinceneZy, h I LhAAy c/nd Kathy Et&zn 710 Kings view Lane. Plymouth, MW 55441 Home: 471-0064 (tto^: 522-6683 Hew House Phone: 471-0684 JMk. M ..., ;f>. f'Vr I r'v ’ ■ ■ ■r 4- WKt. ^ V X'" 11 < IH lA •■ - 7 mtii rJKfjni y*0:- Ki*taTii 0iiwam r€f«fara IK '1^ V ’ / mm-.:K' Mmu] ill • ^. . •w«r«i m V Ji 1 X rw ( /0/D6> Subd, 3. Variances; Issuances. A. In considering applications for variance, the Council shall consider the advice and recommendation of the Board and the effect of the proposed variance upon the health, safety and welfare of the community, existing and anticipated traffic conditions, light and air, danger of fire, risk to the public safety, and the effect on values of property in the surrounding area. Before granting a variance, the Council shall hear requests for variances from the literal provisions of this Chapter in instances where their strict enforcement would cause undue hardship because of circumstances unique to the individual property under consideration, and to grant such variances only when it is demonstrated that such actions will be in keeping with the spirit and intent of this Chapter. "Undue hardship" as used in connection with the granting of a variance means; 1. The property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under conditions allowed by the official controls, 2. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his property not created by the landowner. 3. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. 4. Economic considerations alone shall not constitute an undue hardship if reasonable use for the property exists under the terms of this Chapter, 5. Undue hardship also includes, but is not limited to, inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Variances shall be granted for earth sheltered construction as defined in Minnesota Statutes, Section 116J.06, Subd. 2, when in harmony with this Chapter. 6. The Board of Appeals and Adjustments or the Council may not permit as a variance any use that is not permitted under this Chapter for property in the zone where the affected person's land is located. 7. The Board or Council may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one-family dwelling as a two-family dwelling. Section 6. Ordinance Section 10.08, subUvision 3 (A) la hereby immediately adjoining property. (9) The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the distict in which said land is located. . of the applicant. (12) The granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate desionstrable hardship or difficulty. i/ » • f July 14, 1987 Michael P. Gaffron Assistant Planning & Zoning Administrator City of Orono Box 66 Chrystal Bay, MN 55323 Dear Sir: I am writing this letter about the planning commission meeting on Monday, July 20, 1987, and the Item ^1168, Richard G. Helstrom, 2895 Casco Point Road. I am concerned about the variance few the Helstrom item because my property is set back from both my neighbors on the east and the west. If the current set-back ordinance is not strictly held to I am going to find my home even more set back than it is now. It is my understanding that the set-back requirements are in place so that houses like mine are not cut-off from their views of the lake and lake breezes. I’m sure that all lake shore owners would like to improve their homes with better views of the lake, but if the zoning requirements are not held to, theWproperty owners that do put on additions will continue to expand their homes towards the lake. I would appreciate it if the Zoning Commission would consider my property placement in view of the other neighboring properties and would hold to a strict inforcement of the current zoning requirements so that I am not deprived of ray relative position to the lake shore. I hope to be at the July 20th meeting; however, if I am not, I would appreciate this letter being put into the record at that time. /^Sincerely, Ji K. Bowers 2905 Casco Point Road Wayzata, MN 55391 JKB:am ■]_ _ _'1 H i * < TO:Mayor Grabek Orono Council Members „ Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Planning Commission Members City Admin;strator Bernhardson FROM: DATE: SOBJ: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Zoning Administrator July 15, 1987 #1172 Christine Beck, 3820 Cherry Avenue Variance ” Public Hearing Zoning District - LR-IC Total Area Required 30,540 s.f. or .7 acres 21,780 s.f. Lakeshore setback for all structures ’^a^^existing = 15' (storage shed) proposed = to ’ ^ removed b) Listing = 37 structure c) Listing = 34' (steps, deck - accessory to principal Structure) variance =41' or 55% proposed = 27' variance = 48' or 64% in.22 Subd. 2 - Lakeshore Hardcover 0-75' - 0-75' Area= 11,250 s.f. allowed =0 ^ ^ existing = 1806.6 s.f._ or proposed = 1751.5 s.f. or ♦For more information regarding hardcover, review exhibits F, G & H. please List of Exhibits - A - Application B - Property owners list C - Plat map D - Building permit application *5172 E - Survey submitted for Application #1172 P - hardcover calculations G - Sketch of existing hardcover H - Sketch of proposed hardcover I - Plans for deck VJ Zoning File #1172 July 15, 1987 Page 2 the^City granted approval of hardcover and setback variances within the lakeshore protected area f?fnt l^ne^/the home. Staff cannot confirm if the "overhang" wa« ever removed along the lakefront of the home. It not appear to be a condition of the variance approval. The garage had to remain as a single story with no residential unit to be installed within the addition. The findings were noted as follows: 1. Reduce hardcover within 75 feet of the lake (removal of 2T*s*t^'i?oture is non-conforming - placed on lot prior to lakeshore standards. 