Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
12-12-1987 Planning Packet
PLANN� COMMISSION MEETD«.; MONDAY, DECEMB 21, 1987 7:00 P.M. 1275 BROWN ROAD SOU'I'B -COUNCIL CHAMBERS COUNCIL REPRESENT TIVB -J. Diann Goetten TTBNDANC UBLIC BARINGS 1.7:00 P.M.#1232 Betz uilders, 60/100 Stubbs Bay Road -Class III Subdivision -Pr iminary Pat 2.7:30 P. .1231 Olai e-n�on & Florence K. Golden, ACTIO ITEMS 1380 & 1390 R ilro d venu -Subdivision oRearr. ngement 3.#120 M.Hilbelin /J. Vogt, 320 1 Crysta_ By Road - Lot Line Class III u ivision -Pr limin ry Plat - S con R v ew • 5. 1 • 1214 ich r Zi ins , 09 ort rown Ro d -.r1 ·imina y ub ivision -cond vi w 1229 Ric ard Vari nc , 3826 C r y Av nu r ng •_ 230 & 0 .son, 2670 h nt Ro· d -nc Publ·c a 1 w· & . 2715 pCo ·t·on I ar ng 23 d - n Or C s or • , ( o. 7) - 0 7 t n �� C, � L j- 3 (A --0 � � ..-. =, • P c PUBLIC ATTENDANCE CITY OF ORONO MEETING DATE j C ' 2 \ PLEASE FILL OUT THE INFORMATION REQUESTED BELOW FOR OUR CITY RECORDS. NAME (please print) NAME OR NUMBER ADDRESS 1 V J c. h 'ic) 1 /> O____ /■. /r:.RO* 173 O ^ ^1 / 4* hidttu h- Ir/j v\ 5^ow. -/ . /J r CKp,.. Yrl:^ f // y *7 j:/r ' •O 1 1 7 -^ / •) J « ?S' 6.XMh '470Oin<'~, y I'ytR /..'Al 7. \ 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. • 13. 14.• 9 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. .«! I . n n fiil 1 I' Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson From:Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building s Zoning Administrator Date: Subject December 16r 1987 #1232 Betz Builders, Inc., 60/100 Stubbs Bay Road Preliminary Subdivision - Public Hearing Application - Subdivision Plat Class III Zoning District - RR-IB Total Area ~ 22 + acres (no designated wetlands) Plat of 5 Lots - Lots 1-4 average area of 2 acres dry. Lot 5 equals 12 + acres List of Exhibits Exhibit A Exhibit B Exhibit C Exhibit D Exhibit E Exhibit F Exhibit G Exhibit H Exhibit I Application Property Owners List Flat Map Preliminary Plat Road Plans Engineer's Report Septic Test Site Plans Plat of Area Drainage Pattern and Watershed The applicant proposes a 5 lot division of 2 parcels - Lots 1 through 4 owned by Betz Builders, and Lot 5 set aside for future development and owned by Clement C. Kroll. The plat road shall serve all 5 lots. The existing driveway serving the northern property, proposed Lot 5, shall be closed off and all access to Lot 5 shall be via the new private road. All four lots have tested out as mound systems for orincipal and future expansions sites. Please refer to Gaffron's memo on mound systems in the Hilbelink/Vogt item included in the agenda packet. Septic testing will not be required for Lot 5 because it exceeds 5+ acres in area. Staff has recorded no problem with existing system that serves the residence. The existing residence and accessory buildings on Lot 1 are currently under a hazardous building procedure and have no bearing on the current subdivision review. Existing tennis court on Lot 5 does not meet the required 50' setback from private road but neither did it meet the 50' setback from Stubbs Bay Road when constructed. All other structures meet required setback from all newly arranged property lines. Zoning File #1232 December 16, 1987 Page 2 of 2 Staff will ask for the standard drainage and utility easement along lot lines. The Engineer's report (Exhibit F) seeks drainage calculations for storm sewer and pond area shown in engineering plans for road (Exhibit E). The drainageway to ponding area has been directed along the shar'.-d lot lines of Lots 2 and 3. Ponding area in Lot 3 should be designated on the preliminary plat and described in angles and bearings. The area of the ponding area must be excluded from the dry buildable calculations of the lots. Storm sewer drainage to the wetlands to the southeast of the subject property and then via drainage tile under Luce Line and then via overland drainage to Stubbs Bay is described on Exhibit I. The City must have the drainage calculations to determine impact on down stream properties. In addition. Cook has asked for a storm sewer profile, detail of pond outlet control structure, and design of drainage ditch to south to ensure a minimum of erosion problems given the severe sloping topography. Cook asks that the road plans be amended as follows: 1.Bank at west side adjacent to Stubbs Bay Road be graded out. 2.Ditch bottom set 3' below existing center line at property line. 3.Back slope graded to a 3:1 slope. 4.Bituminous flumes provided to drain the curb section at Stubbs Bay Road. Staff has enclosed a plat of the surrounding neighborhood (Exhibit H), designating approximate location of houses, boundaries of individual properties and surrounding road locations. At a minimum, staff would recommend that an extended access to the east lot line be provided for a future connector/through road to Loaf Street. Note 30+ undeveloped acres within RLS #843 at the east quadrant. There is no more than a 1 to 1^ acre wetland within the entire property v»ith a potential development density of 15+ lots. Staff cannot recommend approval of the preliminary plat of the Betz Builders subdivision until the following is resolved: A.Exact area of each lot exclusive of ponding area and road right- of-way extension. B.Storm sewer detail as noted above. Applicant to file a formal application with M.C.W.D. to review drainage and grading plan. Applicant may have to relocate location of private road at least along the west side of property to make up for dry lands now used for ponding area that will also serve land owner to north. Lot 5, when developed in the future . rr CITY OF ORONO f^X-i-3 in ->9 ) {•>■ ‘'i (•• -. /• • «* .< - ** ? -**• > - ' »It ■• b % up "Vl0$ Rec'd ^; ' Date Rec U-) By ^ /<* •1 SUBDIVISION APPLICATION FORM - ’'I ^5:- APPLICANT Name /IST ^ hdH}')dC'^ 7^/V Telephone 3 YV PROPERTY Name OWNER Mailing Address QpUUf^r^ P/P - Al/e KU'-'/ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __Telephone _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ Mailing Address (Attach list if more than one) PROPERTY LOCATION Street Address (p^'jlOd 'S^.Cjitj i2il Property Identification No. (P.I.D.) Complete Legal Description to be attached to application U .1 ! f '-I t-MU.*?!U* EXISTING LAND USE *r --rrr-c •J u'J #.iLrU Number of Tax Parcels _ _ _ _ _ __ Development Size ^ 1 " w f"i‘.“il 1 u’t.'Vi. VV\.«t'V “C:,“ w' V • V V* f L.•vvAcres Dry Land ■■ Acres Wet Land YOU Acres Total, all parcels^, .a r^i ^/)i rU:J6 Present Use (check)r.esidential; no. of units Other (specify) _ _ _ _ _ _ t f ,/c-7 i I- X.'.' U t Present Zoning District PROPOSAL Division for Tax Purposes V Lot Line Rearrangemei't Only (no new building sites) Subdivision for New !i lilding Sites Number of Building Sites:Existing Units New Units Total Units Proposed Gross Density Units per Acre s Minimum Lot Size;Square Feet Dry Buildable Land Proposed Use: (chock).X.Residential Other (specify) (OVGE;f.' L.„. MINIMUM MATERIAL NECESSARY FOR COMPLETE PRELIMINARY APPLICATION 1.Application Completed Preliminary Plat information on Certificate of Survey.2. 3.Certified Property Owner’s list of owners within 350' (this list can be obtained from the Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Government Center 348-3271) 4.Stamped, legal sized envelopes (#10) pre-addressed to each of the names on the above list with no return address. Certification by Zoning Department that Preliminary Plat Application is complete. Zoning Officials Signature _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ _ Date MINIMUM MATERIAL NECESSARY FOR COMPLETE PINAL PLAT APPLICATION 1.Payment of fees (park fees, filing fee, sev/er 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 compleuu Zoning Officials Signature_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _Date - - - - - - - - -- FEES _ _ _ Sketch Plan Review (Class I, II & III) Preliminary Review (Class 1 & 11 Sabdivisions) $150.00 $250.00 Preliminary Review (Class III and all non-residentia2 ) $300.00 plus 20.00/lot Final Plat Review (Class III) ♦(Plus any legal or engineering c.'.: rges) $150.00* Applicant has read the above and hereby agrees to p : . vide all information required or roquested by the Zoning Administrator, City Ensr ':cr. City Attorney, Planning Commission and Council necessary to process this r. -;-!ication and further agrees to pay all additional foes established by erdir"- ce. Date Date /!-? t’ - ings are usually hold on the thirfl Monday of each month T RUN DATE 11/09/67 BATCH 009 PROP ADOR OkT^ER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR PROP AODR OUNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER N/J1E/ADDR PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR PROP ADDR OWr^ER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR I 38 05-117-23 11 0002 03905 HIGH LA CYRIL L DUCHARME ETAL CYRIL L DUCHARME 3905 HIGH LANE LONG LAKE MN 55356 / 38 05-117-23 12 0007 00100 STUDDS DAY RD S BETZ BUILDERS INC BETZ BUILDERS INC 15301 HIGHWAY 55 W PLYMOUTH MN 55997 38 05-117-23 12 0010 03580 DAYSIUE RD V E NORTON ETAL VICTOR E NORTON / 3500 BAYSIDE ROAD LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 05-117-23 12 0013 00200 BEDERWOOD DR K C THOMAS ETAL JOANN M GUSTAFSON 200 BEDERWOOD DRIVE LONG LAKE HN 55356 38 05-117-23 12 0017 03915 HIGH U RICHARD G MARKLUND RICHARD G MARKLU140 3915 HIGH LANE / LONG UKE MN 55356 38 05-117-23 13 0005 n L GUSTAFSON ETAL GERALD L GUSTAFSON 200 BEDERWOOD DR lOm LAKE MN 55356 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNERS ,'ST 000538 05-117-23 11 00095 LEAF ST E C GRAHAM JR ETAL E C GRAHAM JR 95 LEAF ST LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 05-117-23 12 0008 00060 STUBBS BAY RD 1 CLEMENT C KROLL ETAL CLEMENT C KROLL 60 STUBBS DAY RD S MAPLE PLAIN m 55359 38 05-117-23 12 0011 00165 BEDERWOOD DR GEORGC 3 TERP GEORGE S TERP 165 BEDERWOOD DR tONG LAKE MN 55356 38 05-117-21* 12 0019 03920 HIGH LA H W WOLVERTON ETAL H WESLEY WOLVERTON 3920 HIGH LANE LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 05-117-23 13 0003 FLORIAN J STERNER ETAL FLORIAN J STERNLR 5929 ALDRICH AVE SO MPLS MN 55919 38v 05-117-23 13 0011 00220 BEDERWOOD DR G A J -GUSTAFSON GERALD L GUSTAFSON 200 BEDE^OD DRIVE LOJK} LAKE rtf 55356 REPORT NO. PI935901 PAGE 7 38 05-117-23 12 0001 03995 HIGH U ALMOND N KREB ETAL ALrtOND N KREB 3995 HIGH LANE LONG UKE MN 55356 38 05-117-23 12 0009 00090 STUDDS BAY RD \ WELDON H DUfiN ETAL WELDON H mm 90 STUBBS DAY RD MAPLE PLAIN MN 55359 38 05-117-23 12 0012 00185 BEDERWOOD DR P D SWANSON A M C SWANSON NEAL AN’DERSON 130 CYGNET PLACE LOr^G UKE MN 55356 38 05-117-23 12 0016 V . STATE OF MINN STATE OF mm 30 05-117-23 13 0009 G L GUSTAFSCtl ETAl TfRAir; I. 'vz A,rvr • 100 BEDwKt!CC». L.. LONG LAKE liN 55356 / V . 30 05-117-23 21 0011 036<i0 DAYSIDE RD HERBERT T OLSON > WIFE HERBERT & JANE OLSON 36<t0 BAYSIOE RO LONG UKE MN 55356 J J J RUM DATE 11/09/67 BATCH 009 PROP ADDR OWIER NAME TAXPAYER 14AHE/ADDR 38 05-117-23 21 0019 03620 EILEEN ST S I L WHITMAN STEPHEN T WHITMAN 3620 EILEEN ST ORONO MN 55359 HENNEPIN comny PROPERTi INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWIJERS LIST 38 32-118-23 39 0006 JOHN F DU>OI JOHN F DUIO) 20 S CROUTJ RD P 0 BOX 77 LONG LAKE MN 55356 REPORT NO. PI93590X PAGE 8 38 32-118-23 93 0005 03535 WATERTOWN RO ROBERT E ROBERTSON t WIFE ROBERT E ROBERTSON 3535 WATERTOWN RD LONG LAKE MN 55356 PROP ADOR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AODR PROP ADOR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR 38 32-118-23 93 0006 03565 WATERTOWN RD D M DUNN ET AL W/L EST DCRALINE M DIAM 3565 WATERTOWN ROAD LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 32-118-23 93 0009 03995 WATERTOWN RD R T QUADY ETAL ’ OBERT T QUADY 399F S WATERTOWN RO LCfJG LAKE MN 55356 TOTAL BATCH 009 00027 38 32-118-23 93 0007 03505 WATERTOWXX RO M TOLEV » I JOSEPHSON MICHAEL H FOLEY AND ILONA R JOSEPHSON 3505 WATERTOWN RD ORONO MN 55356 38 32-118-23 93 0010 03925 WATERTOWN RO WAfOA L PETERSEN WANOA L PETERSEN 3925 WATERTOWN RO LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 32-118-23 34 0011 3685 WATERTOWN RD THOMAS JOHN MAXWELL THOMAS JOHN MAXWELL 3685 WATERTOWN RD MAPLE PLAIN MN 55358 38 32-118-23 93 0008 03965 WATERTOWN RD GERALD KVIST ETAL GERALD KVIST P 0 BOX e» LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 32-113-23 99 0007 03905 WATERTOWN RD WARD FERRELL ETAL WARD FERRELL 3905 WATERTOWN RO LONG UKE MN 55356 I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY T .NATION, TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF. f > (\. -V /-■ *1 I V\ •»iv ( DATE ii-ioisn fHiiA J J I lEaStme:>^*i r 3mtU5- s v?r*»*' ---------n:n - into X' 9^ » !^/»’, L ^icn. tB •V ^ j»'4, ^#7' - '^'fW"''‘i 7 • -<^a —■•'•' --^V^S? ,• r. A . ■.AOj •■•) V: . ;r •’it-ir^ , f--«-_,^‘.r • „ » ' ■<•' " ■. f \ Oym-sff’^ /O ^ ___r 3^-l\%dB- r «■•.A (jA> * :h f /-----U- •» • • • - «•. e (^^ r / (?5- /A7r ^5 V\ ID.. •- ■« «r^ t I »* I 05-m-a2{ll)^ fJe GISTERED land SUR\f ’ *% 1 • X* 5A- t! ’ J** Ul i*i«< X' AnT • 4‘ ' r'r I I U^ • ^3'i 1^? .i ‘» (?> f^w I«l tX , ' . j .■ J ...... SCALE CATE EL .. v .. ," ..... ,., P J FO BETZ BUILDERS OF LOTS 41 6 42. AuuiT'1R tS S B. 0.203 Pl I cou �"'"""-SU 5 l.:t / .,....,_--..... , / I . . / I / / � , � COFFIN 8 GRONBERG, I C. E E UR OR L RS LO L E, 0 ' /::] r ....... / / / - / - / / - - / -- .,,,- -- / - - / / I I .,,,.,,, I I / I -- I I ,------\.,. ,-l \ ' I II 'I \\ \ - -� / / ,' , I I I I \ •C,, I / ,\ t I I I \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ '' I • , I I I , I ca m r Bones troo Rosene Anderlik & Associates Otto G Bonf%troo. PE Rohfft W Rotfnf, PC Joseph C AntJprfiii. PE BMdtoril A Lfmt>ffg. PL Richard E Turnfr. PL J.imfi C OHon. PC Girnn R Coo»i. PE tr>omaj E Noyfi. PE Robert G Schunicht. PE M.ifvin L Sorvaia. PE Krith A Gordon. PE Rich.ifd W foiter. PE Donald C Biif'jafdt. PE Jrtry A Boofdon. PE Mafic A Hanson. PC Trd K Cirid. PE Mifhapl T R.iutm.^nn, PE Kobprt R Pfpffpfip. PE David O loikota. PC Thomas W Pptrrson. Pt Muhapl C lynch PE Jamrs R Waiand PE Kpnt'irth P Anderson. PE Knth A BacTimann, PE Mark R Rolfs. PC Robrd C Russrk. AiA Thernas E Angus. PE Howard A Sanford. PE CfMrIPS A Erickson i*0 M Pnvfisky Hari. I M Olson Sus n M Ebprlm M.* k A Scip Engineers & Architects December 15, 1987 City of Orono Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Attn; Mrj,J Mabusth Re; File No. 139-1232 Betz Addition Dear .Teanne, We have reviewed the preliminary plat and grading plan submitted on the Betz Addition. The preliminary plat should indicate drainage and utility easements along lot lines. Drainage easements should also be provided over the ponding area. The drainage calculations should be provided for the storm sewer and pond area. The storm sewer profile and the pond outlet control structures details should be provided. The drainage ditch should be designed to minimize erosion problems. The roadway ba*jk on the west side abutting Stubbs Bay Road should be graded out. The ditch bottom shouifld be set 3 feet below the existing centerline at the property line. The backslope shall be graded to a 3:1 slope. Bituminous flumes should be provided to drain the curb section at Stubbs Bay Road. If you have any questions, please contact this office. Yours very truly, BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC. Glenn R. Cook GRC;li 2335 West Highway 36 • St. Paul, Minnesota 55113 • 612-636-4600 7L ) t l,_\ ,-- - - J -- I I I I L-i----�-- ,, - G I " .JI ,. t) J • G • • .,.,,,, - ---1 ro ( , · , . .. \ BAY 'Tl T.�/8, - II , I • H- Cll'I • I I X t)-e.s, N .. 1a ll,r ..... •· t .. A..� 'J .. 11'\C. !--o�,etLS· 0.843 X X u cc0 F S. • • • • • / T -2 .. -----·· / / . s . .1 C S . • I . . ·2 JJ r I . \ To:Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson From: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator Date:Deceirber 15, 1987 Subject: #1231 Olai Hanson & Florence Golden, 1380 & 1390 Railroad Avenue -Subdivision of a Lot Line Rearrangement Class I - Public Hearing Zoning District - LR-IA Pertinent Ordinances - Section 11.03, Definition 65 (C) and Application - Subdivision - Lot Line Rearrangement required by variance application #1056, approved by Council on 9/14/87. List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Exhibit B - Exhibit C - Exhibit D - Exhibit E - Exhibit F - Application Plat Map Property Owners List Survey Council Minutes of 9/14/87 Resolution No. 2252 Review of Application - On September 14, 1987, Council approved Olai Hanson's side setback variance, approving a 4.6" setback for a proposed detached garage (20' x 24'). A building permit cannot be issued for the garage until both Mr. Hanson and Mrs. Golden complete a lot line rearrangement with the City that would legally define the dividing line between their properties, thereby ending a long bitter boundary dispute between the two parties. The current application is the formal application of the lot line rearrangement (review the enclosed survey. Exhibit D). Mrs. Golden (A + C) gains 0.87 feet at the front of Parcel C and 1.05 feet at the rear. The existing garage is now 1.2 feet from the new dividing line. The Hanson's proposed garage at the northwesterly corner will bo 4.6 feet from the newly defined lot line and easily meets the required 6.4 feet at the northeasterly corner at 7+ feet per Resolution 2252, Exhibit F. The old wire fence, probably the Golden's old fence, is now on Hanson's side of the new line. This does not appear to be a problem as both property owners are fully aware of where the new lot line falls in relation to existing improvements but this is not a problem that the City need be involved with at this point. The average lot width of the Golden lot runs approximately 101 feet and the Hanson's lot at an average width of 59 feet. Zoning File #1231 December 15, 1987 Page 2 of 2 Staff. Recommenclation - To approve the subdivision application of Olai Hanson and Florence Golden that would realign the shared lot lines of their properties located at 1380 and 1390 Railroad Avenue subject to the following conditions: 1.Prior to scheduling the application before the Council for final approval, the survey must be amended to include the following: A.3 separate legal descriptions for the parcels as follows: i.A separate legal description must be shown for Mrs. Golden's original property; ii.A legal description for Hanson's property less the strip to the north to be given to Mrs. Golden* and iii.Legal description of strip of land to be deeded to Mrs. Golden. B.Signature lines for Clerk and Mayor. C.Line for date approval by Council. 2.Mrs. Golden must apply for legal combination of Parcels A and C upon final approval by the Council. 3.Mr. Hanson may apply for a building permit for the proposed garage upon final approval by the Council. ■n CITY OF ORONC SUBDIVISION APPLICATION FORM / .-•'i 'V ■• 9 « i •/. ► 7/*"i *•w.j j Date Rec'd By _ _ _ Fee Rec'd /? 3 / AJPPLICAHT Mame Olal Harison 4 llTrrrre Katherine Golden Te^ Mailing Address 1390 Railrodd Avenue, Orono . MN Olai Hanson & Florgre Katherine QoldnPROPERTY Name OWNER (Golden) 47>9327 Telephone 473-K>34 Mailing Address 1390 Railroad^^enue. Orono. I4N & 13B0^a^r<^ Ave., Orono. (Attach list if more than one) PROPERTY LOCATION ‘ 1380 I^ilroad Avtnje. Cteno. (Caldn) Street Address CTfj. yrc r-rcTfr 1390 Railroad /'.venue, Crono. MIvJ A rti rc^i m va L7k.lt C.v*V«V'V ::L:rA /\A • \»V10-117-23-31-0006' (Golden ) »- Property Identification No. (P.I.D.) 10-117-?3-31-0005 YOU Complete Legal Description to be attached to application EXISTING LAND USE • ^COOl iiOl T.t5:01 ♦f /iO/C-7 IX.* I f f yj f Number of Tax Parcels Development Size N/A Acres Viet Arroa xotal, all parcels Present Use (chec)<)Residential; no. of units Other (specify) ___________ Present Zoning District LR-LA Single Family La>:eshore PROPOSAL _ _ _ _ Division for Tax Purooses ^Lot Line Rearrangement Only (no new building sites) -A » _ _ _ _ _ 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 Duildable Land Proposed Use; (check)Residential Other (specify) .a f %i (OVER) *, » . 