3. Property is sewered. S?thin 75 feet of the lakeshore. The total for the hardcover to be removed is 509.5 s.f. providing a final reduction of 55.1 s.f. or .5%. Staff would note that in reviewing the hardcover and area credits that you are aware that the wetlands areas are included in the area credit against half the property is made up of wetlands. Please note, the proposed addition far exceeds the required 26 feet the^wetland. In the previous review f conservation & flowage easement over the wetlands area, would recommend acquiring an easement with this review becau of the sensitivity and extent of this wetland. Issues for Consideration - 1. The application involves new construction totally within the lakeshore protected area. a) Is there a feasible location out of the protected area? b) Is the proposed reduction of 55.1 s.f. of within the protected area sufficient? If not, what other structures~hardcover can be removed? i Zoning File #1172 July 15, 1987 Page 3 c) Can the structure be reduced •* pulled further back from lakeshore? Staff would suggest the following alternatives: 1 - Deck area leading from lake front door can be reduced to 3 feet width or in line with projected edge of lake side of residence. 2 - Steps need not access at higher lakeshore elevations at proposed location - steps should not encroach any further than front line of principal residence - note the elevations at the front line of house or at lakeshore of existing patio are at some higher elevations. 3 - The entire deck now relocated to east side of house could also be reduced from 21'xl6' (patio is 16.9'xl2.4'). Is the deck at 21'xl6* more acceptable if entirely relocated behind front line of house, on the east side of home? Note the drainage flows to east & south behind front line of the house. It is the policy of the City to consider a spaced wooden deck total hardcover. The hardcover of the patio area shall be removed. Portions of the retaining wall may have to remain beneath the deck in order to provide stability of existing bank. The entire underlay area of the deck must remain in natural, undisturbed, non-hardcover condition. The required width of spacing between planks to be reviewed by City Engineer. Staff RecoHBendation To approve the hardcover and lakeshore setback variance application of Christine Beck for the property located at 3820 Cherry Avenue based on the following hardships and findings: 1. The house was placed on the property prior to standards for lakeshore development. 2. The wetlands along the east and south side of the property place restrictions on the building envelope. 3. There is no feasible area for the proposed deck out of the lakeshore protected area because the living areas of the house are completely located within the protected area. 4. The majority of the surface runoff from the property flows to the lower elevations along the east side of the property. The break in drainage occurs approximately along the front line of the house. The majority of new hardcover will be placed behind the front line of the house. I Zoning File #1172 July 15, 1987 Page 4 The approval is subject to the following conditions:& 1. Existing storage structure to be removed prior to construction of deck. 2. Underlay area of proposed deck to remain in natrual state, ground cover to be restored - retaining walls that remain to provide stability of existing bank. 3. The applicant must remove additional structure/improvements within the 0-75* setback area s.f., within the 75-250* setback area s.f.. 4. The deck plans shall be amended as follows: a) Deck adjacent to lakeshore door limited to 3* or 4* (front line of house projection). b) Remaining area of deck shall not extend beyond front line of house - this included area of steps. 5. Owner to grant conservation & flowage easement over designated wetlands. ■■i Bfgrwiwiiii Zoninq File #1172 EXHIBIT F HARDCOVER FACT SHEET Hardcover 0-75* — Area * 11,250 s.f. House “ 1297.1 s.f. Pavement, steps = 58 s.f. Patio “ 209.5 s.f. Storage structure » 242 s.f. I i ; \ I TOTAL 1806.6 s.f. or 16% Hardcover 75~250* — Area = 19,290 s.f. House = 96 s.f. Attached garage = 699.4 s.f. Drive *» 3220 s.f. Paved walks, steps » 119 s.f. TOTAL 4134 s.f. or 21% TOTAL HARDCOVER = 37% Hardcover Removal 509.5 s.f. Proposed Deck - 454.4 s.f. Proposed Hardcover Reduction = 55.1 s.f. or .5% mmmm '■1 T",; :r- ■ •'P.f . ’ '1^ i U r I . . ^ .— — .If fr 11 7a /■j-t / <-’'4 //7^ uace KGc•u Fee Receipt_ Initials 7^ x'7✓ CITY OP ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION («0.00 per each additional variance) PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) 3^ ! Please check one - Is the property _ _ abstract or Attach A torrens? included on requ^J^hOTVTO^. applicant Name Jlkt. ff, ajff i// _ _ _-r City: //,, V OWNER (if different than applicant) Name_ _ _ _ _ _xSCOryx-C^ Address: Date Property Acquired _ _ _>^ot) also own the adjacent parcels of land. PRESENT DSE OP PROPERTY Phone (home) f7/- CHECK TL 150.00 CELEIBlzJimLYQUPhone (work) 06r'26/37 Phone (home) Phone (work) City:Zip: (month/year) Present Zoning District Present Use of Property Other (specify) Residential DESCRIPTION OP REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $ s'errnt^_k:' Lot Width Front X Hardcover 4- Ser^i.^efc Side Rear) J HARDSHIP ; • Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty resulting from strict enforcement pf zoning regulations: DESCRIPTION OP UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code Requirements: ^ d3UIRED SUBMITTALS 1. O Completed Application Form r 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). Stamped, legal sized envelopes (#10) pre-addressed to each of the names on the above list with no return address. Certificate of survey including hardcover calculations as required. Plat Map. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your varian :;e application is not complete if the above inforroation has not been included. Certification by Zoning Department that Variance Application is complete. Zoning Official's Signature_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Date APPLICANT’S SIGNATURK 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 / ^ fir/d Date (> ONNBRS SIGNATDltB 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 l i tc/ A''Date V- 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 ing & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. r ■ O O 90 H ni 1! m ^ m ui H f (.r ( I i xH o2 -0 m Tj m > X]N -< _> rn Z a XI >3XI m s 3 Q ►- f- •• 0» 5 ® ^ 2O H 0) O g|S= ? U1 g s>Sz:r ••I uiwgm X M Sr-i* 3 ^ U C. Si ^ 01 H H m m s 2SS8 0.33 in Q in 9 M m ^3 m r- n» o vn c > 3 O St I o<e I >03m > XI ► s z s 3 SStl*- PlStS"*s~ss 8 M » r-3 Si^g:! 0 0>1 CK'"« XM •<4Ir* w S'"3 t o 3 f«5*SS M (A o> e2S5g J S = -33m Min Q m M in xS > MM m *“3 m o — o 3z > >: x5 E X :! oSi ? 5n i> XIN -< >► m 2 o o XI > a 3 g” ^ 3 n (/I o uN > M H W2 H > o>n: -< H u_ m w o 3r- ?S 3 ms S! 8 8S*=*SS^ ^ 5Q| - iS«5 i H ns X M ►- m -< 3 i: 3 SS5=*S}g °ss *S33^1 i |>*Z- S3 Sr Mgn, 2 m j § r m o j> s ® (( -.-<0 3 z > :; 30 E X r! o•« r«2 *n m -g rn > XI^ - fc> m 2 OO X > o2 5 XX m S M Q ►- r- •• 5?M 01 O — ®O IsSs. - H ► X X ►- 5 •• c. n30 X ^_ m I in M T» n# g ► J2 ^ gi *n n 01 o ^ K •< H U a ms $ 8 8 ( iK X 3 -a m > N •< 5^ao•o S"*o 5 g gaX3 8» isiigii aSiz a M ns o o > OS I CO m V X §••“Sr X•<O X ns m 5 w fSSa 8c:inin > 3 ^ w u Q m «o X > iSoo *- m 2 Sr-i:m o iM oS!i X O X -< m n ►- Q X ^ xc m Ins^ m 3 w S w 3'"So »2"S»sts-s aSir?Z nf > ^ 2 m £ Q N* X ui X -< •• Q m I in z X ns in > m X yi M > > o M SooS®OS M ,a3S*S XOICOQ^- X M M Z ^ . «K r- r- n I in r- r X nsin > > W X m m iA I- m a o CO5n X XS oo cn a >Hm st nss i^i < r» ^ m M -< W (0 ;$oo 04 ' 1 8 Sooons c Ul H d S !S (01 Xm 9 •H Sx 0) S3.‘ s c. .11 sffc.7.rn7.R ? • f ' iM ♦ ‘ V !v i- ► AY. ^-----!7—^ ^ •’ V- «'^'^ » "^rr 5:^» s i.i -1 :: - Co • ♦• .• - - . • ^ A « t•■*wta3>o- r t -*:• CHL A ^ - s ,• 0> <.*•. %,'•, J-l-------L.- ; • ■-------J U : Ji,l *' X V'^v ?-,••' i- ? ^JL. «•.'_ , I 4k^ • ..%v ,. ^.-;. .., .: y-; ' ” t ^ ‘ '' ' “ V=" ■ - "\. i . I . ., s '4 r 1^ maple ""......... _ > I _ 8 p Av . =4 fl, •••V, *f0 t|#/; / ...\f^ ;ur.‘-'^- r- !• I *■ i»f 1 • •* I ' .V i// / ;» T7T / \ V \ W ' \ _ >J* H V f I \ V * f\> y • • •; -I ' -S'. ■'4 5^i Ov. * . > > •%\ »<“*'.iij. r.. 1 If ! j ^ iI i ^ i ^ f Of oaorio building permit application 2 BUILDING PEMUT APPLlCAfl Pwulrcment* to bo handed in with Building Terrait Appli 1. Building Permit Application - to be filled out 2. Energy Calculations - filled ilM. I fi ^ 3. Purnish Septic Report • Desl^jW’ • ^ WOI • Purnish a Certificate of Survey, including hatj^t^^r calculations and grading and drainage plans as t4Sjired 5. Furr ah 2_aeta of Coastru*etion Planes -- - - -jL^T^irecJ. a) 1 set for City to keep on file b) 1 set for s4%e Construction Plans should includes !• First floor plan. 2. Footing and foundation plan. 3. Elevations (of all sides). 5 -actions.5. Details - stairs and any special connections. ZONING DISTRICT ira ABOVE IHFORMATIOM MOST BE SOBMITTED BEFORE PLAN REVIEW T«s Wor^yond or without a required inspection will S^uSj^eftfa^alty SITE ADDRESS, rxxrw.(> t A. , FIRE DEPARTMENT PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION NO. (PID) LOT-S-^-jT .block ___^ jaU.flM. cy-//T-e-i SUBDIVISION(^i.^y.VvwV.t fSA-r POST OFFICE (Phone) VAR. DATE OND. USE DATE Zt-CU.C.ZofS) NE~ Vi. Twr't ( wi OC'i _______ ^T »- lAnn ARCHITECT/ENGINEER - Must Certify Multi-Family. Commercial & Industrial (:onstruction Plans (Address) (Phone) LOT AREA BUILDER fsUil (Firm) WIDTH depth (Address) p. . _ . 3 ‘>4^ -------t^A(?Pt.'H7fc*v (L.\-\~0 hi'cX V5»''iQ:. TYPE OF WORK New Addition Remodel (Phone) 77 1-7.? XX PROPOSED SETBACKS: FRONT R. SIDE REAR Renovate Ki' s fs... . -S ieo Tc (i- C&icViiD L SIDE LAKE WETLANDS ICONST. TYPE U)cco Q^X. ACCESS Existing AGENCVt City cty State approval DATE(S): DWELL. UNITS GAR. STALLS I ATT. DET. BUILDING SIZE AkVucx . L* ■ W. l(. STORIES B 1 Estimated Construction Valuation ^ S.CCO. PERMIT FEES SQ. FT. NUMBER OF BEDROOMS N) A SEPTIC APR DATE HMottOVER Existing %: Proposed %t PROPOSED USE VcOfi, Ml GRADING □Staff App. Date □CUP App. Date COUNCIL APP. DATE OCCUPANCY CLASSIFICATION BLDG. PERMIT STATE FEE PLAN REVIEW SAC CHARGE SEWER UNIT PARK FEE PENALTY OTHER REMARKS:. /iM Kf. Ci?ni7M r Ta n^.;^ I. /.a. ^ fA ^ *^StlAf IT I > - 1 . i-k /•? #• "r*- -e rV iO ^—— --------1 aVikB UtlekL^g ^ Ki^nt iXtD OlL IWSPECTION REOUincO O.............fOOTiWO b«tor« POUF □ ....rRAMINO rough-Mi □ ....INSUiA^lON O.............WA4.LBOAAO t>#fOPO tftptoQ Q.............riHAl boforo occuponcy □ ....SiTC IHSPCCTION vyoRK BEroNO OR without a re quired INSPECTION WILL BE SUB JECT TO PENALTY NSPECTION8 Must be called in ^4 HOURS IN ADVAf^CE. WORK REOUIRINO SEPARATE PERMITS PLUMBING................................□ MfCMAMlCAL.................................Q •P«U............................................□ SEPTIC.......................................□ SEWER.....................................□ WATER...........................................Q ORAOiNO A EILLINO..........................D................□ hereby inakea application for a building permit for the worit described, agrees to do all work in atrlrr of^the“sf%''^n^ ^!?f of the City of Orono and rulingsBuilding Code Division, and declares that all tacts and representations stated herein are true and correct L/nlH)r Date /A 4///A--/ /7>T//^ Signature T- e Minder . Cngineerino Co. ENGINEERS AND SURVEVORS LAND «UAVftVlMO • CIVIC tb MUNIClOAC tNOli C4ie-5CT*‘ AVENUE N. MINNEAPOLIS TT. MINN. KE 7-5C37 SOILS TtSTINO LAND PLAMNirslO f..* A ‘.- ' yIr. ■ 1 r.v4* > iiM / ^ i I ' we Heatsy cfaxiEY that this 15 atwjc amo correct represcntatiom of a suRvey^oF the boundaries of the LAND ABOVE DESCRIBED AND OP THE LOCATION OF ALL BUILDINGS, IF ANY, THEREON, AND ALL VISIBLE ENCROACHMENTS, IF ANY, FROM OR ON SAID LAND. ^ .. MINDER ENGINEERING CO., INC. ^ f \y^ _________ A, r% 1% ^ ^ y CMOINHMIS^ M(0 SORVOYORS ^ u 7 ' y- -' //' >/- i\r ■ OMEO this ,4^ ^ -i-.- O' land ftURVEVtMO c.v,u fc v,^N,c.P»c ,np .mm».~o AVENoe N. WHWK3EA.POL1S *n, MIWN. KE 7- 5<b9T SOU-S TtSTiMO LA.no puannini © CcR»inffi<M ii« «if t ^X!^T7h€^ J/m - /5 J I / - /// 51 7.'4,.' <■-»*» 4 /•», 5^1 ^^**^*^ V/3V.&.«V ' • " ' ;t* •k-w •> Vl\/'€ /'V / .} i. /I t t I 7S f I .jd ‘•‘*‘ I ^5^V- / I I Ifl t ^---------------------- • 1 ** ^ ^ * -,-A-r AC li <u)DvEy* OF the bcu ^jo^a 'ES the£:r; r;r-v, . a«o ... If Miy, fttf>v\ OR on swo t>NP, KAU sOLR EMGlHLERl^iG C0.,1NL. / tN«i»ME9'R?> ^**0 iURv»YORS OMtO ----0^V /j-.. /, «' * r ^ ,^i 1 ■ io.1^- la' --------- I MiNDBR Engineering Co, AND SURVEYORS H ENGINEERS LAND •, CIVIL h. MUNICIPAL* fW^IMltaiN* e4l6-SG^'< AVENUE N. MINNEAPOL S TT, MINN. KE 7-5CG7 •OILS TESTING LAND PLANNING #f ttiir'TGy O ^ ^ • •-• ** ' f»/' ^ # ? >v -,r m ’rf # ,> •• t J?