1 ' -I •W •• MINIMUM MATERIAL NECESSARY FOR COMPLETE PRELIMINARY APPLICATION 1.Application Completed 2.Preliminary Plat information on Certificate of Survey. 3.Certified Property Owner's list of owners within 350' (this list can be obtained from the Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Government Center 348-3271) 4.Stamped, legal sized envelopes {#10 ) pre-addressed to each of the names on the above list with no return address. Certification by Zoning Department that Preliminary Plat Application is complete. Zoning Officials Signature _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Date _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ MINIMUM MATERIAL NECESSARY FOR COMPLETE PINAL PLAT APPLICATION 1.Payment of fees (park fees, filing fee, sewer and v/ater assessments) 2.Signed certificate of survey or mylar copies of formal plat. 3.Title opinion. 4.Easements, Covenants, etc. novclopcrs Agreement and acceptable form cf security. Certificaticn v.,. ^cr.inc Derartmjnt that Final Plat Aoolication is comolet Zoning Officials Signut..,.-e* '*Date PEES Sketch Plan Review (Class Z.Z1 & III) Preliminary Review (Class Z j Z1 Subdivisions) $150.00 $250.00 Preliminary Revi ev; (Class III and all non-resicential)$300.00 plus 20.00/lot Final Plat Review (Class Hi') *(Plus any legal or engineo~ln.|‘ charges) $150.00* I to pay _ _^ ^ ^ ^ ^^ ^ ^^^ ^ ^^.» / - ^• f'‘y/1 c y',1^, , -. Applicant's Signature .Zr Owner's Signature.^^^ ^ ^ ,/ 6 y/Jd. U-J/IA ■xi'.-'-'V ^ >'/Applicant must have all submittals ihto "..r.*, Cb ty offices' 25 days before the '-'•X X./ Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Cem-i*. si on Meetings are usually held on the third Monday of each month. I •I M I f I f;"*1**4J I ' K" ••.rj Q- 5 g f m^*^2 ■ ^ zr ’ I / 3 QRY3TAL'^,^^yYj^ ^¥~3^ 'TV ^ - - — ■—■ in4^ 'f ^ V^4|e: 1 ,T .¥■/ /-JMi ^ * C-, ’’►A— ““ — %-rrl / ^ MTKA; 2^’/^ ^ « ,'a» - —rs— ;3 _____________1 «oO ^0 3 *• CRYSTAL (\^\>* AVE lo .. 1 v2a?/- :.' 1^ i ^ .?/;•/ • — •» in'):i"0^ ,U|. r PROSPECT To •-' ! ' > •' 1 r! v»A(^s.♦ •i ?3 *7^'^ |j ^' *7*^ ' : ^v ^'S Z-i .•'i^Sl ^ '' ‘ ^■•/■^•' -■>1/ *♦ I *3 — "C r 1 fV m _ ^0 ^^ ^^ #7 J I S 5 flkCC I ■ ^ • f'rf' ^ ^ ■ 0 uf ' - ‘b <• *•# RUT4 DATE 10/09/87 r DATCH 004 PROP AODR 0’r:NER NAME TAXPAYER NAfiE/ACDR 38 10-117-23 11 0002 BURLIKliTON NORTHERN RY DAKOTA RAIL TNC WASHINGTON WE A ADAMS ST hutchinso>4 55350 HE^^IEPIN COUriTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY 0i:>^ER5 LIST 38 10-117-23 31 0001 02010 SHORELINE DR GEORGE F ROVEGNO JR & WIFE GEORGE F ROVEGtrO 2010 SHORELINE DRIVE WAYZATA riN 55391 REPORT NO. PI435401 PAGE 6 38 10-117-23 31 0002 02040 rJORTH SHORE DR JOHN T SPENCE JOHN T SPEf.’CE 2040 NO SHORE DR WAYZATA MN 55391 PROP ADDR O’/TiER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR 38 10-117-23 31 0003 02060 mnV\ SHORE DR LYLE G GODFREY ETAL LYLE G GODFREY 2060 SHORE DRIVE WAYZATA riN 55391 38 10-117-23 31 0004 02080 riORTH SHORE DR CAROL A LA QUEY CAROL A LA QUEY 2080 NORTH SHORE DR WAYZATA 55391 30 10-117-23 31 0005 01390 RAILROAD AVE OLAI HANSON ETAL OLAI HANSON BOX 129 CRYSTAL BAY MN 55323 PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR 30 10-117-23 31 0006 01380 RAILROAD AVE F J GOLDEN ETAL F J GOLDEN 1380 RAILROAD AVE CRYST/L DAY m 55323 30 10-117-23 31 0007 01360 RAILROAD AVE T J PATTRIN ASA PATTRIN TIMOTHY A SHEPRI A PAHRIN 1360 RAILROAD AVE ORONO MM 55323 38 10-117-23 31 0008 02055 SPATES AVE MARIETTA H Af^DEPSOM MARIETTA H ANDERSON 2055 SPATES AVE WAYZATA MN 55391 fl r PROP ADDR cwt:er name TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR 38 10-117-23 31 0048 01375 DROWN RD S KURTIS P RAKOS KURTIS P RAKOS 1300 ARDOR ST ORONO m 55391 30 10-117-!3 31 0049 01300 ARDOR ST DOUGLAS DE MALICN’ON DOUGLAS DE MALIGNON BOX 97 LAKE M?<55356 30 10-117-23 :i 0050 01395 DROWTl RD S C E CAMPION & ASSOC INC PHILIP KALEY 1395 DROWN ROAD SO WAYZATA MN 55391 / t• J r PROP ADDR OWN’ER r:ANE TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR 38 10-117-23 31 0081 STATE U?® DEPT TERRY D & CHRISTINE M MORSE 20G0 SPATES AVE WAYZATA MN 55391 30 10-117-23 31 0009 01990 SPATES AVE D CREAR & M 5 CREAR MICHAEL & THERESA SAYLER 1990 SPATES AVE WAYZATA M?l 55391 38 10-117-23 31 0090 02040 SPATES AVE RICHARD V STINHCN ft WIFE RICHARD V STiriSCN 2040 SPATES AVE WAYZATA LRI 55391 •..rrwjri PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AODR 30 10-117-23 31 0095 02080 SPATES AVE T ft C MORSE TERRY D MORSE 20G0 SPATES AVE OROr^O M>l 55391 33 10-117-23 31 0096 02060 SPATES AVE HARRIET SPATES TOURANCEAU HARRIET SPATES TORANGEAU 2060 SPATES AVE WAYZATA m 55391 30 10-117-23 33 0002 02265 NORTH SHORE DR Kir:GSLEY H MURPHY JR KINGSLEY N MURPHY JR 2265 NORTH SHORE DR WAYZATA MN 55391 0 t r r RW DATE 10/09/07 HEhOJZPIN COUTITY PROPERTY INFORMATIOtJ SYSTEM PROPERTY OICHERS LIST REPORT NO. PI<^?5A0l PAGE 7 BATCH 00^ PROP ADDR OU*NER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR 30 10-117-23 3^ 0001 01^25 BAY RIDGE RD VERtWN E MCCOY VERNON E MC COY 1^25 BAY RIDGE RT 5 MAYZATA MN 55391 30 10-117-23 3^ 0002 01425 BAY RIDGE RD VERNON E MCCOY VERNON E ^K: COY 1425 BAY RIDGE RT 5 WAYZATA MN 55391 30 10-117-23 34 0003 01449 BAY RIDGE RD J M LESLEY & C LESLEY JAMES M fi CAROL LESLEY 1449 BAYRIDGE RD WAYZATA M^^ 55391 30 10-117-23 34 0011 PROP ADDR 0:04ER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR VERNON E MCCOY HENliEPIN CO HMY DEPT TOTAL BATCH 004 00022 - r I CERTIFY TIfAT T)JE FACTS REPRESEHTED ARE AH ACCURATE Al.T) TRUE REPRESENTATIOH OF IKFORMATIOH AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE OtJ THE RECORDS OF THE HEHJIEI’IN COUJITY DEPARTltEHT OF PROPERTY TAXATION, TO THE DEST OF MY KKOU'LEDGE AND BELIEF.^ r/^ fe' DATE ny'^£( (j\v~^ r r .. 0 ^ . O ■ DETAIL Soundary /^ne be^i^ecr^ Parcel A and Force/ B by ayreenoenf <n 0\ <toV) PARCEL A That part of the Northeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 10 ' Township 117, Range 23, Hennepin County, Minnesota described as follows: Connenclng at the southwest comer of Lot 6, Elbridge S. Barnes* First Siixtlvision in Section 10, Township 117, Range 23, according to the recorded plat thereof; thence southwesterly along the easterly right of way line of Burlington Northern Railroad 297.93 feet; thence southeasterly at right angles 40.00 feet to the easterly line of Railroad Avenue, which is. the point of beginning; thence northeasterly at a right angle 100.87 feet; thence southeasterly at a right ar.nle 123*00 feet; thence southwesterly at a rlc^t angle 101.05 feet; thence northwesterly 125.00 feet to the point of beginning. *MDRJl?ES OP THB REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HETJ) SEPTEMBER 14, 1987 o ATTENDANCE 7:00 P.M. u *. v.The Orono Council met on the above date with the following members present: Mayor Grabek, CounciImembers Peterson, Sime, Goetten, and Callahan. The following represented the City staff: City Administrator Bernhardson , Public Works Coordinator Gerhardson, Building & Zoning Administrator Mabusth, Assistant Planning & Zoning Administrator Gaffron, and City Recorder Peterson. City Attorney Blatz was also present. *• CONSENT AGENDA* . . uIt was moved by CounciImember Sime, seconded by CounciImember Peterson, to approve the Consent Agenda subject to removal of the following items: #9 - 1988 Cable TV Commission Budget #14- Jeff Essen, 2648 Casco Point Road - Berm Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. APPROVAL OP MINUTES* . j uIt was moved by CounciImember Sime, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to approve the Minutes of the August 24, 1987 Council meeting as submitted. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS .. ..u-Planning Commifsioner Johnson had no comments at this time. PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no comments from the public. ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT; f#105e)«1056yOLAI HANSON RAILROAD AVENUE VARIANCE RESOLUTION #2252 City Administrator Bernhardson explained the request for a side yard setback variance to construct a 2 car garage within 10' of the lot line. Applicant and affected neighbor, Mrs. Golden, have agreed upon a final lot line location and exchanged deeds for the strips of property in question. The proposed garage would be 4.6' to 6.4' from the newly established lot line. Mrs. uolden hao concerns with the proposed garage obstructing sunlight from her garden. Present for this matter were applicant's Attorney, Debra Page; and son-in-law, Henry Reiss Attorney Debra Page submitted photos of Mrs. Golden s garden in relation to the Hanso.i property. 4es OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 14, 1987 A il'.nson continued On behalf of Mrs. Golden, Attorney Dan Bergeron asked that the variance be denied due to affecting the value of the Golden property. He stated that the Hanson’s have only one car/one drive.*, therefore, no hardship for a double garage. A single garage would not require a variance. Based on information from a reputable contractor, he noted that the garage could be placed elsewhere on the property for an additional $1,200 to remove the drainfield and/or correct the soils. Henry Reiss stated that the proposed double garage would be used for car and boat storage. It was moved by CounciImembf^r Goetten, seconded by Mayor Grabek, to adopt Resolution #2252 granting a variance to permit the construction of a detached double garage located 4.6 feet from the side lot line subject to completion of the subdivision of a lot line rearrangement. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. #1172 CHRISTINE BECK 3820 CHERRY AVENUE VARIANCE RESOLUTION #2253 Christine Beck and her son, James Beck, were present for this matter. City Administrator Bernhardson explained the request for variances to permit the construction of a deck to be placed 27 feet from the shoreline in exchange for removal of a lakeshore cabin resulting In a total hardcover reduction of 55.1 s.f. or .5% withi.n the 0-75* area. Staff suggests that the deck stairs may be constructed off to the side to avoid furthe:r lakeshore encroachment. CounciImember Goetten felt that removal of the cabin v;as a great concession on the applicant's part in return for tnis variance. James Beck stated that putting the stairs off to the side v/ould involve more steps which would be inconvenient for his elderly mother. It was moved by CounciImember Callahan, seconded by Mayor Grabek,- to adopt Resolution #2253 granting the variance as proposed. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. City of OEiOIVO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO, 2252_________ A RESOLUTION GRANTING A VARIANCE TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.03, SUBDIVISION 15 (F) FILE #1056 WHEREAS, Olai Hanson (hereinafter "the ^Orono of the property located at 1390 Railroad Avenue within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as follows: Exhibit A attached (Hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the nprnfit^\he Municipal zoning Code Section 10.03, Subdivision 15 (F) ,ine construction of a detached garage located 4.6 feet from the side where a side yard setback of ).0 feet is normally required. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: FINDINGS 1.This application was reviewed as Zoning File #1056. 2. The property is located in the LR-IA Single Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District. 3.The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this ^PP^ 21, 1986, September 8, 1986 and August 17, 1987 and approval of the proposed variance on a vote of 4 ^ upon the finding that construction of the garage lot line will not to a significant degree infringe upon the amount o^ sunlight falling upon the neighboring property owned by Mrs. Goiae . 4.The side setback encroachment of 5.4' is necessary to reduce the angle of vehicle entry into the garage due to the close proxi y of the existing house. 5.Disturbed soils in the former septic system locatio^n are not suitable for construction of a garage and are garage could not be located to meet the required 10 side setback unless soil correction measures are undertaken. 6.The City Council has considered this application findings and recommendations of the Planning City staff, comments by the applicant and the effect o -P P variance on the health, safety and v/elfare of the community. Page 1 of 4 " I City off OROIVO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. _ _ _ _ _ _ 7. ThG City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variance would not adversely affect traffic conditions^ lights air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary tc alleviate a demon strable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicant; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the findings noted above, the Orono City Council hereby grants a variance per Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.03, Subdivision 15 (F) to permit the construction of a detached garage located 4.6 feet from the side lot line where a 10' side setback is normally required, subject to the following conditions; 1.The garage shall be located as shown on the attached Exhibit B, the northwesterly corner of the garage to be no less than 4.6' from the established lot line, and the northeasterly corner shall be no less than 6.4' from the lot line, as represented by the site plan provided bv the applicant. 2.Applicarts surveyor shall stake the established north lot line of the property that the City Inspector can verify the garage setbacks prior to footing or garage slab construction. 3.A building permit shall not be issued for the garage until such time that applicant and the affected neighboring property owner, Mrs. Golden, have completed the required subdivision of a lot line rearrangement to legally establish th \r agreed-upon lot line location. 4.Authorities granted v;ith this resolution run with the property not with the applicants, but are permissive only and must be exorcised by application for a building permit within one year of the date of Council approva], or this variance will expire on that date (September 14, 1908). 5.Violation of or non-compliance v/ith any of the terms and conditions of this resolution shall constitute a violcition of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 6. The undersigned applicants linve read, understood and hereby agree to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of themselves, their heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agree to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Page 2 of 4 City of OROINO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 2252_ _ _ _ _ Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 14th day of September, 1987. Page 3 of 4 y To:Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson From: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator Date:December 14, 1987 Subject: #1201 Mike Hilbelink & John Vogt, 320 Old Crystal Bay Road No - Preliminary Subdivision - Continuation of Public Hearing List o£ Exhibits Exhibit A - Exhibit B - Exhibit C Exhibit D Exhibit E Exhibit P Exhibit G Septic Test Survey Individual Site Plans Locating Soil Borings & Perculation Test Holes Planning Commission Minutes of 9/21/87 Engineer's Report Preliminary Plat Drainage Watershed Map Gaffron's Memo/Packet At the Planning Commission meeting of September 21, 1987, the application was tabled and the Public Hearing to be continued until the applicant had submitted the necessary septic testing to confirm adequate, suitable area for principal and alternate on-site sewage systems. Please review Exhibits A & B. All ten undeveloped lots are confirmed as meeting required standards. Of the total 20 test areas, 4 tested out as standard systems and the remaining 16 as mound systems. If any members have reservations concerning the use of mound design systems, please contact Mike Gaffron prior to the meeting as he will not be present at the December 21st meeting. Staff can confirm that the only known failure of a mound system was a result of faulty installation and had no bearing on the actual design of the system. Standard systems fail when installed incorrectly also. The average cost of installing a mound septic system runs anywhere from $8,000-10,000 and a standard system $4,000-6,000. Review Exhibit F, a memo/packet from Mike Gaffron that reviews mound installations in the City and current level of expertise. In reviev.’irg the Engineer's report. Exhibit D, the wetlands boundaries as shown on Lots 5 and 6 are satisfactory. The Engineer recommends the placement of 15" culverts at 2 designations on the plat (see Exhibit E). Note that we would also recommend that existing drainageway within Lot 2, Block 2 be relocated along the east lot line at the time of site grading. Zoning File #1201 December 14, 1987 Page 2 of 3 In regard to Planning Commission's concern with the size and configuration of Lot 7, staff would suggest that final plat resolution include a disclaimer advising future owner that if property is divided in the future, such division will be subject to all pertinent municipal ordinances effective at that time. Thert* would be no legal basis to state lot cannot be subdivided in the future. As for concern with underground drainage tiles, review Exhibit F, the only area draining to the east is a small watershed designated with slash lines. If drainage is affected by land alterat.ons on the subject property, drainage would be picked up at road ditches on Old Crystal Bay Road, but once again, the area is minimal in area and v/e have no record of such underground lines existing. Please advise staff if you have any other concerns with this division as proposed prior to the meeting so that staff will have adequate time to gather or define new information for your meeting. Staff Recommendation - To approve the proposed 11 lot plat subdivision of Mike Hilbelink and John Vogt finding all pertinent sections of the subdivision, zoning and on site septic codes have been satisfied and tr t a variance to all 11 lots to be served by private roads finding the pa.acement and design of such roads would provide adequate and safe access for the public who use the roads. Such approval is subject to the following conditions: 1.Underlying road and utility easements to be granted over all road outlots. 2.Conservation & Flowagc^ easement taken over designated wetland. 3.Lots 1, 2, and 3, Block 1 are classified as through lots. Future owners are placed on notice that a conditional use permit is required prior to the installation of accessory structures. 4. Septic testing or a letter from the on-site septic evaluator. Bob Koch, confirming adequate area for an alternate septic site on Lot 2, Block 1. 5.Relocate existing drainageway on Lot 2, Block 2 to east lot line within 10' wide drainage easement. 6.Per Section 11.33, Subdivision 4, plat roads to be constructed as follows; A.East/west road 28' minimum paved width. B.North/south road 24' minimum paved width. 7.Park fee of $2,000 ($200.00 x 10 lots). Zoning File #1201 December 14, 1987 Page 3 of 3 8.Future owner of Lot 7 is hereby advised that if property is subdivided at sometime in the future, such division shall be subject to all pertinent ordinances existing at that time. 9.Prior to final subdivision, applicants shall submit private covenants that will define the ownership and share in maintenance of future private roads. % ^ P.O. Box 81 LoroU.n. MN Tel: (612)479-2133/ L»iVhoilraiiu’ic.Li reco. L ■un.iat.i on;, .an? .'»••• t:u;ao i-.’u i^ropojcd acvclo,)iiu;jiU: i'he liorthuoal l/.i o.' Lho .jouti oaal 1/i; ui section 113, towruhi,. 116 , ranj;e 23 •iJoant,/, . ^nncsoLa. Lot I dloclv 1 oitc 1 .... 1 . had an avora/c percolation rate oi ./.2 ;u:./in in uio top o inchoQ. Iho uotUed »il lewis a.-e 30 inetea a can be inatallecl on t-nla ai-oc. ii-o 2.hag a., average ncroola..ion rate or n, .un/ir. and tno .rntUecl coil level waa M I. ft to I, ft i. inai.oa . a atanaard rtrainiiolJ could be in tliiy ru im* Lot 111 lilotdc 1 -ilto .1 I I , . I iiad un av.n-.:-o porcolaLIon ruW of '.a ..in/n. and tin- i.K,U.Jn.l soil level was at 2k inches and 2J inches and 21 inches, oitc, IlJ.ad an average per colation rate of oO nin/in and tne inottlod soil level was at 1 ft to J It./-incnes. Only a l-lound systcu can be installed in either area oite I or dite,^ Lot L Block I Jite I had an average percolation rate of 70 ii-n/in and ti.c i.