- V J'r-'f / C'^y' - wTh CWSV cTuTIfY TMW TH<5 IS » W .^.JTmkICT ttPtJseii^WlOM Of ». SUBVtV^Of THE BOUMONl.ES of THE LWO H50VE OEStRlBEO Mm Of THE UWH)M Of ML BU1UHH6S, If fMY, THEREON. M»0 fU. VISIBLE EHCHOfCHMENT , If «HY. f«r/i o«« sno u.no. ^ WUNOER ENGIMEERINQ CO., INC. OMtO TUI*»UAV«yo<LS ^ <y y- .Y^ r ' ::;:a«ieBg::^nagai^^ ^ ^____1 't ^31 A m Xv 5' 7 7/8" ;■ ;. . • .r::;;.................................. ;.; .. :. .-.y\ .:: >. :;. ,-:j: \.; ^v: :;.x:; x |i| 16‘ 0" I t^l 27 ’ ^ •I5'8 .s'.:V:':, ;: . X...•.. ;: : .;•; /W'-;;. . ..,■ 5'8 LHlStinQ H0US6 ::X: S’.».•;:'»‘i ■«* « 2'I ••ir:?? ^ . . . ... .. ....... .. ............ ... .......... ... , , i-.::fv:7 »..***..* j^SFront door ttoopBiiliieSili^^ 5* 4' —•Illiiliii^illS frost-proof post footings ■frost-proof support beam footings :■Joist supporting double 2h12 beam - 2 h10 floor JolstSp 20” on center 1 ' ^ f /V TO:Mayor Grabek Orono Council Members Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson FROM: DATE: SOBJ: Mary Jo Knott, Septic and Zoning Aide July 16, 1987 #1173 David & Tresa Gardella, 1230 Orono Oaks Dr. Variance Zoning District — RR~1B &nnl ication - Front yard setback variance to construct a detached garage within their defined front yard area per Section 10 Subdivision 9(D). List of Exhibits - A - Application B - Plat Map C ” Property Owners List D - Survey ^ ^ \ E “ Photographs (to be presented at meeting) The applicant is requesting a front yard ®«tback variance in order to construct a garage next to and Th#» house was built on aS acre wooded lot (see exhibit E). All SI ittl irihe Irea are thick with tall vegetation. Hardcover Snolln issue After an on-site evaluation, it was noted that the proposed garage site is in an Thatowner to the west does not have any buildings on his lot. Ttiat !rt las observed to have areas staked out ^hi and driveway. The future house site would not be able to s>e oroDosed qarage because the areas between the two points are heavily wLded and have an elevation difference. The garage’^ site is level and devoid of trees and ®hrubs. “ ^a natural screening of thick vegetation around it. If the proposed aaraae site could be placed next to the other principal structure ?lln’the applicant would need a side setback variance. This locltion ll'^not feasible because the area has would require major land alterations. The ea would not be an ideal location for two reasons: 1. The slope in that area is steep and unfeasible for a garage. 2. Once the vegetation would be removed to f a garage, the neighbors could see the garage from their house. The backyard would not be ideal due to the location of the septic system. * \v Zoning File #1173 July 16, 1987 Page 2 Tho Planning Co^jnission should -. the aPPl^cant^ proposed garage will be. Please note tn^ ?L"\pp\icYnt ex^res^ed^a desire to match the garage design with the house design. recommended for approval. 1. The proposed site has natural screening three seasons out of four. 2. The slope is level in the proposed area, therefore, no grading will be necessary. 3. The propos^ed ^he detached garage will not 4. The proposed garage location will have a minimum amount of land alterations. -i. n - •‘V V,c. ■;V- V A I * .uacc i^cc u ('• /-Foe / * /'■ 11 _ _ _ _ _ _ Receipt Initials X ! I 7.5 CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION ter-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) _-_ _ _ _ _- PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address i?-^n Omno Oaks nrive. Long lake.._M]L-----553^ CITY QF DIM FimCE OFFICE i 3002000^ Oi CEH 150.00 Property identification Number (P.I.D.) J.5-119-23-34 0010 i^q^qq abstract or v YOUabstract or j-j5:20Please check one - Is the property - - Attach legal description to application if not included_on_requiredj«^^ applicant Name DAVID T. & TRESA GARDELLA Phone (home) A7S-7nR6 Phone (work) — , ^ . f!itY: I.nnp Lake. Mn, Zip:_^356--------Address : 19R0 nmnr. nak <^ Dnve------------________________ll___________________________ OWNER (if different than applicant) Phone (home)_- - - - - - -■ Name SAME Phone (work) Address:City:Zip: Date Property Acquired Jail. (month/year) I jjdJWiC (do PRESENT USE OF PROPERTY Present Zoning District Present Use of Property not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. RR IB YFR Residential Other (specify) • 3 Describe request in detail; nn hpar, “ please n- - ^ " .arrh ^Aeqdired y Lot Width _ _ _ Hardcover Rear) Lot Area Setback Variances (Front r ’Side other /M HARDSHIP Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty resulting from strict enforcement of zoning regulations;_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code Requirements: Heavily wooded surrounding home, Large trees, slopes on_ _ _ side of home where garage is suppose to be._ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ RETIRED SUBMITTALS 1. ' Completed Application Form ’ ^ 2^^ fcertified Property Owners List of owners within 150* (you can obtain ' this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Govt Center 'lyy / 348-3271). Stamped, legal sized envelopes (#10) pre-addressed to each of the names on the above list with no return address. 4. Certificate of survey including hardcover calculations as required. 5. / Plat Map. / The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your variance application is not complete if the above information has not been included. Certification by Zoning Department that Variance Application is complete. Zoning Official's Signature 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. —7 - - - - - ,— Applicant's Signa^^urc Date 0 7 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 iJi//. 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. i \_ t 77 L / S' 1, "4 'TT-^ i^SMw / 7% ./ ? DUN • / % 'S- 'h ^i4Rftot&^>-^: JtTj f^rr— V- ' "■ 1 «>.J4 ^ -tv/ r- <A4 1 ,' ^* T '4W • ; • H W * ;■ =r*de\! C» rtis \ .♦. *• V Jh I ■*3^‘ <0 m u 1*4 ai •i* 1 ^ «•*- * . * i^H 1H4J •0-4«*«l ouTLcrr A • ’45 4#‘C - v,l S > -^1 >.7. ce'^o I I jji jj------------ ''• * »• > UNDAWOdp V ZND^ ^ '■ ■;■:, !• '.V '’-Z / . -^7 LIN( • u lU. ill AWOOD *<."5 INOa WOOD .. 