-,ttled soil level was at lb inches and 3 fect..atc,U had i-.n avc-radc ..ercolation rate of 70 ain/in and the mottled soil level was at 30 i.'wnec to JJ incncs. n ..oand nyste... would need to be installed in either Site 1 or Lot S Dlockl Site I_., ^had an average percolation rate of 70 rdn/in tuio the laittled soil level was at 2o inches to 30 inches.Jiltc_U had an average percolation rate of 70 rdn/in apd the ..ottled soil level was at 21 i. ones,inches and 30 incnos. A i-lound system would oe required on botli of these oi.^. Lot 6 Block I SiteJ[_ t-i^i ;^ad an avoraco percolaUon rate of !iu -dn/in and tne oiae.. soil level was at 2 ft. 7 inches, 2 ft 10 inches ana 3 has an avera;c percolation rate of oO .dn/in ana tho i.iottled soil level was at .■ ft a men,-a a..u 2b inches. A Mound system would also bo riM-.uiiod on noth ts, _ . ■- -----------------------------^ad a porcolation rate of 30 rdn/in and tr.e mtvleu su.l level was at 3 ft and 2 ft 3 inches, site II had a porcotav:on I u.o oi c0..un/l., mottled soil level wsa at 3 ft 30 inches raid 1,: inch.:,. „ dounl s..st,::., ..ou,. I al-.- be rcijuircd on two .yl Robert Koch MPCA CertifitJcJ •- • Koch ’s Soil Testing P.O. Box 01 l.nrettn, MN rd; (612)4/9-^03/ The follov;in,' drainliela rucouiicndatlons ai*«: i'or t-jy Lott, at tniy pro^JOacd developi.icnt; tno .iorthvjc^t i/a oi the .jOutlicaat 1//j oi section 113» townohip 1H>, iv^nLC 23, lienncpin dr.onoy, .iinnesota y h Lot b lilock I 3ito I had .“in avoraj^o puree Nation rate oi 7t) niii/in aiid the ;.ottled aoil level was at 3t) inciies, 3 ft 6 inuiiua and 30 inchuj* Jito 11 i'.ad ;u'i avcrajjc perco lation rate of 3*0 ran/tn and the mottled soil luvulwas at 3 ft <■> inones, J it 'j> indies and 3 ft* A ilound oystcin must oe installed on uotli of tutvu Lot I Block III Site I hati an avuraj;*) jM?r<;*>latlon rate of [>h iiin/in aiu. t.ar mvittliai soil level was a h ft 3 inches, h ft .'i laches luuj h ft ■'» inche.>» oi te 1 nail .ui aveia,,«. percolation rate of Uh min/in ai.d tho mottled soil levelwas at u ft u inches and U ft* A standard dj-ainfield can bo installed on Bite I out a mound systen would uc rcijuircd on Site II (due to the laottled soil level at 3 ft. Lot I Blocl: II Site i had an averadG percolation rate of SO .min/in and the .nottled soil level was at 30 inciies, 2U inciics a^id 23 indies* oito II Iiad .'in avoraijO i^crcolatuon laoc oi 37*2 min/in and the :iottled soil level was at p ft 6 indies , p ft 10 inches and 3 ft. Site 1 would require a i!ou»id system wldle oito II woulu need only a st.a-idard drainficld. Lot II Bloc; II Bite I had an avera^je percolation rate of 3c.h min/in unn tiie mjotlcd woii level was at U ft and Ij ft 6 inches. Bite II had oii a/eraje ycrcolution rule oi 70 rain/in and the mottled soil level was at 3 ft 2 ft o incncs luiu pO ancncs. n standard drainficld can be installeil on Bite I out Bi te II , uoolci rctjuire a .A)ujid syste; 1. Bee the unclosi.d i>trcol: -don tests and .oil ..orlnys fou t-.o lictails on cacii in'Ilvi.iual Lui,. Thi,' sice of .xmiv. .j;, .se ij or Jr .iui'icl .ouL.n l v>:. Ln- sine and location of tlu- actual .lou.o. C -X t. - a. Robert Koch •''/if, MPCA Certified If i t; •; i •P .V *•.Lc-'f 'oi- Y. I r^-‘ <** :h'v: 5>--•» « « f.\ •,;f .ii .‘5‘.'v>v;jt.v.. • •. »•• • , • » • • *r!* ■• * r \ ,.• •• •. iV'V 1^': ■k'\•' i*.'f". »» /*> A ** J /’ .- • ^ •% • •t '• • • [<r -?.Ac:. r •p.*/ "V 1 . sT’’ '*y< Y'r I ^o' '^1 .1-1 <■-f y 1 NX) 0 V Z- p / ^!o »* i •» ♦ f ■ 1 r.t’ ^ -’>♦ * ./yi- •• V s^-t V » .•»■"!*•• r' 1 K) •V?:. • ^ \:- •'V -.V • >y v;» /i*r rV • ' |i b y. ^■ s !''♦*i' •.' ;* r " i:-u .* '♦> •«. ••« # • ' m . '' V /v. »• •■v .»: »« ‘ ‘V I-' 3.0/3 *7 IN) ^ »'! V 74/*.%• « fl ■I*.-‘ *• «. •t • «. V ?R^- 7 c7 s p- O %• r.V I-**.. ^.* i . .• iy • 4-:; S-. S?«p AM .1.1 I r-- *i;:' >v»*', • isj cr\ no :v.- 4 .i. - t *■ i.* ’ .Ji *♦. ».i i7 V/ \n k O J.. A* . %5 •' 5 y- t:. •V* i '(•'i ,.i .s I ►; •2.C' ^ 4 “■ « :;b- / V3-2 p. SR'^ sxC/ 5~ So'C. A-'SB / foe }oo > <d X « 'p. I t> •5?' \ ■ Sft'3 x:<^ o4T-______ V<25 0. SL ■S' 7.-5:^^ ------------------- *v' •* - V ^ - i ■•4- :i-: Uot^K) MINUTES OP THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 21, 1987 ATTENDANCE 7:03 P.M. The Planning Commission meeting was held on the above date with the follov/ing members present: Chairman Kelley, Bellows, Cohen, and Hanson. Brown arrived at 7:08 and Taylor arrived at 7:14 P.M. Johnson was absent. The following represented the City staff: Building & Zoning Administrator Mabusth and City Recorder Peterson. CounciImember Callahan was also present. #1197 C. WICKS/W. PERRELL/G. COFFIN 3045/3085 WATERTOWN ROAD SUBDIVISION OF A LOT LINE REARRANGEMENT PUBLIC HEARING 7:14-7:17 The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing was noted. Ward Ferrell, Arlo VandeVegte, and Gordon Coffin were present for this matter. Zoning Administrator Mabusth explained that this application is n*^*- actually a lot line rearrangement and the the review in solves more of a corrective action to offset incorrect legal desriptions of properties originally created within Auditors Subdivision No. 230. Staff recommends approval of the filing of the corrective survey that would redefine the legal descriptions of Lots 3, 4 and 5 Auditors Subdivision No. 230. M Ferrell noted that the disputed property consisted There were no comments from the public reg:.ding this matter and the public hearing was closed. It was moved by Chairman Kelley, seconded by Cohen, to recommend approval per staff recommendation. Motion. Ayes 6, Nays 0. (#1201 M. HILBELINK/J. VCX3T \^0 QJ-D CRYSTAL BAY ROAD NORTH CtHSSIII SUBDIVISION - PLAT PUBLIC HEARING 7:35-7:56 The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing was noted. John Vogt, Mike Hilbelink, and surveyor Phil Nelson were present for this matter. MINUTES OF TDE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 21, 1987 #1201 HILBELINK/VOGT CONTINUED Zoning Administrator Mabusth explained the revised proposal per the Planning Commission directives from the September 8, 1987 sketch plan review meeting. All lots are now served by interior plat roads and all lots meet the required lot width at the rear of the required front yard setback line, but Lot 8 is optional. She reviewed the outlets for future development not to be constructed at this time, only as a potential through road if the City deems necessary. In response to Chairman Kelley's question. Zoning Administrator Mabusth stated that criteria considered by the City which may necessitate the through road would be changes in density resulting from sewer. She noted that the City is not intent on taking over roads serving areas at 2+ acre densities, which they would have to do if a through road was put in. Phil Nelson explained the contours and soils of the property noting that septic testing has not yet been completed, however, mound systems are anticipated for all lots. Bill Hull, 2445 Woodhaven Drive, stated his main concern is the traffic and safety with many small children in their area if a through road were constructed. He stated he has no objection with the plan as currently proposed. Allen Engleman, 315 Old Crystal Bay Road, voice.< concern v;ith damage to the road and bridge from heavy truck traffic from the existing and future develpment. He stated that these trucks are over the posted weight limit asking what the City intends to do about it. Mr. Engleman was advised to submit photos that he has taken of such violator. i for appropriate staff person to enforce. Scott Goldsmith, 265 Old Crystal Bay Road, asked about the drainage from the proposed development; and will a nine lot plat create a need for a storm sev/er. Phil Nelson stated that approximately 95% of the drainage will go to the drainage swale by the railroad tracks. He explained the drainage pattern which is not anticipated to change by the proposed development. Chairman Kelley asked if a berm along Old Crystal Bay Road was planned. MINUTES OP THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 21, 1987 #1201 HILBELINK/VCX3T CONTINUED Chairman Kelley asked Mr. Nelson if the farm property had any existing draintile currently assisting the drainage that would be disrupted by the development and change the drainage. Phil Nelson stated he was unaware of any existing draintile but would check into it. John Vogt stated that no berm is planned, however, as in the last development, the future property owner may desire a berm. Staff advised applicants that a separate conditional use permit and review would be required for any berm. Planning Commission voiced concern with Lot 7 (which is proposed at 6.1 acres) being silt'd!vided in the future. Phil Nelson stated that due to the soils and need to provide primary and alternate septic sites, he is fairly certain Lot 7 could not be subdivided further. Zoning Administrator Mabusth concurred v;ith Mr. Nelson on this point. Chairman Kelley recommended that a covenant be made to prohibit further subdivision of Lot 7. Bellows voiced major concern with very marginal soils and felt that the soils should also be tested for suitable building pads. She was not in favor of a subdivision requiring all mound systems stating that these systems are experimental and many have been known to fail. Zoning Administrator Mabusth stated that there is nothing in the platting code that would require soils tests to ensure buiIdability. Serverely marginal soils have been used to construct homes and that construction of such foundations result in increased construrtion costs. Chairman Kelley stated that although the «ity does not require it, he advised applicants ..or their own interest to consider the marginal s-'ils and possibly have the soils tested for suitable bUi.lding pads. It was moved by Chairman Kelley, sfconded by Hanson, to table this matter and continue the public hearing pending completion of septic tercing. Motion, Ayes 6, Nays C. MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 21, 1987 #1201 UILBELINKAOGT CONTINUED In response to Bellows' concern/ Zoning Administrator Mabusth stated that the City Engineer and MCWD will be reviewing the actual defined wetland area. #643 BRUCE 6 CAMILLE CURTISS 1920 pag:3rness point road RECONSIDERATION OP VARIANCE APPLICATION Zoning Administrator Mabusth explained the issues involved: 1) Providing a turn-around required as a condition for variances approved by Council on 9/14/81; b) allowing a 6' privacy fence that was constructed without Council approval and according to staff partially in the City right-of-way. Camille Curtiss was present for this matter and contended that they have no objection to installing the turn-around but believed t.hat the City war opposed to the tuin-around because it would resu^Lt in more hardcover. Planning Commission and staff noted that based on the documentation from 1981 provided/ the turn-around was required. Planning Commission recommended and Mrs. Curtiss agreed to installing the turn-around. Regarding the remaining issue of the fence/ Mrs. Curtiss stated she was unaware that an additional permit was required J or the fence and questioned that the fence was partially in the right-of-way. She noted that no further c :>nstruction has been done on the fence since the City'i stop work order posted 9/11/86/ but it is essentially completed. She submitted a petition from her neighbors stating they have no objection to the fence. She stated that *'h‘? fence is needed for the safety of children. Zoning Administrator Mabusth noted that in the 1981 review/ the narrow depth of the lot and minimal grassed yard area was discussed. There was no discussion of a fence found in the review of that application but it is applicable in the application for reconsideration. Chairman Kelley suggested that a shorter than 6' fence could serve the safety and privacy concerns. It was moved by Chairman Kelley, seconded by Hanson, to table this matter pending an official survey to determine proper fence location. Motion, Ayes 6, Nays 0. 0 Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik & Associates, Inc. 2335 IV. Trunk Highway 36 St Paul, MN 55113 6126364600 September 17, 1987 City of Orono Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Attn: Ms. Jeanne Mabusth Re: File No. 139-1201 Hilbelink-Vogt Preliminary Plat Engineers & Architects Otto C Bonntnw, P £ Hubert IT Hutenf. /* L Ju%etrh C AnJrrtik. P L HfaJJued A. Lrmbeet, P t HKHQfdt. Tttrittr. P.t. J ^in C O/mmi. P t CtertnR Coot,P£ hrilh A CurUiUt, P L Jhumut t Nufe%, P L MniuttU H’ Loitre. P.t. HubeftC SihunHht,Pt Mar\$n L Sofwth. P.t. Dtma'J C Bergardt, P.£. Jerry A. Bourdon. P.t. Mark A Maruun. P t. TeJK Ftfld. PE Mh hot! T Hautmunn, P £ Hubert M Pjrjjrrir. P t iJuerd O Loxiota. P L JHumat W Petenun, P.t. Mnhaei C lyrnh, P.t karen L. ILUlu. P £. Jamet H. Matar^. P £. kenneth P Anderiun. P £. krnh A Bathmann, PL. Mark H Mo(/i. P t. Hubert C Muisek. A LA. Tkumat t Artgui. PL. St uit L Yuung. P L Ckariei A truiuin Leo M Pawebky Harlan M Oliun Huian M tberhn Dear Jeanne, We have reviewed the Hilbelirk-Vogt Preliminary Plat. The plan as submitted is acceptable with provisions for controlling the site runoff. The property owner should provide a 20 foot wide drai».:ige easement over the entire drainage ditch within the plat. The owner should provide a 15" diameter culvert beneath tlie access in the ditchline of Old Crystal Bay Road. A 15" culvert should also be provided in the low area beneath the proposed roadway so that surface water can be direc ted to the drainage ditch. We did not complete a hydraulic analysis for the watershed to determine cul vert size. We simply observed the existing culverts in the area. Roadways should be completed in developing this plat; proposed roadways should be constructed through the Peterman Second Addition and the Wood^aven Addition to complete the road network in the ar-*a. Yours very truly, BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC. Michael C. Lynch MCL:li 66l9e % ^ , «»««■ V r ^ # V . A •-•■*— W--------— -'T - • - ~ *” ^ f ^ ** *~^T**'^ ^~'m ^w *-• »“• • * V“ rvr ::Y ^ : ;sTvcw ;<w£ , jrrrm:"—^ ri • ./ zrr. z,ziz^::z.z'^^rz: Jz... -//• "^-:,r.*:i: I // • “"•'■• — .... •■-••••—• / #• *’ hb^—\V*' “ • ♦ j^^.'zz.'zzz. *T". r. \ tmSmmmk l. »■> •-'• ■■n •■ ■ * , kI • >>W X> v» 11 :;:cj ■- ^**4 ^ar^—O '^Gl CRYSTAL \ RFRRY ^HILL Wl-UM f>H1V^ NORTH ?• . -- jNfim jC MRI FWCi£ \ SI DUPONT %f\ r NORTH_______SRJ LAKE ytEW Z'3:.^. —•—'ZT'^' y ti- 71 ■J /Ik HU ' > i • » /97 » /?&7 .^7<7trr/VC A>c^ yNjL^ /^epA'/tCj' 7^/c> z c> — V 26. 5/. 2.^ /?/e/ o 7 /S 7 // /r 2- ( I”? 2/ 3?^ 3i' 7/ iTO V O IS % /I/ /e./o ^zV. 3VX ?6. X 227% 35% O O a O S o 3 7 •3>-S ? 6^ 2'^ ?-V 3^ /V 2-1 /S /? oX> o'4 oX o/. /V“/^ .i>X /yx 37 X /6 X 3 e> ’/» 77 S’-")?-cxX r 2’"/ c,^//-3<r>-&7'j) 2-7 r^y's'// “X . i : I I ^ I y6^ 0'p Ij “ ^:>3 ^ S'c^TlC TTrS.'^''^C=> yjAS^ ]Ci^:> Xa Pc^t^ ^2li~ LJ>0;1|<L. ^ 14-cr-^C.Je^ X^r£,VCT70 //^ /AJ ^Me-A^'T* /CLe'PPrU^S ^ /I yoo77r-f.<i5^C*‘ /aJ i:j7 /^A/v\(.' i c-^^‘mr^C^ .T>rv^4t- -------------**T= v^V- Of'‘ J>! CX/irr/'-'X-^ K'c*S(PtA^cf 5%3i: OF /-/-3'? U5//VU- oA'X/rr ^ rrnr>^.S. V--------- . . ^ /^6 2 I \ ^ C’/ SjtoO /v^t'/c'fy>^ /'•/-^’~? ■ *76-'’ ~ /t o ^„iTT dls4Al^io^jQ*' dosc^ -^^A/P> ?P|2^! Mi ry^’g'* 4ciU/.c^ /^sr/>t4gg 1 2.9V3 ^M&O ^f^C,L^vJcf:>r> !SL>0 'J^&cetoocS> &>. C'Y6^a^^ 2ZSO Pei//AJ Za/ 2,^/^ P>^/A/ Za^ 2.0 0> 2S1 0> /O.U^lu-^oco P«» TP a^vz /o i/Vwl^ £0^1 fA(^Vte\A:^ /-/o 5"7S" OKFon-^ /St> '?(^T N-Fftfev-. ^t>. 62^ >J. ft«/Jj>«.(.e fe.. ^ OiJ C/FOfiE> iS-'C’ S8c>o Bi-'Jb IZUM ^fiAcn-i-TTS pr: fox S>T. 'fpitNtClM /-AJ. fJ , pEKA-’IJA'tG^ ^■5>X Sr. fx- K S' 2JC>5 307Q 7 CO /O 2 o PD «'’A pp p/->6 pp. /74C /^. A pE> ZyS P27 6A^X5 - cS-P ■ pD /.»•& /^sTirn CBlaak. /eu5>S oLS<^/^ - c, C-C> ^^ S Ui^(l/AA> ^gr/7#/ O. yi CM5^ C>cSc>^ * ^uffi. Ot-So/O ///^^ O lomg .^ ^AfZL. t^AY* **’So/v V^P ICClTHC^AfC pj> /.rB Brj^ • r“> f-.VPPAfcCa Wij>,v,er^ &.: 1-<,C.F '-^ MAAS PZ>^fvB f^TAJ-ve Skos, PJ> /-C S FD p0> LOiDl'iigR pS. LO\t>yvi£Te p-r) fCj-C £u,t/./l,'AiAJ PP fltC Smi.a/1/MaJ /?7S /?7f /?7? /‘?7S nn /??? me. riBO pfFO liB'z fA U7> CV) (s^ Co'^ O') c«) ( /c>‘ (H) (p) (,/c) (ip (/*) 00 pc') f \sn UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA Section B >1 J AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION SERVICE Department of Agricultural Engineering 201 Agricultural Engineering Building 1390 Eckles Avenue St Paul, Minnesota 55108 TABLE OF CONTENTS Topics Codes - Copy of Minnesota Rules Chapter 7080 Individual Sewage Treatment Systems Standards and proposed changes. Site and Soils - How soil treats sewage; site evaluation; soil surveys; soil augers; percolation testing; surveying; sample data sheets. Sewage Tanks - Septic tanks; aerobic tanks; holding tanks; soil treatment of septage. Soil Treatment Units - Location, design, layout and installation of trenches and beds; drop boxes, distribution boxes and valve boxes; shallow trenches; sewage osmosis; seepage pits. Mounds - Design and construction of sewage treatment motands; pressure distribution of effluent. Pumps - Sewage ejector pumps, sump pumps; friction loss; pumping stations; pump selection. Collector Systems - Sewage treatment systems using individual septic tanks and common soil treatment units; suggested design criteria. Shoreland - Publications available; individual systems; resort systems; county and municipal Shoreland Acts; setback distances. Water Use - Estimates of sewage flows; water use rates for homes and other establishments. Toilets - Partial list of manufacturers of chemical, incinerators and composting toilets; sanitary privy. Evaluation - Procedures for evaluation of existing systems; use of dye; lake property questionnaire; inspection forms; system design worksheet. V B-1 HOW SOIL TREATS SEWAGE TANK EFFLUENT Suitable soil is an effective treatment medium for sewage tank effluent. Soil contains a complex biological community. One tablespoon of soil contains over a million microscopic organisms, including bacteria, protozoa, fungi, molds, and other creatures. It is the bacteria and other microorganisms in the soil which treat the wastewater and purify it before it reaches the groundwater table. *^ut the wastewater must pass through the soil slowly enough to provide adequate contact time with soil particles and microorgeinisms. Soil bacteria or "bugs” as they are sometimes called, need the same things to live and grow as any other animal. They need a place to live, food and water to eat, air or oxygen to breathe, and time to grow. Soil bacteria attach themselves to soil particles using microbial slimes. The larger soil pores are filled with air, containing oxygen. To provide adequate time for treatment to take place, it is necessary to have at least 3 feet of aerated or unsaturated soil. WHAT IS SOIL? Soil is also a collection of particles of various sizes which have been ground up from the larger rocks by glaciers or by the action of wind and water. On page B-17 three schemes for classifying soil particles are presented. The U.S. Department of Agriculture classification system is used by the Soil Conservation Service and by soil scientists when classifying and mapping soils. The relative proportions of sand, silt, and clay particles determine the soil texture. The triangle graph on page B-l8 shows the various soil textures under the USDA classification system. A soil consisting of equal parts of sand, silt, and clay is called a clay loam. If there Is more sand, it becomes a sandy loam; if the clay content increases, it becor.es a clay. A field method for estimating soil texture is given in publication CD-FO-0817 at the end of Section B. Most people have a good idea of what a sand particle looks and feels like. But it is Impossible to see a single clay particle with a naked eye, and difficult