'X»' \ -\ (. q,M^f l m 5rv-^ ( Ki lA Ma. ill o r- Ula r lUiIh- 10 \ < o o o ao <fK> CO <o Ul UJo > cr M < a ID o Kl CM I CO 9 25ao I lAm o K» CM < 10 312 5^ § K O lAn lA lA 13 wo MOO •• > K) 2 < CM O ^ o oo >A CM I CO I lA fO a a COoo HI CM I 10 3p"’sBgs:10 5 Kl Ui M «• UJ ? 5 S M zo g e « S CO M < D UJ W O < o >- u5S^ Oo 5 2 ( V lA tt V V UJ S“|5^ o CO CL a UJ ro o u u 10 UJ UJ >- >- UJ UJ CM X s ^ o u w oo fO CM I CD 9-. O 2g“K3§g ‘« CO 10 w fSi Si a a CO w UJ UJ N ^10 CD lA CMoo Kl lA CM IcO !f! 9 “Ibs ao 5 S''a < u Ja UJ a x: K Q Ula M 3 N K> O O < UJ -J VC CM o a Kl CM I CO Ul »o a lA Q Ul Kl n X Lo a < lA u -J > H O lA >A CM N Oa n5 CH M^ a o o u ttl: Zz :xC«c a < X -I -Iu oM pa w X o^ o o M -J o Kl S3 CM g § *D lA Kl lA lA K> CM I CO u -J CO V V ^ UJ Ul25gi I lA Kl CM lAo CM O o *’"’53V >. Q tiling UJ UJ O O CD CO <J -J a a g a MM o 33S§ U U CM ^ aa D < lUr ao B a o a o X a < >• N a 4)( a u a r O H ooo K> o o •< CD WOw Ulu. lAooo Kl O CO ^ tt a *0 Ul UJ lA §23“‘ K> CM I 10 —I UJ UJ UJ < < 3 £ I lA HI <H CO £ C X Ul < S9i^^ CM N Oo X g ^ O O CO _ DC a M ^ ■ " f kr [QiiUilnn i f I t s M CL 9 S w“-i UJoc N S tti § O O I i (c a H a tn O UJ U CO H lU ^ H I/) tu ggs=Ui u. u.H a o o ■ » . ■ r. r ••■<t .:.'■> t '. i \ \I r o ^ IS ? .T 71 V-/ X s’* X X A > \ fM ly ^I « > vj 'sV • ^ ir'-^ •f 2-'«-^ hk^. w r "•' ■ .n.»" ■ .f^t> <. V* ‘ '!-• -• jf ■ :# ’X-' « a C v -fc VL*^ V I / ^ y ' j-'ip t: I •» "T >1 -■''' *l-l . '• ; r^^'l tjpJLi • r» ' '* ^ * .'i f»', ... ' v/ViC V. >1. ; Pli? %# I- '#!»'? 7 ' </ ^ V h ' ^ , V . r •iy”« ^ V ’-t/ ^'•* "O o o CO D) c/> * I TO;Mayor Grabek Orono Council Members Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson [jP FROM Michael P. Gaffron, Assistant Planning S Zoning Administrator DATE: SUBJ: July 17, 1987 #1176 Richard Putnam, 2765 Casco Point Road Variance - Public Hearing Zoning District •• LR~1C, 1/2 acre sewered Application - Hardcover, side setback, average lakeshore setback variances to construct an addition to existing residence. List of Exhibits - A - Application B - Plat Map C - Property Owners List D - Conceptual sketch of proposed site plan E - Survey of existing development F - Letter of non-objection from C.W. Peterson, owner of property at 2755 Casco Point Road ^ . *.1:4: G - Hardcover calculations by applicant, verified by staff ! I - Floor plan ! j - Code Section 10.08 1 SuKl. 3(A) [ Pertinent Facts - i \Existing Allowed or Required Proposed Variance [ -Hardcover 0-75' ^ 75-250' 250-500' 0 36.4% 85.7% 0% 25% 30% 0 40.2% 48.5% 15.2% 18.5% -Average Setback Encroachment 6*O'25*25' -Side Setback 2'10'2'8' Detached Garage (changed to attached) AppTi*ca^“ proposes to attach his e/isting house and <letached aaraae The garage is currently 2' from the lot . ine He notes L might have to replace the garage to move the garage further from the lot line because that forcrthe removll of a larae maple next to the proposed 3rd garage stall. He also notes that the trend in ^^e neighborhood is for garages to all be at the edge of the lot, so visual spacing^is maintained. The required setback for either a detached or attached garage is 10’ from the side lOv line in thi zone. I Zoning File #1176 July 17, 1987 Page 2 The proposed deck and screen Po-h^on^the tL^Tve^a^ge will cause an encroachment ° house that is located to the lakeshore setback. 'h^orhood 2755 Casco Point Road, is rear of the others in the ne g plumbing removed and is ?nS^^ e\i;tur?lfb^y Mr T^P^^^^ed^^o^rl/rTt^^to^n^f^or^ objections to the proposal. The hardcover variance is a result hardcover removal a ^>lus in the traffic's Per-Ptio; w^th the *;>ousl addition Lrtrrn"^‘-3.8\'’\n^9^7?n.the 7^ “r^/re^se'^n ^h^"d-cr:r^:n%h^^ non-structural hardcover for structural hardcover. setback - Although the house «^^i“°"|hVia”rdshirts that rre‘’xTs\V for a third stall legitimate? Average Lakesho^ Set^ Zhlrforc%rthrA^sue"fs"no? in 1hha*” the neichboring house that lorces tn a-hie a Ifn; with tje - t „"etthor^s^^^on^°o“hTe*^^^ ^«n?!ai%u?urf relocation of "the neighboring house create r^justification for granting this variance? or 0.41 acre in a This is typical of hardcover in the 0 75 s- ^4 4.„a4-inn or is it the norm?Casco Point. Is this a unique situation, or is it Is 25% in the 75-250- zone reasonable for this property olh^s Mke it) or is a variance appropriate? Staff Recommendation - ooion review the application infe^es ra^e-riiereiect^on 1-08 ju^^. j(A. “cove^ and'’a^"e«ge lak"eshore"setback are present. If so, a recommendation for approval would be appropriate. I ♦*'m Incite Koc u y %' Fee ______ Receipt Initials Optn !Cr- 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 applicatioT£JTY OF ORDHO After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) FINAHCE OFFICE - - - - - - ^ 01 QEH 200.00 ^ 200.00 PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address FtoloT U-IA^V^XM Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Please checlc one - Is the property __OT abstract or w yn»»rtfs IUL* torrens? Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. APPLICANT Name Phone (home) _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Phone (worlc) _ _ Address; Qot^T/2u^. City; Zip; OWNER (if different than applicant) Phone (home) Name Phone (wor)c) Address;City;Zip; Date Property Acquired t^rm.(month/year) I (do) Wo notj also own the adjacent parcels of land. PRESENT USE OF PROPERTY Present Zoning District /-P- ~1 Present Use of Property -Qru'.it^Residential Other (specify) DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $ ''k^.Goo Describe request in detail; i- VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area Setbac)c Variances ( Lot Width Front _ _ _ Hardcover Side”^ Rear) Other P/L^ .mJ I !: H7aU>SHIP Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty reisulting from strict, enforcement of ^zoning regulations; Tly^nrorcement or zoning reguiarigns: Uy^ DESCRIPTION OP UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe unusual property Code Requirements;_ _ _ _ _ nditions preventing compliance with Zoning 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 (#1C) pre-addressed to each of the names on the above list with no return address. 4. Certificate of survey including hardcover calculations as required. 5. Plat Map. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your variance application is not complete if the above information has not been included. Certification by Zoning Department that Variance Application is complete. Zoning Official's Signature Date APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay all fees and/or unusual expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. Applicant's Signature Date OWNERS SIGNATURE The owner hereby ackowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents. Commission members, and Council members for purposes of investiga tion and verification off this re<fue5t. Owner's Signature Date Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council, and, if an applicant is unable to attend a schedule'' meeting, to please make arrange ments to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. * >'■ V % I t-i ' I’' o Sf in to eg M CL HIo < CL r-i Hi PC Ciu o o o 10 •J N § g- O Z M H UJ Kig lO o eg u I (D N < *-4 U in a UJ H UJ CL 2 O in QC UJ UJ CL I O CJ 10 UJ rg > ^< lO lO < a UJ UJ CL UJ uto: a 23 u u o in 10 ^ C^ CL eg s § o ^ PC o H o Z M in ct UJ K UJa to p eg u. to eg N |Ni4 ouin <o I o eg CO to lO<r N ej o ^ Z «0 D UJ in a cc UJ PC H _ UJ Z CL UJ > CL UJ Oa 2 l- K> 2 10 M lO & ouin <u in in 10 <T N. eg < K < N >• <z o o Xu ly CL PC £ o o ^ 9o z y 3 pc < UJ 0. UJ CL Z 2 cMT5r« (( o eg CL o H O Z J M < K> p H eg CL ui Ss I— mz m M lO m o UJ eg u u I in M < z P-« L) u- ‘^5 I o eg ^ Z UJ aJ CO eg O K) O Z is* S o ^ -j r>. ^ o N < z eg 3 o o in h* «o 10 o o <rm oin c e iD ‘ Q CO z ® to Z M to o eg z K> o eg u I in N <u in>cu M Z in z -J UJ UJ UJ eh Q m z in o _ eg to CO CJ to o UJ UJ outn <u >1 M < < •J -J UJ UJ to CJ < HS u o M M > >. UJ UJ a N Z ® fco z M to p eg & •i ^ CO a LC ^ z m o eg u o “ 5o >. V- Kl Z 2 10 «• < M lO I • K^g o Z M eg g g »o eg I •-4 I o eg 3 O 28 Z UJo M a < UIo M8Z 5 ^M K1o m U lO o u J55 Sgg^§ eg O h- O 8 s z K eg O o o K o o az 'I X M UJ li ^ : 1 < >- < < o3 to ^ 4h>>• fc y z tz: XH a H a a O -JUJUK 1 a X cvj 10 a ^ ^O' a lo M N H ^ 2* 5a eg Z 2ro o a a M 3 o h- a zH Z O ii U.O i UJ z Si«i Z < UJ a UJ zii^ (c < I I' ((('<• !* r R. A. Putnam and Associates, Inc.// / u. ! X ^ ^ ^'7C -r ; ^ 'C-v'V'3 1 Bdta Prairie • 7640 Marked Place, Lake Hidge Office Park, Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344 • (012) 041-4383 Minnetonka • 2765 Casco Point Road. Wayzata. Minnesota 55391 • (612) 471-9682 jjiatittgiibaattMA r» mI c: ^ HARDCOVDI RBOTLATIOHS AHD HORKskm ^f n A. JL V ' 'ii HARDCOVER ORDINANCE - In lOT*; *.k- «______ th. p.rc.nt.9. of lot .r.. th.t c *n " ^ *" ««"*"« U-itln, .»ch .. root,. drlv«.y.t ,idU«k, .tc -urf.c. Chardcov.r-) . lake. Studl.a hav. .’own th*k aVdl,!;/. lo'-fa within 1,000 feet of from highly urbanlied areaa have a d.^rimenVai^l ' *r carried Into the lake Cleaned by filtering through gra...d or ..getated';a?d*‘ar«^"^%Vor%"rt“r“ \^e" ®* HAIJ>C0VER setback zones - PERCENTAGE AT.Tr»«gn •>' ‘X* l^xechora, go_Bardcover le allow.d .r«‘;urr..... “• ‘i'si™ “ v:. r. •- “• '••> .nvrs, -is,s \r.“ LTU-,;n™.r ■“ '••■ . .. . . . .. -■ ■« .1-......... C.HOW TO DETERMINE LOT AREA WITHIN EACH SETBACR »n»n» /h. u hardcover percentage calculations)- - --- - - - - - - ** ‘**"0">in«tor in all I a 0—75* Zone Area - 75* x /Average width of lot In 0-75* *one\ \ measure parallel to shoreline J ft. - (Avg width)Area of 0-75* rone s.f. (1) II. 75-250* Zona Area - (175-or avg lot depth In eon.) x/*vg width of lot In 75-250' rone! \ neasure parallel to shoreline ) 7- -ft- -_i2£±lf__o.f. (2) (Avg width) Area of 75-250* zone 175* X III. 250-500* Zone •* Araa - (250- or avg lot depth In rone) x/hvg width of lot In 250-500. zone! <-Z.^ -^5fT X . ——- - -ft. - —/ 1^0._ _ _ _^a.f, (3j (Avg width) Area of 250-500* zone ^ vrj. xuu in d:Du-^:>uu* 2one\ measure parallel to shoreline ) ■ri IV. 500-1,000. ton. ^ (500 or awg lot depth In zona) xAyg width of lot In 500-1000" zono\ V measure parallel to shoreline 500’ X (Avg width) ft. « I Safa (4) Area of 500-1,000* zone I , J -ms*- i !r 1 omirnPOVER rXt.COIATI0N SUMMARY A.B. Lakeshor* Setback Zona Lot Area In Zone Existing Hardcover In Zone 0-75* -250 ’ 500-1000 Bt St i^g>o 8f hardcover limitations c.D. Existing Final Hardcover Proposed Percentage 1 Bardcover (B/A)xl00 In Zone —- - - - --- - - - c> %O sf 4'^^^sf sf / %sf E.P. Hardcover Allo%#ed Percentage Hardcover (D/A)xl00 Percentage — O %0 % 25 % 30 % %35 % C_L^ _^€0\^ INCLUDES * Structures with roofs Decks» oven if slatted Sidewalks Driveways (paved or gravel) , i „ k« Decorative landscaping areas underlain by plastic sheeting Tops of retaining walls# rock walls Any other surface that does not allow direct absorption of rainfall into the ground E. OTHER LAKBSHORE REGOT jlQEl SBC. 10.22. REGOLATIOBS FOR FAMILT LAKBSHORE RBSIDBITIAL DISTRICT. regulations shall apply: -LR-lC-1- one Family Lakeshoro Residential District tne roiiowxng T o.«.4tt The set: bftck fro® the shoreline for buildings on adjacent and nearby lots. JuhVn 75 « lirZt ToT,': rl;ooo‘J:.ro7 th.".weun. t^er. .h.U t. no ,r..ter tH.n 35. hard cover. nuhd 3 Tr.. R.BOV.1 Regulation.. Ho tree, within 75 fe.t ot the Kith th. alamet.r of alx (6) inch., or .ore shall be renwved without flrat obta n a permit from the Council. . M s •H IQ c •H U, oo *0o > § 0(• • rsl f, J3 o o- <::> <s 0 c •H 1 K •O 01 *D *0 < Oo fH «c •H Xi £ C ••S §; c u Qt >o ’ iII oc »-)l »J 4J M •H Kba *D Ol COaou Ot Eh U X COlu: o 3: ooo •H Joom \ zo Kl Eh, < D U < O o 0 in 1o inM m ^ %4• • tO %4 Q «M 4^> O*§’•I 8 %4 m %4 tt tM 8 rO M > O U QX < X m Jo co «co M 0) Mo kl •Hu c •H o *D 6 OM klm Mo O'c 5 4i CO /.H •I 2 O CO 3 £ "I ■ 1 ‘ 1 1 1 9 9 1 1 > 1 1 9 9 'I -1 I i ■n1 1 9 1 .• 9 9 1 J ■9 j:; 4J•o •H « K 1 f K K X 1 K X X K X 1 X pi X 1 X • X K X X i-X length• 1 1 0 5 3 01 IQ .