to visualize the size of 0.002 mm. If a sand particle were magnified to a size 10 inches in diameter, in comparison, a silt particle would be about 1 inch in diameter and a clay particle about the size of a grain of sugar. Structure, which is the formation of larger soil particles by the cementing vtietner of individual sand, silt, and clay particles, affects the pore size and the rate at which water will move through soil. It is not the size of soil particles that determines how fast water moves through soil, but rather the size of the spaces or pores between the particles or aggregates. Loamy soils have a mixture of pore sizes, some large and some small, depending upon the arrangement of the different particles. A field soil with a high percentage of clay particles has more pores than a sandy soil but will drain much more slowly because the pores are very small. A soil which has a well-defined structure will transmit water much more rapidly than a soil where the structure has been destroyed by compaction or smearing. WHAT IS WASTEWATER? Wastewater which enters the soil in a sewage treatment system becomes the food and water for the biological community. Domestic wastewater is 99.water and 1 B-2 only O.lt pollutants which need to be removed. Wastewater treatment is difficult because it is necessary to maintain a very hi/jh removal efficiency while dealing with large volumes of water. The O.lf in wastewater that must be removed or modified consists mostly of organic material, bacteria, and nutrients. The organic material, which is sometimes called the "biochemical oxygen demand" (BOD), comes from a variety of. sources in a domestic wastewater system. Food preparation, dish and clothes washing, and wastes from the relatively inefficient human digestive system all discharge into the domestic sewage system. Table B.1. shows the concentration of BCD, suspended solids, and other materials in raw sewage and in septic tank effluent. BOD and suspended solids are measures of the percentage of organic material found in wastewater. Pathogens are microorganisms which cause disease and are usually present in domestic sewage. Fecal conforms are indicators of the presence of pathogens and Table B.1. shows that in 100 ml (about 1/2 cup) of septic tank effluent, there are between 1,000 and 1 million. There are about the same number of viruses in this quantity of effluent. Nutrients are part of the materials in septic tank effluent and are of concern because of possible eutrophication of ground or surface waters and possible contamination of water supply wells. Nitrogen and phosphorus are the nutrients of major concern in sewage tank effluent. Quantities of these nutrients are listed at various locations in the soil treatment system in Table B.1. Table B.1. Treatment Efficiencies of Soils Parameter Raw Waste Septic Tank Effluent One Foot Below Trench Bottom Three Feet Below Trench Bottom BOD- (rag/1) 0 270 - HOO 140 - 175 0 0 TSS (mg/1)300 - 400 45 - 6*?0 0 Fecal Conform (MPN/100 ml) 1 million to 100 million 1 thousand to 1 million 0 - 100 0 Viruses (PFU/ml) (Unknown)100 thousand to 10 million 0 - 1000 0 Nitrogen Total (mg/1)100 - 150 1 50 - 60 • -- NH^j (mg/1)50 - 120 30 - 60 •B - 60 B NO^ (tug/]) Total Pho3~ < 1 < 1 B - 40 B - 40 phorus (mg/1)10 - 40 10 - 30 B - 10 B - 1 ‘ B s Background % r ( vmni'r i B-3 HOW SOIL TREATS WASTEWATER In the soil, bacteria eat the food (literally break down the BOD and solids, and incorporate them). Pathogens become trapped in the soil, either by being adsorbed onto soil particles, or becoming stuck to the microbial slimes laid down by soil bacteria. Once trapped, some pathogens die because of differences in temperature, lack of moisture and food, and other causes. Others are inhibited or killed by antibiotics given off naturally by soil fungi and other organisms. Still others are actually preyed upon by soil bacteria and literally eaten. Nutrients are also removed or modified. Nitrogen from the septic tank is usually in the ammonia form (NH^). While some is used by the soil bacteria or adsorbed by the soil particles,'most of it is converted to nitrate (NO.) in the aerated soil. Nitrates are soluble and will move with soil water. Nitrate movement is one of the reasons for separation distances between sewage treatment systems and water supply wells. There is little evidence to show, however, that shallow sewage treatment systems such as drainfield trenches or seepage beds cause nitrate problems with water supply wells. Recent research results show that sewage treatment mounds utilizing pressure distribution do an excellent job of denitrification. Phosphates are removed from wastewater by being adsorbed onto soil particles, particularly particles with high concentrations of iron, manganese, and aluminum. Soils with a greater percentage of clay particles have more of these minerals than sands. When the adsorption sites are filled, phosphates will ir'^ve through the soil. Laboratory studies on coarse sands Indicate the maximum rate of phosphate movement is about 50 cm (20 inches) per year. Field studies have indicated that the rate is even slower under operating sewage treatment systems. Phosphate movement will be still less through loam or finer textured soils which have more adsorption sites. If the treatment system is functioning properly, problems from phosphate movement to surface or groundwaters should be minimal. UNSATURATED FLOW AND THE BIOMAT The soil bacteria must have air and sufficient time for treatment to be effective. These conditions will exist if the soil beneath the soil treatment system is unsaturated. In an unsaturated soil, water moves only through the smallest pores or in a thin film around soil particles surrounding the larger pores which are usually filled with air. The reason for this type of movement is that the driving force behind unsaturated flow is not gravity, but a soil tension force (sometimes called capillary attraction, wicking action, or "sucking power"). If all soil pores were filled with water (i.e., saturated conditions), most of the water would flow by gravity through the larger pores (much the same way one could put more water through a 12-inch culvert than a 1-inch garden hose). However, under unsaturated co»'ditions, the largest pores drain first, since they are able to exert the least tension (or "sucking power"). Water is pulled or "sucked" through the smaller pores. Because water is moving due to tension or "sucking" power, it does not have to go down but can move sideways or even up to wherever the soil is driest. The presence of lush, green grass over the drainfield is evidence of this "capillary" movement of unsaturated flow of water. 11 rn• r 11'rr- T i ri~~r .'T—7~r~ L. B-4 As sewage tank effluent flows into a drainfield trench, It moves into the distribution pipe and down through the trench rock to the soil where treatment begins* A biological layer or biomat is formed by soil roicroorganisms which secrete a gluey or sticky substance and anchor themselves to the soil or rock particles. This biomat forms first along the trench bottom and as liquid begins to pond in the trench, forms along the soil surfaces on the sidewalls. When' fully developed, the gray to black slimy biomat layer is about 1/2 to 1 inch thick. Flow through the biomat is considerably slower than flow throug.' natural soil and is unsaturated flow. Thus, the biomat acta as a valve to slow down the flow of wastewater into the soil so that unsaturated conditions exist In the soil beneath the drainfield trench. A properly functioning system will have wastewater ponded in the trench while the soil a few inches outside of and below the trench will be unsaturated. The unsaturated soil has pores containing both air and water so that microorganisms living in the soil can effectively tr*i *• the wastewater through the soil systen,. A developed biomat is in equilibrium in that it remains at about the same thickness and the same permeability if proper effluent quality and quantity are maintained. The biomat and the liquid ponded within the trench are anaerobic and the organic materials in the wastewater are food for the anaerobic microorganisms which grow and multiply and increase the thickness and decrease the permeability of the biomat. On the soil side of the biomat, oxygen is present so that conditions are aerobic allowing soil bacteria to feed on and break down the biomat continuously. These two processes go on at about the same rate so that the thickness and permeability of the biomat remain about the same. If the wastewater contains a greater proportion of organic material because of failure to regularly pump the septic tank, the greater amount of food for the bacteria will increase the thickness of the biomat and decrease its permeability. If seasonally saturated conditions occur in the soil outside the trench, aerobic conditions will no longer exist, the biomat will thicken, and its permeability will be reduced. Soil of suitable texture is an excellent treatment medium for sewage tank effluent. The soil is a self-renewing treatment system and will maintain its treatment effectiveness and capacity as long as the sewage tank effluent remains of reasonable quality and as long as aerobic conditions exist in the soil outside of the trench. The design and construction procedures presented in this Manual are intended to show how to utilize the soil system in such a way as to assure that sewage tank effluent is properly treated. • • I ✓'SECTION E - MOUNDS A sewage treatment mound is a seepage bed elevated by soil fill to provide an adequate separation distance between the rock layer in the mound and the barrier layer such as saturated soil conditions or bedrock. The mound must be carefully constructed to provide adequate sewage treatment. Mound failures have usually been traced to improper construction practices. Important factors in the design and successful operation of a sewage treatment mound are location, size and shape, soil surface preparation, construction procedures, distribution of effluent, and dosing quantity. 1 and 2 list conditions where a mound can successfully be used and caution on wl.c use of large mounds with collector sewage systems. While mounds sized to treat the effluent from one or two single-family residences will be successful, large-scale mounds have and will continue to fail to properly treat sewage because of incorrect design. With slowly permeable soils, water table mounding will take place within the mound itself, causing hydraulic failure. With rapidly permeable srils, the concentration of nitrates moving downward may contaminate groundwater aquifers. Properly designed and constructed sewage treatment mounds are an effective method of onsite sewage treatment. Recent research at the Small-Scale Waste Management Project indicates that residential mounds utilizing pressure distribution will have *4*1 percent less nitrates percolating downward than a standard subsurface trench system. Sufficient mounds have been installed in Minnesota and elsewhere to prove that the mound treatment system should be an accepted technology. Sewage treatment mounds should not be considered alternative treatment systems, but rather preferred treatment systems in many instances. Pages 3 and *1 show a perspective view as well as a cross-section and plan view of a mound. Mound construction begins with the layer of clean sand which must be at least 1-foot thick. The top of the clean sand layer must be level as must the rock layer which is placed upon the clean sand layer. Distribution pipes, preferably for pressure distribution, are placed in the rock layer which is covered with a layer of hay or straw plus a layer of untreated building paper. These layers may be replaced by a single layer of a permeable synthetic fabric. The purpose ot the layer over the clean rock is to prevent the soil backfill from filtering dawn into the rock and occupying the void spaces of the rock. A loamy sand cap, which is 6 inches thick at the side and 12 inches thick at the center is placed over the rock layer. The purpose of the loamy sand is to avoid undue soil compaction so that the pore spaces are maintained, and soil air and moisture can move freely. The entire mound area is covered with a 6-inch layer of top soil upon which a grass cover should be established as soon as possibl . The contractor is primarily responsible for proper mound construction. There arc three layers, each of which if not tre'ted properly, can create problems with the hydraulic performance of the mound. The first layer is the natural or fill soil upon which the mound is to be constructed. If this soil is wetter than the plastic limit, or if considerable construction -i- activity has caused compaotlon, then the ability of this soil to transmit liquid will have been seriously reduced. For proper hydraulic performance, there should be at least 2 feet of natural or fill soil with a percolation rate between 5 and 120 minutes per inch. This could be 2 feet of natural soil above a saturated layer, it could be 1 foot of natural soil plus 1 foot of fill soil, or it could be 2 feet of fill soil, preferably of loamy sand texture. Unless the soil under the mound has the ability to transmit liquid both vertically and horizontally, the mound will not function properly. Another critical layer which is essential to proper mound performance is the soil surface upon which the clean sand layer is placed. Soil surface preparation which is described on page 9 should be carefully studied. Once the clean sand layer is in place, it will be extremely difficult for the inspector to determine how the soil surface was prepared prior to sand placement. A soil surface which has been smeared, compacted, and otherwise made unsuitable for the movement of liquid through it, will not recover that capacity after a period of time. Liquid will likely seep out of the mound at the toe of the dike or at the edge of the rock layer. Page 9 indicates that a crawler or track-type tractor shall be used for mound construction. Page 16 shows earth pressures of various sized track-type tractors. It is recommended that the earth pressure of the crawler tractor used for mound construction not exceed 1,000 Ibs/sq ft. The use of proper construction equipment along with proper construction techniques is essential to proper mound performance. The other layer over which the contractor has responsibility, but which can easily be checked by the inspector, is the texture of the clean sand layer. Clean sand is described on page 10 on the basis of a sieve analysis. Clean sand can also easily be determined by using the fruit jar test. Place exactly 2 inches of sand in the bottom of a quart fruit jar and then fill the jar three-fourths full of water. Place the cover on the jar and shake the contents vigorously. Allow the jar to stand for about an hour and observe if there is a layer of silt or clay on top of the sand. If the thickness of these fine particles is more than 1/8 inch, the sand is likely not suitable for use in the mound construction. The reason is that too many fine particles tend to cause the soil to compact during the construction process. Also, the long-term acceptance rate of this soil will be slower than the long-term acceptance rate of clean sand, which is used for sizing the rock layer. Troubleshooting a failed raound requires a soil auger which can collect a sample of the sand layer used by the contractor. The same soil auger can penetrate into the soil under the clean sand layer to determine if that layer is unusually compact. The soil 'uger will also allow one to determine if a barrier layer such as seasonally saturated soil is closer than 3 feet to the bottom of the rock layer. The soil sizing factor for the clean sand layer of the mound is 0.83 square feet per gallon of waste per day. Mote that this is the soil sizing factor for a soil having a percolation rate in the range of 0.1 to 5 mpi, as found -ii- r A r r i on paRes B-29 and D-6. To determine the area of rock layer required for a 4-bedroom, type I home, first refer to pace D-7 for the estimated sewage flow rate of 600 gpd. Multiplying 600 gpd times 0.83 uQ ft/gpd results in a rock layer area of 500 sq ft. The rock layer in a mound should be no wider than 10 feet, unless special design considerations are made. Thus, the shape of the rock layer required for a daily sewage flow of 600 gallons is 10 feet wide by 50 feet long. The total width of the mound from dike toe to dike toe is shown on page 5. Dimension d^ is the upslope dike width, and dimension is the dcwnslope dike width. The width of the rock layer is designated as W. The height of the mound above the original soil at the upper edge of the rock layer is designated as h^ and the height at the downslope edge of the rock layer is designated as hi. The slope of the dike is designated with a slope ratio (SR) which is the ratio of the horizontal distance to the vertical distance. For example, an SR of 3 indicates 3 feet horizontal to 1 foot vertical and would be equivalent to a slope of 33 percent. An SR of 4 is a flatter slope and is equivalent to a 25 percent slope. Formulas to determine d^, d^, and h2 are presented on page 5. A table of those values is also presented for convenience. On level ground, d^ equals d^. On sloping ground d^ becomes longer than 1 if the slope ratio is the same for both dikes. The dimension h^ is usually 3.0 feet, consisting of 1.0 foot of clean sand, l.O foot of rock layer, and 1.0 foot of soil cover over the rock. On level ground h_ equals h^, but on sloping ground h. is greater than h^ because tne top of the sand layer and the bottom of the'^rock layer must be level. As an example, if the ground slope is 6 percent, this is equivalent to 6 feet in 100 feet or 0.6 foot in 10 feet. Thus, if h^ equcls 3.0 feet, h- equals 3.0 + 0.6 = 3.6 feet. This value can also be calculated by the formula on page 5 where s is the amount of slope in percent. As can be observed in the table on page 5, the dike widths d. and d^ depend upon the land slope and the dike slope ratio. For example, if the land slope is 6 percent and the dike slope ratio is specified as 4:1, d, equals 9.7 feet and a_ equals 18.9 feet. With a 10-foot wide rock layer, the total dike toe'^to dike toe width of the mound would be 9.7 + 10.0 + 18.9 = 38.6 feet. The length of the mound varies depending upon where it is measured. As can be seen f.