*1 rH a c • •H , •~i ^ Ch M Of tn kl <0c Oi > •H M Q 01 *0 •H (O \o •H Jie 4J U o rH « -W 10 n ^ « o a 01c o> <0 « o 3;; *= T3 o ja n kl 01uc 4io Sii n nil< t:-' %4 r oo •I 0)m 0) • M •I w O •D K4 « X fy\c 4J tf) K CO M iO o H < C-o < E- O c c •H •o 0) •D •Dm oo o Xi o U >ou•o Utn <rc 4J in •H K M I r u >oo•a k4 ro X rH co •H *o*o < JC Xi TJ •H X >1c Q Uno < (U A X iJcnc I E O 4J M I i O •D 0) > O E tc JZ 4J •V • » CM 1 • •A s 0 CM 0 • Cm • • CM 0 mm rn 0 1 \ 1 • V)0 i 0 U B 1 B B o 1 1 o XMu X u IM to CM <Q ifilr § •a Qt >o 6 0) X 0)ua o H b. cn 0) o 4J •J < E- O wa; >ou•ou O!CT'c •H iJ CO •«-l K U 0 c •H 1 ^ 0 oc •H r3 01 T3 T3 < Oo rH o JQ O H Oc •H eii> O'c H 4J (0 o >ou•o fO X X 0) •D <0s.o 0)c •H Mi oc oo 0 1o >> CM 09 • • • • CM CM Cm IM • • • • e 0 «i o «M f 0 • • CM Cm • • 0 0 CM 0 Cm 0 Cm 0 • • • CM CM Cm • • 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CM Cm CM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Cm Cm 0 0 0 0 Cm cm 0 § x: 4J T3 •H u Xo M X M 4J O'co r-C 0 0 P u 0 O' 0 M >0s 0 > •M M Q M 0*o •H to O •H ^o 0 0 0« O 0a 0o 0•oc o C *H •H 4J O' to tn c M 0 *H CO M M 0 0 *\* 0 0 *D 0 ^ c P x: 0 p 0 Xto >o CJ Q X < X 14 0x; 4Jo o X M Hto M X 0 0 0 0 Tl CM 0 Cm •a < H8 :L.-0»'V«r. <> t JI ua: CO o:o 2:o M E h < D U u a:u >oua K*xre 14 O O |4 Q) > O O•ou 10 £ tJtc •H 4J co N c •H jC .P •H 2 •»«4 X p H <0 p 10 0)u < p O oo p H U 0» >ou•ou 10 OSi ^ „ j c •H P U) •H K M » fO ir' O O O Ioo in /r^O 0 in 1o in CM 0 in CM 1 in tM m in I 9 Co o 9 p 1o p •^1u c •e' p 0) 01co M u T) P iO BB M Om p CA Crc •H P 0) •H 01 CO 3 Otc « 01 <P 10 • • IM IM • • « 01 o Ip • I'J 0) w < I-o •o 9 •O *0 9 0 P >ou•o p COtc tH <0co •H P •H TJ X < n x: p•o •Ha c a o Q IM •H •oo to CO >o jC ptnc p M u>rs \ O H B 9 tu CO 01 O P go H P 01 >oo•o Ofcrc •H p CO •H Xw • • *M Ip • • Bi m 9 m 44 n CO • • 44 ip • • m CO ip 9m 5 ^ 0-a 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 widthS' 1 K QrsJ 1 A X M X K K XC . P v3 8 \ 01 iH ^ tj ,p • • CO CO • • 44 ip ^ CO* Ip ^• rn CO w P: x: p Crc B 9 P M !i / ' i 0 ‘ CK ■d ll 0 1 i ! ( 1 X i\ 1 X m X 0 £ tccc ta CQ 1 1 Lor 0 H • a A V iS 1 n CO < 0 oao pa< p 9 >oo *D P <0tc iH «0c •H ta# ip to cp CO CP « • • cp Cm • • CO 10 44 09r >4- 4 J ■ ■ ^J VO 9 C •H U4 Oo •H •:S- *a 9 >o B 9 CC 9 O H 01 C •H • P sS oc *H •D 01 •O •D < Oo rH Xi ♦ VA . 01c •H Vo crc *H P CO •H Xu pa; >oo •D P <0 £ n 9 COoa 0 pa 0)c o;c •H Cp CO cp m 9 Cp 01 Cp 09 •p 09 U\t'i v^ ffl 5 > ^ ft h:t 1 3 is • N S' 4 • ?• 1 k: % X K K X X >:X V/'•1 i\0 H 31^ 1 5r •HM a 9cr <0u 9 O 9 > 9 > •H Po J< f-4 9 3 9 •O •H to o •H ^ p o «0 9a o 1 uzo o *D 01 cp gu> V.§3 s J•s 5? i-* CO M X M < o >* * 11 ■A »- >r^ 23CkK L. . ar> - M#ta . --------------■=y > r 4—t- • t I • I II ': i I I I * *u I It 5A- 3^^ - ''d I. t\ jn ^—I—i. r« ■1-j '•^f% I1 1 i 1 vvV‘ •. ■ ■ •'■ •> h''‘V .;-» Si'-H f'- - ■•»; 'V -. r • • ! ^ mm7y -, ■.-.jj: i -.V'•* - ' *' •• •?jr. *'-•f ¥%^*r mm ^ t i-j » 1 nlfj 4-« ■♦ I n ■u vvm wo -----------•t* * m '>1 c iii i/' I I M- I ' t r. \ % ITw ” ■#i r~' UU«wl V C41. 1 c*io f i. ^UtiilCU b • A. In considering applications for variance, the .Council shall consider the advice and recontmendation of the Board and the effect of the proposed variance upon the health, safety and welfare of the community, existing and anticipated traffic conditions, light and air, danger of fire, risk to the public safety, and the effect on values of property in the surrounding area. Before granting a variance, the Council shall hear requests for variances from the literal provisions of this Chapter in instances where their strict enforcement would cause undue hardship because of circumstances unique to the individual property under consideration, and to grant such variances only when it is demonstrated that such actions will be in keeping with the spirit and intent of this Chapter. "Undue hardship" as used in connection with the granting of a variance means: 1. The property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under conditions allowed by the official controls.2. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his property not created by the landowner. 3. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. 4. Economic considerations alone shall not constitute an undue hardship if reasonable use for the property exists under the terms of this Chapter. 5. Undue hardship also includes, but is not limited to, inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Variances shall be granted for earth sheltered construction as defined in Minnesota Statutes, Section 116J.06, Subd. 2, when in harmony with this Chapter. 6. The Board of Appeals and Adjustments or the Council may not permit as a variance any use that is not permitted under this Chapter for property in the zone where the affected person's land is located. 7. The Board or Council may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one-family dwelling as a two-family dwelling. section 6. ordinance Section 10.08, Subdivision 3 (B) is hereby amended by adding aoolying to the structure or ‘.Vndnn^5”ttlon°«^‘^°pecu“?!ar7o such property or immediately adjoining property (9) The conditions do not apply structures in the distict in which said land is located. . of the applicant ^e^pe^be cln««y t“i th"e intent o£ the Zoning Code. (12) The granting of such variance will not merely servo as a convenience to the «PPl ff i ^alJe^iat; demonstrable hardship or difficulty. ■i -V r'<- To:Mayor Grabek Orono Council Members Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson Prom: Date: Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning s Zoning Administrator July 16, 1987 Subject - Subdivision - Application - Divide off second dwelling from main house. Ij-st of Exhibits Exhibit A - Application Exhibit B — Plat Map Exhibit C - Survey - Proposal I Exhibit D “ Survey - Proposal II Exhibit E - Wetland Boundary Enlargement Discussion use on his prop^e^ty? the^ aoDlican^^ Resolution No. 2122 for a guest house required in order to allow sale or rental^ subdivision would be his property. You may recall that it wac residental structure on subdivide in order t^move irthl applicant's intent all along to acquisition of that house was such^that t timing of his House use was the most expeditious way to ge°" s\ar°ted^ access in anticipation of an eJrlv^«f„h^,- • easterly temporary forthcoming. These two subdivision request, which is now plan reviel for: P^el^n’mary proposals are brought first as a sketch 21 Concepta^]" "vilw of the orocos®! corridor; and westerly property. This bounda^v oh revision with applicants more land^n^^Se Easter ly pa^r^ bv n "\®happlicant the mininum of 5.0 acres dry buildable. ^ westerly parcel to Items for Discussion dry acL®s''!n®fot'^ l%nd%'’;nd''f/f?oL"r“ Proposal 1, leaving 5.0 30' access corridor to sLva i-hJ h ^^res in Lot 3, a flag lot with a (access point to be moved so i^ L withirthe^3^ problem with this location \* Staff has nostandpoint. ^ Watertown Road from an access safety Staff feels this corridor leaves mor^and b It ® ® access corridor, potential split of Lot 3 to better options for the future Bays this is lS-20 verrs i^ hf.