~om page 4 in the plan view, the mound shape is trapezoidal. If the length is measured along the center of the rock layer, then the height of the mound at the end of the rock layer is 3.3 feet. If the dike slope ratio is 4:1, the dike will extend out 4.0 x 3.3 or 13.2 feet. The total length of the mound measured at the centerline of the rock layer wi-1 be 13.2 + 50 + 13.2 or 76.4 feet. The mound will be slightly longer near the base of the downslope dike and slightly shorter near the base of the upslope dike. Several mound shapes are shown on pages 6 and 7. The rectangular mound is most commonly used since it is the easiest to construct. While the mound location depends upon soil suitability, every effort should be made to fit the mound into the landscape plan. Hounds can bo used as privacy berms or -iii- to highlight a certain portion of the outdoor living area. While the mound must be functional for sewage treatment, the location and shape should also be functional in the landscape plan. Pages 8, 9» 10 and 11 explain the design and construction procedure for a sewage treatment mound. Some design considerations are under consideration for change by the ISTS Advisory Committee. The most significant changes are with respect to using basal width rather than having a slope restriction as presented in the table on page 8. The changes to Chapter 7080 proposed for mound design are explained on pages 21 and 22. Page 12 shows a layout of perforated laterals to provide pressure distribution of effluent over the rock layer of a mound. The length of the perforated lateral is measured from the point where the effluent enters to the end cap. All connections in the pressure distribution system must be tight in order to prevent leakage and to withstand pressure. The pipe from the pump can enter at the center of the manifold system or at the end as is shown on page 15. The laterals can be connected to the manifold as shown on page 12 or with a tee-to-tee lateral construction as shown on page 14. Also as shown on page 14, there should be a perforation drilled horizontally into the end cap of the perforated lateral near the top or crown. Page 13 presents required lateral lengths and pumping rates for three perforation sizes and spacings. For example, if 1/4-inch perforations are spaced 36 inches apart, a pumping rate of 7.5 gpm is required for each 100 square feet of rock layer area. The total pumping rate for the mound designed for the four-bedroom, type I home would be 500 sq ft x 7.5 gpm/100 sq ft = 37.5 gpm. With 1/4-inch perforations spaced 36 inches apart, the maximum length that a 1-inch perforated lateral could extend would be 27 feet, the maximum length of a 1-1/4-inch lateral would be 42 feet, and the maximum length of a 1-1/2-inch lateral would be 54 feet. Using 1 inch or 1-1/4 inch diameter pipe would require that the manifold be located in the center of the rock layer. With the 1-1/2 inch size for the perforated laterals, the manifold could be located on one end as shown on page 15. On page 13 note that as the lateral diameter increases, the maximum allowable length increases. Also, as the perforation size gets smaller, the maximum allowable length increases. The required pumping capacity is greater for a perforation spacing of 30 inches than 36 inches because there are more perforations. Also, the required pumping capacity increases as the perforation diameter increases. Another technique for determining the pumping capacity required for the perforated lateral system is to determine the number of perforations and multiply by the dischar'go per perforation. Assuming a 36-inch pcrfo»-ation spacing and a rock layer that is 50 feet long, a total of 16 perforations will be required per perforated lateral. The last perforation should be placed in the end cap of each lateral. There will bo 3 laterals and a total of 48 perforations. For a residential system, the head on the perforation should be at least 1.0 foot. The table of perforation \ -iv- ( V discharijes on page 17 shows that 0.7^ gpra will be discharged by a 1/^1-inch perforation at a head of 1.0 foot. Multiplying perforations by O.yil gpm/perforation results in a total flow of 35.5 gpm. While this value is slightly lower than the 37.5 gpm as determined from page 13, it is a more accurate figure. The table at the bottom of page 17 contains friction factors that can be used to calculate the friction loss in a perforated lateral. To use these ”F" factors, the friction loss is first calculated as if the entire flow were moving through the entire length of pipe. In the previous example, each lateral would have a flow of 35.5/3 = 11.8 gpm. The friction loss for 11.8 gpm should be calculated for 48 lineal feet of the pipe diameter under consideration. This total friction loss is then multiplied by an facoor which is 0.376 for a pipe having 16 outlets. The friction loss in the pipe with multiple outlets should not be greater than 20 percent of the average operating pressure, in this case 1.0 foot. Thus the maximum allowable friction loss would be 0.20 foot, and the difference in discharge between the first and last perforation along the perforated lateral will be less than 10 percent. By using the ”F” factors on page 17 and the friction loss for plastic pipe presented on page F-18, the maximum allov/able number of various size perforations that are allowed on various diameter laterals were calculated and are presented in the middle tabic on page 18. This table is suitable only for the perforations listed and similar tables can be developed for other perforation diameters. The first table on page 16 presents allowable loading rates of soils located under mounds. This table is fundamental tc designing mounds by the basal width concept, which is explained on pages 21 and 22. The downward percolation rate of original soil profiles in Minnesota have been measured on many slowly permeable soils. None of these original profiles have been found to have a vertical movement slower than 1 cm per day. This is a loading rate of 0.24 gpd/sq ft which is found in the second column of the table for a percolation rate range of 6l to 120 rapi. The design loading rate on the sand layer of the mound is 1.20 gpd/sq ft (which is the reciprocal of the soil sizing factor of 0.83 sq ft/gpd). Thus, if 1.20 gallons per day is the loading rate on a square foot of the clean sand, but the soil under the sand can absorb only 0.24 gallons per day per square foot, then 5.0 times as much basal area must be available as sand area in contact with the rock layer. Since only the side dikes are used in the determination of basal area, the term basal width is preferred. Very little liquid will move out into the end dikes of the mound. Page 18 presents multipliers which are used to determine upslope and downslope dike widths. This table will allow calculation of the values presented on page 5. The table on page 13 will also allow calculation of downslope dike width for rock bed widths narrower than 10 feet. In order to achieve sufficient basal width, it is occasionally necessary to use a narrower and longer rock layer. For the mound which was designed, a 10 x 50 foot rock layer was selected. On a slowly permeable soil, however, an 8-foot wide by 62.5-foot long rock layer would function better hydraulically. If this mound is located on an 8 percent slope, the -V- downslope mound height, h_, will be 3*0 0.08 x 8.0 s 3.64 feet. From the table on page 19 for a slope ratio of *1:1, the dike multiplier is 5.88. This value multiplied by the downslope dike height of 3*64 gives th** value of 21.4 feet for dp. The upslope dike multiplier is 3«03 for a slope ratio of 4:1. Since the^upslope mound height is 3.0, the upslope dike width is 3.0 X 3.03 = 9.1 feet. r Note from page 13 with a 36” perforation spacing that a 1-1/2 inch lateral cannot be used for a length of 62.5 feet, if the manifold is located on one end. With an 8-foot wide rock bed, and the proposed revisions to Chapter 7080, two perforated laterals could be used spaced 4 feet on centers. If the perforations are spaced every 4 feet, there will be 15 lateral perforations for each of the two laterals or a total of 30 perforations. From the perforation discharge table on page 17, a 1/4 inch perforation at a discharge pressure of 1.0 foot of head discharges 0.74 gpm. The 30 perforations in this pressure distributivi* network will require a flow rate of 22.2 gpm. Also, the center table on page 17 shows that 1-1/2 inch diameter laterals can be used with 15 of the 1/4-inch perforations. Pages 19 and 20 present a suggested design procedure using the basal width concept. Pages 21 and 22 present information on the definition of basal width and its importance in mound design as well as several examples on calculating dike widths. -vi- i*ii» 11fi ■ ■ K-l SEWAGE TRE/VIMENT MOUNDS FOR PROBLEM SOILS Suitable soil provides excellent treatment of sewajjc tank effluent. The natural top soil should be utilized for treatment wherever possible. The top layer of a clay soil usually has a more rapid percolation rate than the underlying subsoil. Sandy soils have more organic matter and a finer texture in the top soil layer chan in deeper layers. Soils with adequate organic matter and calcium carbonate (limestone) are good adsorbers of the nutrient phosphorus found in sewage tank effluent. Some soils do not have a percolation rate in the range of 0.1 to 60 minutes per inch which is necessary for the adequate treatment of sewage and for the proper operation of the soil treatment system. In other soils, there is a seasonal saturation at depths closer than 3 feet to the ground surface such that adequate vertical separation of the soil treatment unit is not possible under "natural" conditions. Soils with a "pan" layer that restricts downward movement of liquid, or with bedrock, cither fractured or impermeable, have problems for adequate treatment and proper operation of the soil treat ment unit. One of the first solutions that should be explored for problem sites is to consider pumping sewage tank effluent to an area where the soil is suitable for the installation of a properly designed soil treatment system. Where 3 1/2 to 4 feet of soil cover exists above saturated conditions or "pan" conditions, trenches can be excavated into the natural soil. The trenc!>es must be constructed so that a 3-foot vertical separation initially exists between the trench bottom and the restricting layer. Then aerobic condi tions will exist in the soil under the trench rock and the sewage will be effectively treated. Thus, the excavation depth can be no greater than 6 to 12 inches into the natural soil (see page D-5). After the trench rock and distribution pipe are installed, soil fill is moved into the area to jirotect the trenches from physical damage. There should be at least 6 inches of soil fill above the top of the trench rock. Thus, 12 to 18 inches of fill above natural ground level mas be required to finisli tlac soil treat ment unit. It is recommended that the fill soil be a loamy sand to avoid undue compaction during placement. The area should be graded to provide for surface drainage so that runoff water docs not pond in the area of the trenches. A grass cover should be established as soon as possible. Such an installation will blend into the landscape and it usually will not be readily apparent that the "mounded" area contains the soil treatment unit. However, if the soil percolation rate is either too fast or too slow or barrier layers such as seasonally saturated soil or a "pan" exists closer than 3 feet, hauling fill and constructing a mound or "berm" may be a reasonable and cost-effective alternative to a standard soil treatment unit. A properly designed elevated bed can function properly and adequately treat sewage tank effluent on a long-term basis. A properly constructed mound should be placed on ;it least 24 inches of naturally-occurring or fill soil which is not seasonally saturated and whicli has a percolation rate no slower than 120 minutes per inch. The limit on the slowness of the percolation rate is to provide for adequate dov/nward and lateral movement of liquid. If tlie underlying, natur.il soil is extremely coarse textured, there must be a soil layer in the 24-inclt depth that is at least 12 inclu*s thick and has a pc>rcolation rate lower F.-2 th^n 5 minutes per inch* The alJowoblo percolation rates also depend upon the slope of the original ground surface. A table of these relationslups is presented on page E-8. It should be noted that mound construction be gins with the 12-inch layer of clean sand upon which the rock is placed. I ( The design material presented in section E of this Manual suggests a possible "cookbook** approach and is intended ^o deal primarily with mounds or **berms** for single family residences, or rally sewage flow rates of no more than 1,200 gallons. A flow of 1,200 gallons per day can be treated with a rock bed 10 feet wide by 100 feet long in a properly constructed mound or "berm.** However, the proper hydraulic operation of a mound depends upon lateral as well as vertical seepage. While there is little doubt that rock beds wider than 10 feet will operate satisfactorily on some soils as far as flow hydraulics is concerned, a careful analysis must be made of the ground slope and soil permeability underlying the clean sand layer of the mound. A vertical separation of at least 3 feet is required between the bottom of the rock bed and any restricting layer in order to maintain aerobic condi tions in the clean sand under the rock layer. (Mien consolidated impermeable bedrock is present tiie vertical separation distance is 7 feet.) When aerobic conditions exist in the clean sand, the long-term acceptance rate will be 1.2 gallons per day per square foot. If the depth to the restricting layer is inadequate or the rock bed is too wide, anaerobic conditions may exist and cause a much slower acceptance rate. To evaluate the possibility of anaerobic conditions and the subsequent hydraulic failure is the major design problem when sizing mounds larger than those required for single family residences. Thus, the design criteria of section E cannot be simply multiplied by a scale factor and expected to properly treat larger tlows. The hydraulics of lateral and vertical movement in the clean sand layer and the soil under the elevated rock bed must be carefully analyzed to ascertain that anaerobic conditions will not exist. Thus, both lateral and horizontal permeabilities of the under lying soil layers must be utilized to analyze the flow regime to estimate the height of the saturated zone. Inhere heavy clay soils with slow permeabilities and high seasonal saturated conditions generally exist over an area, it is far better to utilize mounds for one or two single family residences than to collect the effluent from many residences than attempt to dispose and treat it at a single location. The flow hydraulics in clay soils will require cither large depths of fill, or underdrainage, or both, in order to design a proper sewage treatment system to prevent anaerobic conditions under the rock layer. As an example, a mound designed to treat 450 gallons per day may function very well under certain clay soil conditions:, while a single mound serving 5 or 10 residences will fail hydraulically if constructed according to tlic same vertical separation specifications. Proper construction practices for mounds are extremely important but when carefully followed will produce a sewage treatment system tlint will function effectively on a long-term basis. There are an estimated 5,000 single family mounds successfully treating sewage in Minnesota. Many Minnesota counties have found that properly designed and constructed mounds or **beT*ms** are an effective method of sewage treatment and accept them ns a standard system. • • ( « AM SM • 11« , Agricultural Extension Service University of Minnesota Extension Folder 522--1980 LOCATING ON-SITE HOME SEWAGE TREATMENT SYSTEMS James L. Anderson and Roger E. Machmeier* Living outside areas served by municipal sewer and water calls for careful attention to detail when a sewage treatment system is being planned. Sometimes the prospective lot buyer-home owner overlooks the importance of a site evaluator (the person employed to evaluate the site's potential for construction of a septic tank-waste treatment system and well water service). There needs to be frequent communication between the evaluator and prospective homeowner every step of the way. Before a lot is purchased as a building site, ther-; should be written into the purchase agreement con tract that its validity is contingent on location of suit able soils on the lot for the sewage treatment system. This should be done before signing any final purchase contract. The investment in the site evaluation can save money and hardship later on. The following recommended procedures for a complete site evaluation are intended as a guide tc prospective homeowners and site evaluators. Addi tional or different information might be required by local units of government and these must be checked out. The recommendations here should be considered the absolute minimum for an adequate site evaluation. •James L. Aruiersun is an extension soils specialist and Roger E. Machmeier is an extension anricultural engineer, both at the University of Minnesota. i Establishing Priorities The three major items to consider in developing a lot are the loca*ions of the house, water supply well, and the sewage treatment system. Usually ma jor concerns to the owner of an unde veloped lot are the location, aspect* view, and type of house proposed. However, additional projected improve ments including a driveway, garage, patio, or swimming pool may conflict with the area most suited for on site sewage treatment. It is important that the site evaluation for the treatment system be discussed at an early stage in the development plans for the lot. It is a rare instance where each of the desired improvements can be lo cated exactly where the lot purchaser wants. Priorities will have to be estab lished and tradeoffs are inevitable. All of this should be discussed before the physical investigation of the actual site for the sewage treatment system. After lot boundaries have been es tablished. the process of selecting loca tions for the various improvements begins. A careful evaluation should be made of topo^^aphy, land forms, vege tation (including large trees the owner may want to preserve, or cattails which indicate a high watertable), drainage- ways. recent construction activities which may have disturbed or removed the top soil, and any physical features atfecting the site (figure 1). Notice the location of agricultural drain tiles on the lot. These were installed to reduce the leyel of saturated zones of water in the soils below the rooting depth of plants. This means that under normal conditions the soils have excess water during wet periods which can reduce c.'op growth and yields. It is important to maintain the drainage provided by this tile to avoid ai^.y future wetness problems. For example, if a basement were excavated in one of the tile lines, it could mean a basement full of water in the next hard rain. Both the owner and site evaluator should have a plan on paper which can be tested against the actual lot. Since it is much easier to remove lines on paper than to physically move struc tures, water wells, or other improve ments. this is the time to determine suitability of the proposed locaticn^s (figure 2). Before the site evaluator makes the first boring, all of the pre liminary planning mentioned hero should be completed. Figure 1. Topography of lot using 2 foot contours to emphasize significant landscape differences. Figure 2. Homeowner's original concept of where the improvements should be located on the lot. Two potential treatm nt system sites are indicated. (Lot concept plan) J^AD CENTERUNE i * Soils Information To provide for proper sewage treat ment, the soil treatment system must be located in suitable soil. Presently 31 counties have a detail ed soil survey map. An accelerated soil survey program is underway to com plete detailed soil surveys for the en tire state by 1990. These show the occurrence and distribution of each kind of soil and are a good starting point for the lot owner. The delineated areas on the soils map are called "map ping units" which consist primarily of the soil for which the unit is named and soils with similar characteristics. In ad dition there are areas within the unit consisting of soils that are different. Soil types occupying an acre or more within the mapping unit are indicated by a series of map symbols. The mini mum size of the mapping unit, how ever, depends on the scale of the prim ed map. The smallest mapping unit area designated is about 3 acres. This means that the soils map itself cannot be used to determine the suitability of a specific site. Yet, the soil survey in formation is still useful as background and an indication of potential problems which may be encountered on the lot. The local Soil and Water Conservation District can often provide unpublished soils information if a county lacks a published soil survey. The crests of knolls and hills as well as slightly sloping portions of hills are likely areas for placement of waste treatment systems. Depressions, drain age swales that collect runoff from the surrounding area, and excessively steep slopes (figure 1) should be avoided. Future landscaping plans must be considered to provide access to the site not only during the construction phase but afterward so the septic tank can be pumped periodically. Indicating two or three potential waste treatment sites on the lot pro vides additional flexibility if the pri mary site is unsuitable. Some sanitary ordinances require locating two areas suitable for a waste treatment system on a lot. After this preliminary information has been obtained and evaluated, the site evaluation in the field can begin. Site Evaluation To locate the sewage treatment sys tem properly, soil texture, the presence of soil mottling, direct water table measurement, and land slope should be thoroughly evaluated. The first step in conducting the site evaluation is to make a soil boring at least 3 feet deep er than the bottom of the proposed seepage trenches at the approximate center of the proposed system. The first boring determines the presence of soil mottling or a water table. Soil mottling indicates the pres ence and depth of seasonally occurring water tables during dry periods. Water tables can be measured directly during wet periods by leaving the boring hole open for at least 24 hours. Well-drajned soil is often brown or red, while poorly drained soil is gray. The color difference is due to the peri odic water saturation. Mottled soils consist of spots of gray and brown or gray and red. Where mottled soil oc curs, it is assumed the soil is saturated during wet periods (unless the area has been artificially drained). Depth to soil mottling determines the depth at which soil treatment trenches can be placed, since there needs to be a 3 foot vertical separation between the trench bottom and sea sonal water tables (figure 3). Areas of periodically saturated soils can disrupt operation of the sewage treatment system. When the trenches are installed in a saturated soil zone, effluent entering the system during wet periods cannot m.ove away and will either come to the surface or back up into the house. These saturated zones often are unrelated to the existing re gional water tables or surface waters because zones of unsaturated materials generally separate the two. Land slope should be estimated for the proposed system. Knowledge of the land slope assists in the system's design and in selecting the effluent dis tribution metfiod. Steeply sloping land areas should be avoided to reduce con struction problems. However, some contractors will install trenches along the contour on slopes as great as 30 percent. While such construction is dif ficult and costly, the sewage treatment system will function properly when correctly installed. Soil texture can be used to estimate the percolation rate which is then used to estimate the size of the treatment area which will need to be investigated. Figure 3. Interpretation of soil mottling. WELL DRAINED CAN MEASURE WATER table directly (Soil IS Never Soturoted) (In Boring Hole Left open for 24 Mrs .* ASSUME SATURATION AND PRESENCE OP v;atertaqle tOufinq W.i Peftodi) - Cro» Woter foDle m Soil Becomes Safuroted O Soil Ones os Water raOie IS Lowered Soil Docomes Re-soturoted es se Bnghi Colors Iron finely Dissolved Tnroughour Ihe Profilfe Dull Colors Fine Iron Porficles ore Oissoi**: .1 in the water Alternating ol Oey and Red Colors witri Iron Precipitated Neor Soil Pores .1 3 T%bie 1. Soil characteristics and required areas for sewage treatment Percolation rate, minutes per inch Soil texture Soil treatment area in square feet per gallon of waste per day^ Table 2. Estimated sewage flows in gallons per day Faster than 0.1^ 0.1 to 5 6 to 15 16 to 30 31 to 45 46 to 60 Slower than 60^ Coarse sand Sand Sandy loam Loam Silt loam Clay loam Clay Soil too coarse for sewage treatment^^ 0.83 1.27 1.67 2.00 2.20 Use sewage treatment mounds or alternative systems ^For uenches only, the bottom areas may be reduced if more than 6 inches of rock is placed below the distribution pipe: for 12 inches of rock below the distribution pipe the bottom areas can be reduced by 20 percent: a 34 percent reduction for 18 inches: and a 40 percent re* duct ion for 24 inches, ^Soil is unsuitable for standard soil treatment units. Use sewage treatment mounds ot alterno' tive systems. Number of bedrooms Type of residence® 1 II III IV 2 300 225 180 60% 3 450 300 218 of 4 600 375 256 values 5 750 450 294 in 6 900 525 332 Type I.* 7 1,050 600 370 11, or III 8 1,200 675 408 Columns The estimated percolation rate is used to determine the absorption area (table 1) and the estimated sewage flow rate of the residence is determined from table 2. While soil texture is not an absolute indicator of the pcrcola* tion rate, it can provide helpful prelim inary information. The "feel method" is commonly used to evaluate soil tex ture which should be evaluated every 12 inches on a site or whenever the tex ture changes noticeably to the touch. The first soil boring conducted on this lot indicated mottling at a 12 inen depth (figure 4). Alternative waste treatment site 1 was rejected on the basis of a high water table although at the time of the boring there was no water apparent in the hole. Soil boring 2 was made in the center of alternative waste treatment site 2. Thdre was no indication of soil mot tling to a depth of more than 5 feet. Soil texture was estimated using the "feel method." The texture was a loam at the depth of the proposed system. On this basis the percolation rate was estimated at from 16 to 30 minutes per inch (mpi) (table 1). U ing Toivn and Country Sewjge Treatment, Extension Bulletin 304 as a reference, a soil with a percolation rate in the 1C> to 30 mpi range would require 1.67 'iquare feet of trench bot tom area per gallon of waste per day (table 1). However, if 12 inches of rock are placed under the distribution pipe in the trench, a recommendation where trees are present or likely to be present, the bottom area can be reduced by 20 percent to 1.34 square feet per gallon per day. Since a four bedroom, type I house was being installed on the lot. the estimated sewage flow was 600 gal lons per day which required 600x 1.34 =* 800 square feet of trench bottom area (table 2). The trenches were 30 in ches wide, so a total of 320 lineal feat was required. This could be accom plished with four 80-foot runs. The trenches were to be spaced approxi mately 8 feet on centers with total width required of approximately 32 feet. ^Type I: The total floor area of the residence divided by the number of bedrooms is more than 300 square feet per bedroom: no more than two of the following water use appti* ances are installed: automatic washer, dish* washer, water softener, garbage disposal or self-cleaning humidifier in furnace. Type II: More than 500square feet of total residence floor area per bedroom and no more than two of the water-use appliances. Type III: Less than 500square feet of total residence floor area per bedroom and no more than two of the water-use appliances. Type IV* Type I, II, or III but with no toilet wastes discharged into the sewage system. Figure 4. Final location of improvcinentsafter che site has been properly evaluated. l The site evaluator did additional soil borings at the corners of an area ap* proximately 32 x 80 feet Soil condi tions were not significantly different from soil boring 2. Only after this adequate area of suitable soil was located were percola tion tests conducted. Since the soil texture at the depth of the trenches was not different, two percolation tests were conducted in the area of the system (figures A and 5). The per colation test procedure used was that given in the Minnesota Pollution Con trol Agency's adopted standards (WPC-40). The average perroiation rate determined by the two tests was 25 mpi. Since this is within the esti mated range, the size of the system did not change. The system was then designed with the 80-foot trenches on the contour so that the length of all trench bottoms were level (figure 5). Drop boxes were indicated to distribute the effluent since this was a sloping site. After the site has been evaluated, the location of the sewage treatment system, watei supply well, the house, and pertinent structures should be con spicuously staked. The area of the pro posed sewage treatment system, and the alternate site if required, must be piotectcd from any disturbance during the other construction activities. Final Report The prospective homeowner should receive a detailed final report of the s.te evaluation. It should include results of each of the soil boring lest holes in cluding notation of texture, depths to mottling and water tables. Percolation test data, both the field readings and calculated percolation rate, should be included. A sample form which could be used for reporting the results is given in How to Run a Percolation Test, Extension Folder 261. which can be requested from county agricultural extension offices. Data should be kept and presented in a neat and professional manner. Each of the boring holes and percola tion test holes should be located on a Figure 5. Proposed soil treatment system desigrt with soil borings and percolation test hole locations. •trench system is OlSIGNEO using a minimum center to center SPACING Of 0 FEET. TRENCHES FOLLOW CONTOURS O SOIL dORiNG holes ® PERCOLATION TEST MOLES SCALE FEET rcale sketch map of the lot which should also include the location of the house, driveway, patio, and other im provements. Location of the sewage treatment system and water supply well should be indicated with setback distances specified (figure 4). This map and data may then be submitted with the application to the local agency which issues permits for on site sewage treatment systems. Town and Country Sewage Treat* ment. Extension Bulletin 304 Get to Know Your Septic Tank, Extension Folder 337 Shoreland Sewage Treatment, Ex tension Bulletin 394 Additional Information The following additional publica tions about sewage treatment systertis may be requested from county agricul tural extension offices or the Bulletin Room. 3 Coffey Hall. 1420 Eckles Ave.. University of Minnesota. St. Paul. MN 55108. The first two listed are particularly useful for site evaluation and design of on site sewage treatment systems. • How to Run a Percolation Test, Ex tension Folder 261 Other Information Sources • County extension director • City or county zoning administrator • Extension agricultural engineers and soil scientists at the University ct Minnesota • Local Soil and Water Conservation District Offices • Minnesota Pollution Control Agency • Minnesota Department of Natural Resources • Minnesota Department of Health • Minnesota On-Site Sewage Treat ment Contractors Association The ,nlormm,on g,von in ihi, publiculion for cducononj purposes only. Rrforence to commcrc.jl products or trade names is made with rhe ur,de,stand.n.j that no tl.scnm.nat.on ,s intended and no cndo.scn.ent by the M.nnesota Agricultural txtens.on Sr,v.ceT,mpZ! access to rts programs. crimes, and employment «.thout regard to race, creed, color, sex. nal.unal or.g.n, or handreap. ,5 r ( A. SKV/AGE TREAT^EIJT BY SOIL The effluent discharging from a septic tank contains appreciable amounts of nitrogen, phosphorus, bacteria, and viruses, -Nitrate nitrogen (NO^) in anoxmts gre-ater than 45 fflg/l in drinking water can cause neth^oglobinemia in infants (also called "blue baby syndrome"), -Phosphates entering lakes and rivers cause eutrophication, but are not considered a drinking water problem, -Bacteria and viruses cause many enteric (digestive tract) diseases. The soil in most cases is capable of treating these contaminants through a series of complex chemical, physical, and biological processes. Bacteria and viruses 1. Adsorption to soil particles Z, "Feed" on sewage and form a slime layer. 3, i*i;ne layer acts as a filter and also acts as a valve to slow the .. nward percolation of effluent, by attrition due to lack of nutrients, presence of 'u-.eria-toxic chemicals, natural soil antibiotics. Phoaphc:nib 1, r<\,ad.ly adsorbed by mineral particles in the soil, 2, Movement through soil occurs as adsorption sites are used up, 3, Greatest movement in sands (up to 20"/year); less in clays (up tc 4'/year). liitrogen 1, Nearly all N in effluent is in ammonia form (NH^) 2, Under anaerobic conditions such as hea*^ clay soils and sAturAtdd zones, it stays in this form as it moves through the soil and is relatively hainless, 3, Under aerobic conditions, nitrification occurs, changing into nitrate (NO3). In deep sandy or gravelly soils this may move directly into the water table, where it ray ot nay not be diluted depending on the load and the housing density. The above processes are just abbrief overview of the complex proc*sc^s which actually occur. B, SITE AND SOIL CONDITION'S WHICH NECESSITATE ALTERKATI’/E TREATENT AND DISPOSAL METHODS In the standard trench drainfield system, the bacterial slime forms a "biomat" at the rock/soil interface, which slows the downward movement of effluent. The rate of water movement through uhis bionvut depends to a great extent on the permeability of the soil, 1, Coarse sands and gravels may allow such rapid percolation that the biomat won't form. This allov/s effluent to rove directly into the water table. It r tk 4 ( i 2, Heavy clay soils nay be quite imperneable, so that after the biomat forms, alnost no percolation occurs* If you keep flushing the toilet it will either seep to the surface or back up in your basement. To help eliminate these problsms, during the last 3C years most local governments have adopted a specific range of acceptable percolation rates, measured using a standard test procediire. Briefly, the perc test is done by digging a 6” diameter hole, fill it with water, and measure how fast the water drops. Acceptable rates for a standard trench system aes'^between 0.5 minutes per incli of drop and 60 minutes per inch* IN OaONO, CLAY SOILS PiiEDO]J:NATE, AJO) KANT SITES HAVE PERC RATES SLOrJER THAN 60 To complicate matters, in many clay soils and often i:i layered soils, during some seasons a "perched" water table ov saturated zone occux'S* If a drainfield trench is located in this area, it ray not accept any effluent; again, backup or surface seepage can occur* Also, when the trench is saturated, some of the treatment processes stop working* To eliminate this "system floodir.g" problem, most Codes specify that the bottom of the drainfield trench must be at least 3 feet above the highest known water table or saturation zone* IN ORONO, PANY SOILS HAVE A SEASONAL PERCHED SATURATION ZONE BET-’/EEIT f AND U FEET BELCK THE SURFACE, 1-lAKING THE 3-FOOT SEPARATION IKPCSSIBLE* C* ALTERNATIVE SOLUTIONS 1. No Development. 2. * City Sewers, i.o. collection system with off-site treatmcnt/disposal* 3* Install Trenches An;/way, Cross Fingers. 4. Exotic IriT.ovative Systems - such as sewage osmosis; evapotranspiration or vapor beds; in-home recirculating plants; etc. 5* klound Systems au Origins - Sand mound with gravity beds used in N. Dakota since early 1960's — U. of V/isconsin Small Scale Waste ^^anage^er t Project studied mounds extensively in l97C's; concluded that pressure-distribution mounds were m.ost effective, minimized failures* . - Found systems vdth pressure distribution first used in Orono in - (9^ 1978. 13 installed to date; no failures reported to date/^^-^ - V/PC-40 (Ki’CA recommendations) specifies design and siting'" criteria for mound systems, also appearing in Orono Design Manual b* How and Why l-Iounds Worlc - Manv clay soils wd.th unacceptable percolation rates at the depth of trenches have a layer of loamy topsoil which dees have an acceptable perc rate, and will accept a limited aiount of effluent. - Pressure distribution mounds arc specifically designed to make use of this topsoil layer. ( ( - 12-2/*" layer of sand placed over the natural roughened topsoil is fed efHuent from a pressure distribution system in an overlying rock bed, - Biomat "valve" forms at the rock/sand interface which is 12-2/» above the natural soil. r Because of the pressure distribution, an unsaturated air/effluent contact is maintained as treatment occurs in the sand bed. - Treated effluent dispenses into the topsoil, moving vertically and laterally underground until it seeps away or evaporates, c. Public Acceptance - Pressure distribution requires use of a pump, hence owner main tenance required} however, with well—designed and installed pump stations, vei^ few problems occur. - The concept of a "mound" or a hill in the back yard creates some homeowner resistance, but mounds are actually easy to disguise, - To the uninitiated, seepage out the toe of the mound would seem likely; this has not occurred in the 13 mounds in Orono, and shouldn't occur in a properly designed and constructed mound. - Five vears ago, sewer contractors "pshawed" the idea of using mcunds in this area. Today, most contractors consider them as a fairly standard practice, d. Quality Control - Standardizedr'design - System design and site planning geared to each specific site - Installer training and licensing - Standardized site evaluation is a problem since each site evaluator or engineer has his ovm ideas on test methods and interpretations, - Perc rate upper boundary for mounds is somewhat speculative. e. Miscellaneous points - Cost to homeowner; standard system Ctrenches) $25CC-3500 mound system w/pump,etc, $/*CCC—fCCO - Because of higher cost, repairs using mound systems i.re rare, even where they probably have a better chance of working. f I / To:Planning Conunission Chairman Kelley & Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson From: Date: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator December 15, 1987 Subject: ^il214 Richard & Karen Ziminski, 1095 Brown Road North Preliminary Subdivision *- Second Review List o£ Exhibits Exhibit A - Preliminary Plan Exhibit B - Planning Commission Minutes of 10/19/87 Exhibit C - Hennepin County Letter Dated 10/20/87 Exhibit D - Cook Letter At your October 19th, meeting, the application was tabled pending resolve of the location of the drainfield area in relation to proposed dividing line. The applicant was asked to excavate a 3-4' depth ditch along the dividing line as shown on staff sketch. Exhibit A. Gaffron has confirmed that there was no sign of septic drainfield lines within the ditch area. The existing septic system appears to be totally located within proposed Lot 1. Review the Hennepin County Highway Department report. Exhibit C. The County wants all access to Lot 1 from Lot 2 closed off. Access to Lot 2 must be via North Brown Road only. A single access use is approved off County Road 6 for Lot 1. Cook in his report asks that unused extensions of driveways be removed within both lots. Review staff sketch A, this section should be removed either prior to final plat approval or as a condition of final subdivision approval with a specific date for removal in early spring. Staff Recommendation - Staff recommends approval of a 2 lot plat application of Richard Karn Ziminiski finding all standards of the on-site septic, zoning, subdivision codes satisfied, subject to the following conditions: and and 1. Payment of a park fee for Ijt 2 at $200.00. 2. Approval of individual accesses as set forth in the Hennepin County report. Lot 1 to be served by County Road 6 and Lot 2 to be served by existing access off of North Brown Road. 3. The unused extensions of the existing driveway located now within the shared lot lines of Lots 1 and 2 to be removed by a specified date at the time of final subdivision approval, set forth as a condition in the resolution. \f% 3 Vi ¥1 COUNTY -STATE AID HGHWAY NO, 464. T9 Z<0: ■« Paje. I ." “'-cr- Z.bioe.Atf 'o-f sUf Vv o-f dec. z-r~/ir-zi \ ''ButW'm^ se^V>ac.V<. Unes Pu» Zl-HB-iJ ^^^\'t S/<'. / / . ■-rrUi.iOTV*-*.JJ MINUTES OP THE PLANMIHG COMUSSION TING HELD OCTOBER 19, 1987 •1212 BOYKB CONTINUED There were no comments from the public regarding this matter and the public hearing was closed. It was moved by Chairman Kelley, seconded by Johnson, to recommend approval of layout H-1 amending it to provide a straight northward lot line west of Outlot A instead of a curved lot line. Motion, Ayes 6, Nays 0. ( •1214 RICHARD SIMINSKI 1095 NORTH BROUN ROAD PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION PUBLIC HEARING 7:34-7:38 The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. Richard Ziminski was present for this matter. Zoning Administrator Mabusth explained the request for a 2 lot subdivision of applicant's homestead property totalling 6.2 acres. 