% one more 5-plus acre lot. Applicant ultimate development of the ev-s from the Citys standpoint, the Exhibits C rsr is 3 lots property (Lots 2 and 3 on subdivisions that a private road be developed!" n6sui Zoning File #1178 July 16,1978 Page 2 of 2 Staff would prefer to see Proposal II so that if and when Lot 3 is split, a private road outlot of 50' in width could be developed to serve the 3 total houses. The City v»ould have to make it a condition of the currently proposed subdivision that: 1) A future split of Lot 3 will force development of a private road and cul-de-sac to serve all 3 houses; and 2) at the time Lot 3 is split. Lot 2 will have to abandon its existing driveway to Watertown Road and from then on access to the private road. This would have to be filed in the chain of title to ensure enforcement, since Lot 2 would likely be owned separately from Lot 3 at that time. The other choices are; a) Require the access change now. b) Determine that given the current zoning acreages end low density or development, it is not a problem to have 2 driveways onto Watertown Road serving the 3 potential total houses. 2) Note that based on Proposal I, the southeast corner of Lot 2 is above the culvert location; with Proposal II, the corner is opposite the site at the northwest end of Lot 3. 3) The wetland in the westerly parcel (Lot 1) has what staff would call an "indefinite" boundary. Note that because the wetland lies within two half-sections, the designated wetland overlay maps show it on two different half-section maps and show it differently on each. Furthermore, applicants surveyor in the field has now delineated the wetland as somewhat smaller than both overlays indicate. This is a concern since this is a dry year and all the City's wetlands appear smaller than their defined boundaries. City Engineer Glenn Cook has not looked at th^is wetland, but his recommendation is that he and staff should inspect the site and if a final staff determination cannot be readily made, a hydrologic analysis would be required to determine the necessary boundary. 4) A side issue is one that will likely be brought up by neighbor Joe iSilPiaiiliai Applicant and his neighbor will have to work this out between themselves. A lot line rearrangement has been suggested by staff# but applicant a neignbor apparently haven't come to any agreement on this. Action Requestedi^heg direction as to how you will handle the road access situation, so that he can proceed with a formal preliminary subdivision application . ___ . * k. # j CITY OF ORONO Date Rec'd By . 7^ j Fee Rec'd ' ijihlri SUBDIVISION APPLICATION FORM APPLICANT Name {/^\<ux^r'T^ pAA^ Mailing Address PROPERTY Name OWNER __________ Telephone V74->^ 2.Q<oO _ _ _ _ Telephone _ _ _ Mailing Address _ _ _ _ (Attach list if more than one) PROPERTY LOCATION Street Address O^ATti2JrO^--J^ . CITY OF OfxWO FINAHCE OFFICE i35omm -------- Property Identification No. (P.I.D.)01 OE^l 150.00 CHECF Ti i V. vv■HffV /VI Complete Legal Description to be attached to applica^iSff'^”'^'^^"'^ YOU- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- ;5J EXISTING LAND USE 07/16/37 Number of Tax Parcels Development Size Acres Dry Land Acres Wet Land Acres Total, all parcels Present Use (check)Residential; no. of units _i Other (specify) Present Zoning District / A PROPOSAL Division for Tax Purposes _ _ _ Lot Line Rearrangement Only (no new building sites) Subdivision for New Building Sites _ Existing UnitsNumber of Building Sites: New Units Total Units Proposed Gross Density Units per . 9 Acres Minimum Lot Size:Square Feet-J^ry Buildable Land /o a Proposed Use: (check)>=-r Residential Other (specify) r • (OVER) • I r , I• « •• ^ ‘ 4. • «I • .' i » fS'iM fi-'ij * v -f; minimum material necessary for complete preliminary application Application Completed 2. Preliminary Plat information on Certificate of Survey. Center 348-3271) ^ epartment of Finance A-603 Government above list no"^return Pre-addressed to each of the names on the complete.Zoning Department that Preliminary Plat Application is 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. 2o^in“«Mlial^ lignalu?f Application is complete. - - - -—- -——-_ _ _ _ _ _ __ Date PEES f Sketch Plan Review (Class I, ii & lii) Preliminary Review (Class I & ii Subdivisions) Preliminary Review (Class III and all non-residential) Review (Class III) $150.00 $250.00 $300.00 plus 20.00/lot $150.00*- - - - - - - - -^^ainesrlng charges) to provide all information required Commission and Council necessary to process this^a^noTiV *'^^°t''ey. Planning to pay all additional fees estLlilhe^by ordinance? " Urm Applicant's Signature Owner's Signature *laiM^fcoTi\,^®o''nMVetinf™^^^^^^^^^^ 25 days before the the third Monday of each mo'nth. are usually held on t' iTv-’exjj-, 2 .•0 % i isi t O) * . IIW (.) iSJO (?) voc 0) HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA o/ ^/re A'£ i'4 ^ I \ I I \ \ \ v w€st hn€ of ihe £/« of\ {he SE'^'4 of Sec Shf/3-ZS^s' I ' ^ / I \ 'I V ' ^ ^ > \-y\ \ Uv — > ,^■'^>1, >^''ii .' ^ ^-A,,,.5fT 'S'V •, 111 '. ) I y , ( . y ' > V.''' f '//A/V I »//^,//A ,d-‘^i'' ■ y i. // * * i*V' • -' * ' y \ ' 'V‘'''''^'^^‘ < ! I / '.'•':'"'''v ' f'^/>' ' 1 .’V riWiC^ of ihe 5f/<* «/ J iht S£^4 of j*<- it- ! H6-Zi ''L \ ' V -V \ ' ' '' '' > 1 '> X. ' ; r. ' ' « S ------------—> • ' ' I * \ ' ' '■v --------^ ' -.'v ' , ' \ \ \ /'—■ ---■**-' V^ ' S# ', s • k ■' ■// ^ ':«‘--v \\\'\\:; ! I • ' •' / / / ■••'i 1 •!' *\ ' Jk-!!/