1.5 acres will be dedicated as County and City road right-of-way; Lot 1 with existing house is proposed at approximately 2.6 acres; Lot 2 proposed at approximately 2.1 acres. Mabusth stated that the exact location of existing septic is not yet known. Staff recommends approval subject to determination of septic location prior to Council review. Bellows felt that the application should be tabled pending septic location in order to alleviate problems with the subdivision. Richard Ziminski stated he knows the approximate location of the septic system. Chairman Kelley agreed that the actual facts must be known prior to recommendation to Council. There were no comments from the public regarding this matter and the public hearing was closed. It was moved by Cohen, seconded by Bellows, to table the application pending determination of septic location* Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 1. Johnson voted nay because he agreed with staff recommendation. \t- L D Bonestroo, Bosene, Anderlik A Associates, Inc. 2335 W. Trunk Htghwny 3$ St Psut MN 55113 612-53&4600 Engineers A Architects Olio C. Bomeiiroo, B.E. Mvff W, nmrm, B E Jmeph C AmerHtk. B.E. Bmtford A. Umbtfs. B,E. AtermAE. Unm, B.E. Jomm C. OBeo. B.E, October 13, 1987 City of Orono Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Cknm A. Cook, B E Erok A CofAum. B.t. fkoom t Nofn, B.t. AHheed W toiler . B.E. Aoberi C Sthtumki, B.E. Menom L. B E. DooelAC. AorgerAi. B E. JmyA. AoorAoe. B.E. kSork A. Hemoe. B.E. TfA E. Emid. B.E. kteimt T. Amrmeme. B.E. Aukeft A. BHUertt. B E. DomdO LoUom. B.E Tkomm W. Bnerwom. B.E kiidmt C. UmtK B.E Eeren L. Wm, B E Jomn A. ktol md. B E. Kemmtk B. Amkmm. B E. EfHk A. Bmtmene. B.E. Mort A. AeifK P E. Aoben C. AeaH. A.i.A. Tkumot E. Aegmt. B.E. Sttrti L Vommg. B.E. Ckortn A. krmkufe Lto M. BeooLkjr Morten kt. Obom Snamki.Etertm Attn: Jeanne Mabusth Re: 139-1214 Richard D. Ziminaki Dear Jeanne: We have reviewed the subdivision proposed by Richard D. Zisiinski. The access to Lot 1 will be from Co. Rd. 6 and the access to Lot 2 will be from North Brown Road. We would recommend that the Driveway area on Lot 1, east of the house, as well as the Driveway area on Lot 2 be removed and seeded or sodded. If you have any questions, please contact this office. Yours very truly, BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK 6 ASSOCIATES, INC. Glenn R. Cook GRC:ci 7223e I • t iminmr Tr»i ...........I I r ■If—-' »■ HENNEPIN DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATIC 320 Washington Av. South Hopkins, Minnesota 55343-8468 935-3381 TTY 935-6433 OCT 2 6 1987 \l October 20, 1987 Ms. Jeanne Mabusth Building & Zoning Administrator City of Orono P. 0. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Dear Ms. Mabusth: RE:Proposed Subdivision - Richard 0. Ziminski CSAH 6, Southwest quadrant of North Brown Road Section 27, Township 118, Range 23 Hennepin County Plat No. 1581 Review and Recommendations We reviewed the above subdivision and make the following comments: - No additional right of way required at this time by Hennepin County along this segment of CSAH 6. All access to Lot 2 must be via North Brown Road. No additional direct access from these lots to CSAH 6 will be permitted by Hennepin County, All proposed construction within County right of way requires an approved utility permit prior to beginning construction. This includes, but Is not limited to, drainage and utility construction, trail development, and landscaping. Contact our Maintenance Division for utility permit forms. The developer must restore all areas disturbed during construction within County right of way. Please direct any response or questions to Les Weigelt. David W. Schmidt, P.E. Transportation Planning OWS/LDW:Iw HENNEPIN COUNTY an equal opportunity employer 1 ( 1 To:Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson From: Date: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator December 16» 1987 Subject: #1229 Richard Hanson, 3826 Cherry Avenue - Variance - Public Hearing Zoning District - LR-IC Area - 22,218 s.f. Pertinent Ordinances ft Issues - 1. Section 10.22, Subdivision 1 (A) - No structure allowed within 75* of the lake - portion of 3-season porch encroaches setback area, 69* from lakeshore. Required Setback = 75* Existing Principal Structure = 55* Proposed Addition = 69* 2. Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 - There is an existing excess of hardcover within the 0-75* and 75-250* setback areas. The proposed 3 season porch and deck involves increases in both setback areas as follows:t 0-75* Area = 7,500 s.f. Allowed Hardcover = 0 s.f. Existing Hardcover = 646 s.f.*2 8.6% Proposed Increase -• 55 s.f. or .73% TOTAL HARDCOVER = 701 S.f. or 9.3% i *1 Chimney 18 s.f.. House 628 s.f. 75-250* Area = 14,718 s.f. Allowed Hardcover = 3,679.5 s.f. or 25% Existing Hardcover = 4,350 s.f.*9 or 29.5% Proposed Increase = 180 s.f. or 1.2% TOTAL HARDCOVER = 4,530 s.f. or 30.7% *2 Driveway = 2,832 s.f.. Boathouse = 440 s.f.. House = 1,078 s.f. List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Application Exhibit B - Property Owners List Exhibit C - Plat Map Exhibit D - Survey Exhibit E - Elevations Exhibit F - Floor Plan Exhibit G - Staff Sketch Zoning File #1229 December 16, 1987 Page 2 of 2 The applicant proposes a 3-season porch addition, 10* xl4.56', to the east of the existing structure with a 5* x 18* deck on the south of the porch providing access to the yard area from both porch and from house. The elevations (Exhibit E) show sliding glass doors on east side of porch - no steps or deck are shown - applicant must explain. Based on the survey, there appears to be no problem with average lakeshore setback. The applicant has not cited any hardships to the land on the face of the application. Council has approved new structural hardcover within the protected area for the following recent application reviews: Palm, Pemberton, Fagers, Gempler, Swanson, Beck, Waters, Minnetonka Boat Works and Smith Bay Yacht. The hardships cited were size and depth of lot that had sustained a principal structure, location of house in relation to 75* setback line, uniqueness of structure, location of utility lines, steep elevations and need for easy access to yard area. This summer. Council approved a deck for the Beck residence to the immediate east of the property. Approval was based on the pattern of drainage, severe/steep elevations, and location of existing house in relation to 75* setback line. Mrs. Beck removed an accessory structure in her lakeshore yard as a condition of approval in order to reduce hardcover in 0-75* setback area (existing 16%, final with new construction 15.5%). Staff would suggest the following findings or hardships noted upon site inspection of the property: 1. As with Beck property, drainage from area of new construction flows to rear or south over a grassed area. 2. Location of a large mature tree - if porch and deck are moved back out of the protected area the tree would have to be removed. 3. The house was placed on the property prior to lakeshore standards. Staff Recommendation - To recommend approval of the application as proposed. Planning Commission may wish to consider removal of additional hardcover within the 75-250* setback area as hardcover within the lakeshore protected area is all principal structure. Applicant should be asked to explain the elevation that shows sliding glass doors on east side of porch. ■> •• • / f « 1 .. •* . / Fee f± . # •.4 Receipt_______ Initials ^/ ^ CITY OF ORONO • VARIAMCB APPLICATION rrrv r*r i)r/n^!u UJ.fl C? Initial Application Fee $150.00 ($50.00 per each additional v^riar>ffe)t^,'^'' ,v) R< aewal Variance Fee $75.00 (no change from original applicatXpnJ fter-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) >>.fM AA i w*V • VV W ^ •r ¥m t iSL^LfUxt f »nnt%i\ t iMJ PROPERTY LOCATION i}03S630 COOl RO! 714:23 Site Address C i3 /7 /^ / /^! o £/ Jut. S'^ZC *{ /)/! 1^1/17/31 / Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) OtltOOQ!L_ _ _ _ _ _ Please check one - Is the property X abstract or _ _ torrens? Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. APPLICANT Phone (home) ^/7/ Name /f[ V 4I E. ///r:'/t ’I Phone (work) Address; 3VZC MOe Cityt 0n -)rZip; ^''6 3 C- */ OWNER (if different than applicant) Name if. Phone (home) Phone (work) Address;City:Zip; Date Property Acquired Ocitne^ /Q7^(month/year) I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land PRESENT OSE OP PROPERTY Present Zoning District Present Use of Property ^ / / J CCCiiPr ij'C.Residential Other (specify) DESCRIPTION OP REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $ Describe request in detail; 3 S< c .^J e' /- . r r :t"- - - it ? J 07) / //$•>*/>^^v S C fi •“ VARIANCES REQUIRED A6 ' Lot Width Setback Variances ( Front Hardcover Side Rear) Other HARDSHIP , . ^ ^Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty resulting from strxct enforcement of zoning regulations: "7* r < % o ^ Ph<'r.r-- /< U^li-L f ~ 7^' A 3^tSl^»fer ^ ^ ~7 <- - -- DESCRIPTION OP UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code Requirements : 7 /^c. * ( /.. T AV e >• ------- ■ Cd - 7 i'' s s' i\ t> ^ e. ’ ij o r t ^/< ’ I I' i I REQUIRED SUBHITTALS 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,^ Stampedr legal sized envelopes (#10) pre-addressed to each of the names on the above list with no return address. 4^ Certificate of survey including hardcover calculations as required. Plat Map. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Pleas" remember that your variance application is not complete if the abov information has not been included. _ _ __ Certification by Zoning Department that Variance Application is complete. Toning Official's Signature^^_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ Date- - - - - - - - - - » 0^ APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE . The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay all 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 A Date //- 77 ■ VT OWNERS SIGNATURE The owner hereby ac)cowled*;cs and agrees to this application and rurtner authorizes reasonable entry o-'to tho property by City staff, consultants, agents. Commission members, and Council members for purposes of investiga tion and verification of thJ^s r^qu^t. Owner's Signature /^ur/wKJ. 7c/Ii\Date //" /Z_lA_Z. Applicant must have all suLr»i:.taIs into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Plcmning Commission and Council, and, if an applicant is unable to attend a c«'heduled meeting, to please malce arrange ments to have an authorized cgc.ni: <ittend in your place and to advise the Building 6 Zoning Office of this ciange prior to the meeting. , » rf J- t 4t 1 *«•«» • « «. • «#.I 4 * ^r - - • 1 f -1 • .»- ♦•■-• . .• • • ; „.!, < •t - - ;—1 —i 1 •« .« • «. ^ • ._:____i___j - *«I .1 .i 1 I > 4 I j 4 ! i !I i ■t 1 ; I t ■ I .i. --[■-{...r -4- I- *. I I 1 i - I ; < .....' ' I- 4. —* : i i « .» » I • • -. i 4 • \ I i i ! I '" 1 • I 1. —^-------♦-----r • • • _..i—4—t— I i J^y/G fJc^/Clcisi^ *^/3. J</ye OQL. Df}'.- ityyc ycy^>//=iW'/v^i' jjt,-y/t/c' j. ''yjy/eyey'**^y^^' yf-yOr'/. y,T'y/^' sr,yy*4/ /yn^y^y^<-y I « _.i..._j—t- -♦- •• t ^ 4 — I ‘ i_.l „}-I m—^-¥ 4 I \\..r i \ _: - <• . - 4 — - • - • * t H-L IL -•♦ • - * • . - i t_ ’_. r 'I » - ------; — ' ! 1 .. ■ TO:Planning Commission Chairman Kell*'y Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson FROM: DATE: SUBJ: Jeanne A. Mabusthr Zoning Administrator December 16, 1987 #1230 Raymond & Susan Johnson, 2670 Pheasant Road Variance Zoning District LR-IB Area of Lot -* 35,200 s.f. Pertinent Ordinances and Issues ~ Section 10.22, Subd. 2 - Property has an excess of hardcover within the 75-250' setback area, the proposed 3-season porch hardcover at 202.46 s.f. will be matched by removal of an equal amount of hardcover (sidewalk, step, and part of patio - see exhibit E) equalling 202 s.f. The property will remain at 34.4% hardcover within the 75-250' setback area. Section 10.22, Subd. 1(B) - The addition will encroach the average lakeshore setback line based on staff's site inspection and review of aerial maps - applicant's have choice of having their own surveyor confirm encroachment. List of Exhibits - A - Application B - Property Owners List C - Plat Map - Neighbor's letter - Hardcover calculation worksheet - Hardcover survey - Elevations - Floor Plan - Survey D E F G H I J - Sketch of average lakeshore setback line The applicants propose a 3-season porch at the southwest corner of the lakeside of their residence. The addition is out of the 75' lakeshore protected area but upon site inspection would appear to encroach the average lakeshore setback line. The lagoon shoreline is considered lakeshore and new construction is subject to Section 10.22 Subd. 1(B). The encroachment is slight and certainly has no sight impact on neighbor to the east based on location of Johnson's house in relation to house on the east and location of large arborvitaes on east side of patio that provide year round screening. The most affected neighbor on west has written a letter thoroughly in support of the proposal, exhibit D. Zoning File #1230 December 16, 1987 Page 2 of 2 The hardcover facts (exhibits E & P) submitted by applicants confirm hardcover within the 75-250' setback area at 34.4%. Exhibit E refers to a matching removal of existing sidewalk, step and part of patio totalling 202 s.f. The survey does not locate the improvements to be removed - obviously, the area of the sidewalk to be covered by structure is included. The existing hardcover to be removed must be designated on the survey prior to scheduling application before Council. The floor plan shows only an interior access to new structure. Applicant should advise if exterior access is planned as stairs/sidewalk must also be shown on final approved site plan. Staff Recomnendation - To approve the hardcover and average lakeshore setback variances application of Robert & Susan Johnson for the property located at 2670 Pheasant Road based on the following findings and hardship: 1. The location of the subject house on the property screens the entire addition from neighboring property on east, technically the most affected by encroachment. 2. Plantings along east side of patio area provide year around screening for property to the east. 3. The neighboring property owner on the west, the property to sustain and experience most visual impact from new construction, has submitted a letter approving the proposal. 4. There is no increase in hardcover as applicant will remove equal amount of existing hardcover to match new structural hardcover from proposed improvement. Approval is subject to the following conditions: 1. Applicant to update survey designating the following: a. Hardcover improvements to be removed. b. Exterior access to be shown if planned and any other improvements as a result of the proposed exterior access. 2. Hardcover scheduled for removal must be completed by the footing inspection for new structure. UULe KCC U ft / ^ I ^ Fee /•'/b t'’ ____ ( •.' C:1 11 i . / .7 *• *i . .* t L V* f ' «»4«» «1- ,f7 Rece ipt . 7t- ^ Initials^ •. ^fT“ CITY OP ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee $150.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $75.00 (no change from original application) After-the~Fact Fees (Double application fee) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address ^ Cp ^ Q h-^ r ) rr>,‘V >'rr nccrrc f aiTf-ffTUU t.'» I 4fi- i J. u'h^v^v VW'V* O'j tt.'V 150.00 Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) >U - 11 *7 ^QQXli^,n.nfi \ y i:rrrTDT«TLiUfV ynn abstract or y tJOttenSy ’' rr039570 0001 HOI 713:35 Please check one - Is the property Attach legal description to application if not included on required surV6-S?.y/S7 Phone (home) ^ll'^“7"7 *7^APPLICANT _ _ Name -> oKtJSOr)/'/ Phone (work) Address; PAcAC»<j^- City: Zip; f}S3 I OWNER (if different than applicant)Phone (home) Name Phone (work) Address:City:Zip: Date Property Acquired (month/year) I (do) (^ono^ also own the adjacent parcels of land. PRESENT USB OP PROPERTY Present Zoning District _ Present Use of Property .1 L- |£L- IS Residential Other (specify) DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $ * Describe request in detail: Oa/ i! VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area Setback Variances ( Lot Width Front X Hardcover Side Rear) Other hardshxp Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty resulting from strict enforcement of zoning regulations: __ DESCRIPTION OF UNOSOAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code Requirements t_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 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 abr'^e information has not been included. Certification by Zoning Department that Variance Applic.'ation is comnlet-vi, A* Zoning Official's Signature_ _ _ _ _ _ _' _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Date^- - - - - - -ziZZ APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE . The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Ad;ninistrator, agrees to pay all fees and/or unusual expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. y Applicant's Signature Date /^ - - OWNERS SIGNATURE ^ e ..k The owner hereby ackowledg<in and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry wUto 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 Applicant must have all subuiit-:.a^.s into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. .’lanning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. .Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Plainr'.ng Commission and Council, and, if an applicant is unable to attoiid r. scheduled meeting, to please make arrange ments to have an authorized c-jon!: attend in your place and to advise the Building & Zoning Office of this < I'ange prior to the meeting. tOSSSaSSA -T^Xi RUN DATE 11/05/67 QATCH OOA PROP ADDR OMNER NAME TAXPAYER NANE/ADDR PROP ADDR Ok'NER NAHE TAXPAYER NANE/ADDR PROP ADDR OVJNER NAI1E TAXPAYER HAME/ADDR PROP ADDR OUUER NAHE TAXPAYER NANE/AUDR PROP ADDR OUUER NAME TAXPAYER NAI1E/ADDR HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNERS LIST 36 21-117-23 23 0005 02655 PHEASANT RD D A A COOKSOtl DAVID A ANNE MARIE COOKSON 2655 PHEASANT RD EXCELSIOR MN 55331 36 21-117-23 23 0011 02665 PHEASANT RD D J DONEFF A D L DONEFF BRYAN A DARCI DONEFF 2665 PHEASANT RD OROrX) MN 55331 36 21-117-23 23 0020 02660 PHEASANT RD R P DOLLIFF JR ETAL ROGER P DOLLIFF JR 2660 PHEASANT RD EXCELSIOR UN 55331 36 21-117-23 23 0023 02655 SHADYltOOO RD R R A P A ELLER RICHARD A PATRICE ELLER 2655 SHADY WOOD ROAD ORONO MN 55331 TOTAL BATCH OOA 00012 36 21-117-23 23 0009 02673 PHEASANT RD DALLAS C MESSER ETAL DALLAS C MESSER 2673 PHEASA14T RD EXCELSIOR MN 55331 36 21-117-23 23 0012 02695 PHEASANT RD DAD REDDICK BRADFORD H ;<EDDICK 2695 PHEASANT RD EXCELSIOR MN 55331 36 21-117-23 23 0021 02670 R1EASANT RD RAYHOND E JOHNSON RAYMOND E JOHNSON 2670 PHEASANT RD EXCELSIOR m 55331 36 21-117-23 23 0050 02665 SHAOYWOOD RD R W BROVfN A M H DROU7I RICHARD M A MARION H BROWN 2685 SHAOYUOOD RD S EXCELSIOR m 55331 REPORT NO. PI435601 PAGE 11 36 21-117-23 23 0010 02675 PHEASANT RD DAVID T HOFFMAN A WIFE DAVID T HOFFMAN 2675 PliEASANT ROAD EXCELSIOR MN 55331 0019 RD 36 21-117-23 23 02690 PHEAS/Urr A J A S A DALE ALAN DALE 2690 PHEASANT RD EXCELSIOR MN 55331 38 21-117-23 23 0022 02660 PHEASA^rT RD L R JERPBAK A L M JERPDAK LLOYD JERPBAK/LirroA JERPDAK 2660 PHEASANT RD ORONO MN 55331 38 21-117-23 29 0053 02675 SHADYWOOO RD RAN MARTIN ROLU M A NANCY A MARTIN 2675 SHADYWOOO RD EXCELSIOR m 55331 K \t ■ ..iUK * i 1 ^ ^ ll 1 1 I 'V 09 > O aa § a 5m PART LOl 14 D ROGER DOLLIFF 501 so. BTH ST. MINNEAPOLIS. MN 55404 October 5» 1987 City of Orono Building & Zoning Department P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Proposed Construction 2670 Pheasant Road Gentlemen: This is to inform you that we have no objection whatsoever to the proposed construction of a porch addition to our neighbors house. We reside at 2680 (aka lot 20) and our neighbors Raymond Johnson are immediately next door to the northeast. We will be pleased if you favor them with a building permit for the addition. Sincerely, “7- Roger Dolliff ms O- o >r l-H Hi tf M X i-« in 2o o rr O tn cr C Bi t-» 3 »1 fil X > »o 8 <w O Gb O 9 O *D 9 » CU rt »t m (0 M- Cj ».« O U C*) C» Ot %Q M* 3 O o *d CB Ql O ft X" J— O cn M* a 0 c 01 o H* < 0 c 01 n: o Of M Of iO CD aoc (D ID M O 3 iQ rt 3* n X H* CA rf M* 3 cn Q ftcr CD n ?r X CD ►Iaoo< CD ►1 No 3 CD •0 3 O H* ►Io M (D O 3 CD O 3 CD H M z Mozcd t a ft 3* O I tn CD «l O • • • •ti Ml Hi mom 0 0 0 HI Ml Hi n m 0 0 Ml Ml (A 0 Ml CB 0 HI (A (A 0 0 •-n Hi 3 0 HI 0 m 0 HI 0 CD CD CD 0*0 HI HI HI 0 0 0 m 0 H| 0 K}in01 Lnoo U1o 0 1 ooo 3o tr^ 3 O K •O Ho ■g (Aoa wK X CD Haoo< (D H CA ft H« 3 tr» ^ § -c ® 4 8 = O O’ CD oo >aa IDa r» 3 O I' Io« 3 O a D Haoo< CD H •O H O ►9 O > •g (A CD M cn 0 o CD 0 Hi 0 Xw o cro CA 0 H| 0 w CD 3 O < CDa 0 aw § o Moo •n H* 3 Of 0 <3* X o V 8 LI # o P-rji'V E E x>■f.0^ X X X X '‘A r* % V] D ■D a ■N. V h 0 :> CA• H| (A 0 0^ CA 0 HI «n 0 Hi M ft CD 3 ft X a ft X n y M. (A ft H* 3;o Haoo< CD H ►ao r* M ft Da ft o cr CD a 0 a CDao < CDa o s*3U3 ft 3- Xw K« H| >oo Xo Of 3 » s a rf 3* o >r* Ik> O >aa M* ft I—o 3 Of M a Of Hano < CD H CA 0 Hi 0 W y (A ft M. 3 sQ X Of Haoo< CD H ft 0 cro M O O I Ofaa CDa S' ft *V>1 % < > a H X ft Of CD Of rsT 4:r* (A fj • H» Hi 0 et_ t Cl 0 * la » • • / H* ft 3 M* 3 CA rf H* 3 N O 3 CD a Of Haoo<o H Oo ano n oair» 5 M S o ?d cn Xrtw L..... ..................................ft a f .wt. «I ii‘TDinTi n iii^il‘ii(rnif ' I T . o. hardcover CALCOIATIOW 80MMARY A.B.C.D. Lakeshore Setback Zone Lot Area In Zone Existing Hardcover In Zone Existing Hardcover Percentage (B/A)xlOO Pinal Proposed Hardcover In Zone 0-75* 75-250* 250-500 * 500-1000* 7 “TOO sf /7s (oOO sf ^ 3o0 sf sf 70 sf L *foo sf I sf 3v.y t 2-g.3 « % 7g sf ^400 sf sf E.F. Hardcover Percentage (D/A)xl00 Allowed Hardcover Percentage 1 %0 ¥ %25 2^3 %30 %35 % « % « HARDCOVER LIMITATIONS HARDCOVER INCLUDES* - Structures with roofs - Decks, even if slatted - Sidewalks - Driveways (paved or gravel) - 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 TAKESHORE REGULATIONS 8BC. 10.22, HBGDLATIOHS FOR "LR-lA", "Lir-IA-l*, "LR-IB", •LR-IC" AND "LR-lC-l" OWK FAMILY LAKB8BORB RESIDBHTIAL 0I8TRICT. With:.;: any "LR-lA", LR-lA-1", "LR-lB", "LR-IC", or •LR-lC-1" One Family Lakeshore Residential Dictrf.ct the following regulations shall apply: Subd. 1. Lakeshore Set Back Regulaticrs. The set back from the shoreline for lakeshore lots shall be at least 75 feet end no building may be located closer to the shoreline than the average distance frerr. the shoreline of existing residence buildings on adjacent and nearby lots. Subd. 2. Lakeshore Hard Cover Regulr.ticns. Within 75 feet of shoreline there shall be no excavating, filling, hard cove-., temporary or permanent structures. Within 75 to 250 feet of the shoreline there rival 1 be no greater than 251 hard cover. Within 250 to 500 feet of the shoreline there shall be no greater than 30% hard cover. Within 500 to 1,000 feet of the .■■iho.rttlf.ne there shall be no greater than 35% hard cover. Subd. 3. Tree Removal Regulatlcns. V.s trcoo within 75 feet of the shoreline with the diameter of six (6) inches or more be removed without first obtaining a permit from the Council. 1 7 To:Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson From: Date: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator December 16, 1987 Subject #1233 Michael Halley Homes, 2715 Pence Lane - Conditional Use Permit/Variance - Public Hearing Zoning District - LR-IB Area - .94 acres or 41,148 s.f. Pertinent Ordinances and Issues - Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 - No land alterations within lakeshore protected area and no permanent structures. Applicant must replace deteriorating retaining walls within the 0-75'. Section 10.03, Subdivision 19 and 21 (2) - Ordinance 24, Second Series - Conditional use permit required if fill brought to site exceeds 100 cubic yards if this fill is not required for adequate coverage of frost footings/foundation. Applicant must clarify. . . applicant discusses a second option that involves bringing in 2,400 cubic yards of fill to raise grade. In addition, conditional use permit required to restore retaining walls. Section 10.55, Subdivision 8 - Variance to place new structures and perform land alterations within protected area. Hardcover Facts - 0-75' Area = 13,425 s.f. in area 75-250' Area = 27,723 s.f. in area Allowed Hardcover = 6,931 s.f. or 25% Proposed Hardcover = 6,737 s.f. or 24.3% (please note this does not include any improvements as shown in elevations within street yard, this only includes improvements within the lakeshore yard, but does include the driveway)* * House *= 2,600 s.f. Drive ® 3,195 s.f. Lakeside Deck = 410 s.f. Steps - Lakeshore Only Based on 4' Standard = 148 s.f. Retaining Walls Only Within Lakeshore Yard = 384 s.f. (This includes the elimination of the continuous wall at upper level of lakeshore yard) -•* - Zoning File #1233 December 16, 1987 Page 2 of 3 List of Exhibits Exhibit A Exhibit B Exhibit C Exhibit D Exhibit E Exhibit F Exhibit G Application Property Owners List Plat Map Survey Site Plan/Grading Plan Floor Plans/Elevations Engineer's Report As the applicant's addendum notes, this application involves the construction of a new residence, not the rebuilding of the existing foundation (review Exhibit E). The application has been reviewed as a new building permit application. Hardcover will consider only proposed iirprovements and improvements to remain. Retaining walls within the lakeshore yard must be replaced as they are old and in a deteriorated state and this condition was probably worsened by the storm of July 23, 1987. The applicant asks that we consider the major alteration of the lakeshore bank to provide a more natural, consistent setting with the proposed walk-out design (removal of 478 cubic yards within the 75-250' setback and 1,075 cubic yards within the 0-75' setback area), as opposed to other proposed option of raising grade along north, east and west sides of house requiring approximar#*!^ 2,400 cubic yards of additional fill on site. Based on Section 10.03, Subdivision 21, if fill is in excess of 100 cubic yards, it must be for adequate coverage of frost footings/foundation. If applicant can support this claim, a conditional use permit is not needed. The application is similar to at least 2 recent applications involving proposed walk-outs that required alterations within the 0-75' setback area. These residences were located either in or at the 75' setback line and were denied. The applicant can create a walk-out design within the 30'+ between proposed house and the 75' setback line (review Exhibit E). The applicant can move the house back to provide more room for desired lake front yard adjacent to house with a con’^ination of filling and graduating the cuts for walk-out up to the 75' setback line. The Engineer in his review sees no environmental advantage regarding water quality from the proposed lakeshore alteration and recommends against the major alteration within the 0-75' setback area. Issues for consideration: 1. Does the fact that the house is located out of the 75' setback area have any bearing on this review? 2. Does the elimination of the continuous block retaining wall along the entire shoreline outweigh the alteration and removal of 1,070 cubic yards of fill? Is this an aesthetic or environmental consideration? Which is appropriate for the City in its consideration of this application? Zoning File #1233 December 16, 1987 Page 3 of 3 3. How does the fact that we are dealing with a new residence structure on the property affect your decision? Should it have an affect in your consideration? 4. Under what conditions would you approve alterations within the 0*> 75' setback area? Environmental benefits. Comprehensive improvement of drainage - not only on a single property but also surrounding properties. Severe erosion. Ease of maintenance reducing hazard to homeowner. Ability to eliminate structural hardcover. Others Staff Recommendation To recommend a conditional use permit and variance per Section 10.03, Subdivision 19 and Section 10.55, Subdivision 8 to allow the replacement of retaining walls within the lakeshore yard and reconstruction of steps not to exceed 4' width standard and to deny the request of the applicant to alter existing grades within the 0-75' lakeshore protected area requiring 1,075 cubic yards of f’ll to be removed, based on the following findings: 1. No appreciable environmental benefit to quality of run-off. 2. Limits disturbance within lakeshore protected area. 3. No acceptable hardship has been demonstrated by applicant as there is adequate depth to move house further away from shoreline and suggest to the applicant that he consider either moving the house back or use the 30'+ feet of the existing width in front of proposed house to provide walk-out and that the City may consider granting a conditional use permit to allow fill brought to site to artifically raise grades. A grading plan (proposed contours plus amount and , location of fill, cross profile) must be submitted prior to formal action by the Planning Commission if applicant wishes to reconsider and request tabling. fT-rrfefiai r D y « • A Date Rec'd Fee j ■*» ' ■' *>■ ' /'<ri> v=co.->^ ■<-* •O / Receipt^ Initials CITY OF ORONO GENERAL LAND OSE APPLICATION PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address 971fi Pf»npp T.anp Property Identification Niunber (P.I.D.) 21-117-23-32-007 abstract or torrens?Please check one - Is the property __ _ _ _ (tor Conditional Use Applications only) Please attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. APPLICANT Name Mir»hn<a1 Hompg , Tnn. Address iinQ v^v-inp r>r-ivf> #3R0 Phone (home) Phone (work) Q44-1Q56 City Fdpfi Prairie Zip 55344 Phone (home)471-7343_ _ _ _ _ _OHNER (if different than applicant) Name William^ k Madeleine S. Mernik Phone 944-6512 Address 271f=> Ppnne Lane_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ City Orono ziP:£K2S/ Date Property Acquired ^(month/year) —^ I (do) ^do also own the adjacent parcels of land. FEES - CONDITIONAL DSE PERMITS $100.00 a)Residential accessory Use $150.00 b)Institutional (church.school, $150.00 c)Duplex Credit/Bldg $250.00 d)Commsrcial/Industrial Use X $200.00 f)Land Alteration ^___ Grading and filling - 101 cu. yd. or more X_ Seawall, retaining walls within 75* of lakeshore$150.00 Variance/Grading within 75' of lake shore. PRD/PID - see fee schedule OTHER APPLICATIONS $150.00 Commercial Site Plan Review (+ consultant fees) _ _ _ _ $250.00 Vacation _ _ _ _ $150.00 Easement Vacation _ _ _ _ $ 50.00 Easement Vacation With Subdivision . _ _ _ _ $250.00 Rezoning _ _ _ _ $200.00 Appeals Other - see fee schedule ►77 ^ '• 7"^ I'i PRESENT OSE OF PROPERTY Present Zoning District lr_ip Present Use of Property Single Family Residential _ _ _ _ _ _ Other (specify)_ DESCRIPTION OP REQUEST Describe request in detail: Regrading within 75* of lake shore to allow for a walkout lower level for a proposed new residential_ _ structure. Replacement of existing deteriorated retaining walla. REQUIRED SUBMITTALS 1. Completed Application Form 2.Certifie'I Property Owners List of owners within 350* (you can obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Government Cerntcr 348-3271) 3.Stamped, legal sized envelopes (#10) pre-addressed to each of the names on the above list with no return address. 4. Certificate of survey. 5. Construction plan, if applicable. *• €. Plat Map. The applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your application is not complete if the above information has not been included. Certification by Zoning Department that Land Use Application is complete. Zoning Officials Signature Date APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay all fees and/or unusual expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and ^correct to the best of his/her )cnowledge. Applicant's signature Date OWNERS SIGNATURE _ The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorized reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents, commission members, and Council members for purposes of investigation and verification of this^request* Owner's signature /{' 7/'///^ i.,—. Date //'~ ^ *~/ >'^.2 Applicant must have all submittals into th\.; City offices 25 days before the Planning Coitcnission Meeting. Planning CoRor.ission Meetings are held on the tltird Monday of each month. Ap^>Iicants nuit be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Comraistlon and Council, and, if an applicant is unable to attend a schei.' led meeting, to please make arrangements to have an authorized agent atL( :.d in your place and to advise the Building & Zoning Office of this charge- prior to the meeting. r m rv> s s o U4 X M M r\> CPo r- f- ^m ui r* r" •-*M M vn IN> m 5 5 T n N ► ti S m m %j n w m n w > XI Tl m 04 M M r- 04ui Wui 01 Ms i 04 04 Ooo X > ni > V -< > rn a u o XI 8|n X XI rggsm m fo X N|n o m ►- SS! (/I*1 XI oi o UI 04 04 r- r- o w m rv> Q r X ^> ^5 iv> o »- 2 ^ i C/I X C trt n§|Sm o > H n X H H •4 I fv> 01 Oi»r> XI o a o o I fVI 04 fM 04 Oo SS S m M X 04 n o m M X X O MSSCJ^ m m o X X ^ (O H H •- I155 n CD o ^ ^ UI H04 i5E r q H 10 01 fo m 04 H XI >00 P- 30 O m fv> fti X ^ on <^ rn o Cjo as,Mi 01 5nX oo IM ,6s o> N,ros N4 2m •o Mz r ♦ .♦ } W> Q O rj , / ns a5m S Nj O O 33 M n “n ms;;;m » m i/i mi o § m • T3 M 1/4 1/4s O c.C (1/c L i / / ; #voiktLhnm fcvy ^Mr//u.y^ ^y//r. Otu^ Soullnvost Crossiim I Km Vikina Oriw - Suite .iBO Eden Pruirie, MN 55 U4 ((d2) 444-K)5h ' *• ‘ V / Novmebor 25, 1987 u NW25I98T I....... fis. Jeanne Mabusth Building & Zoninc^ Administrator P.O. Box (36 Crystal Bay, MN 55232 Re: 2715 Pence Lane Dear Ms. Mabusth; demolish and remove the existing house and shed at ^ P9*^9® then design and construct a new residence. I!n residence to be approximutelv 3300 sq. ft. on the first level, approximately 1300 sq. ft. on the upper level and approximately 2600 sq. ft. finished on the lower le°el. The ' sale price is antici^^ated to be approximately $1,300,000. design of the new house is that the home T^^desJ^^ the character and scale of the existing neighborhood. minimize the removal of existing major trees, while maintaining a low profile orientation to the lake. the requirements expected a home of this size are good drainage and access to the rear yard and lake from the lower living level. This will require within 75* of the lake shore. However, this re- contours consistent with the homes directly the east of this property. This regradin? will also reduce the steepness of the rear yard which now is a hardship for access a^d drainage. We also propose to replace the existing deteriorated retaining walls which are within 75 ft. acieiloiated We have contacted the watershed district engineers, and they are supportive of the plans since all regrading and retaining wall replacement occurs above the 931.5 pt. elevation. We would follow their recommendation to erect and maintain a silt barrier during excavation until sod is established. ^ al«o contacted Doan Terryl Paul Pohle who a.-o the neighbors Who immediately abut our property for their support. r L„ r rJ:/- YH cf]H N ■) ^ I '* f ' JjLTA-aw-jj i'.• ') '•uui*.' November 25, 1987 Pacce r2 r> •1 ))i Without variance approval, and to provide access to the yard and lake without the proposed reRradinp;, (and still meet city hardcover and heitcht ordinances) would require raising the first level of the stri’.cture and the grade on the north, east and west sides of the residence. Raising the grades and structure would be a much greater imposition on the neighborhood, and the adjacent houses. Also, this could cause possible removal of more major existing trees. On the lai\e side, instead of the house nestling into a sculptured yard as proposed, the three levels of the house would be more massive yet meet the ordinances. Our proposal, we feel, will respect the intent of your ordinances by maintaining a visual continuity with the neighborhood^ Sincerely, Michael A. Halley MAH/cj L M Bones troo Rosene Anderlik & Associates Otto 0 Booesiroa P£ RoOert W Rovne. PE C Andffl»k, PE Bradford A Lcmbfrg. PE Richard E Turner. PE James C Olson. PE Glenn R Ccok, PE Tr»omas E Noyes, PE Robert G Schunichl. PE Marvin L Sorvaia. PE Keith A Gordon. PE Richard W Fo«er. PE Oonafd C Burgardt. PE Jerry A Bourdon. PE Mark A Hanson. PE Ted K Field. PE Michael T Rautmann. PE Robert R Pfeffrrle. PE David O Loskota. PE Thomas W Peterson. PE Mictsael C lynch. PE. James R Maland. PE Kenneth P Ar>derson. PE Keith A Bachmarwi. PE Mark R Rolfs. PE Robert C Russek. A I A Thom.^s Howard Charles A Erickson Leo M Paweisky Harlan M Olson Si-.an M Eberiin Mark A Sc Ip MUMV. rc : Russek. A I A__________________ Engineers & Architects December IS, 1987 City of Orono Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Attn: Ms. Jeanne Mabusth Re: File No. 139-1233 Michael Halley Homes 2517 Pence Lane Dear Jeanne, Ve have reviewed a plan for the proposed home at 2517 Pence Lane. The plan provides for constructing a walkout to Lake Minnetonka. The construction would involve excavating in the 0 to 75 setback area. The excavation and regrading work proposed on the property would not significantly enhance runoff quality from the site. Ve would recommend that regrading in the lakeshore area not be allowed. If you have any questions, please contact this office. Yours very truly. BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC. Glenn R. Cook GRC:11 2335 West Highway 36 • St. Paul, Minnesota 55T13 • 612-636-4600 To: From: Date: Subject: Planning Conunission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator December 15, 1987 #1235 City of Orono, 265 Orono Orchard Road - Conditional Use Permit - Public Hearing Zoning District - RR-IB Pertinent Sections of Code - Section 10.03, Subdivision 9 A thru D - Accessory Buildings. Section 10.03, Subdivision 12 - structures. Required 10' setback from all Section 10.20, Subdivision 3 (C) - Accessory structures shall be 50' from all lot lines. Section 10.09 - Conditional Use Permits. List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Exhibit B “ Exhibit C - Exhibit D - Exhibit E - Exhibit F - Exhibit G - Gerhardson's Memo Photo of Structure Plat Map Notice of Public Hearing Certification of Mailing Property Owners List Site Plan The application involves the moving of a garage/barn structure that was formerly located on the site of the Knoll Manor plat and will be permanently located on the Orono Golf Course property. The structure is 864 s.f. in area satisfying the 1,000 s.f. area allowance for accessory structures in residential zones. It will be located well beyond the required 50' setback from all lot lines. The structure will be screened by topography and nature plantings from the surrounding adjacent residential lots. Review Exhibix, G, the accessory structure will be located 130' from the club house, thereby satisfying the required 10' separation setback for’ all structures. The circled structure on the site will be removed at the time the replacement structure is installed. The City has received no negative comments from any of the surrounding neighbors notified with this application. Staff Recommendation - To recommend approval of the conditional use permit for the City of Orono to permit the installation of an 864 s.f. accessory structure for equipment storage purposes at the Orono Golf Course. PROM: DATE: SDBJ: Mark Bernhardsonr City Administrator John R, Gerhardson, Public Works Coordinator June 25, 1987 Proposed Garage - Jrono Golf Course Recently the City approved the "Knoll Manor" subdivision, I have been advised that there is a 24' x 36' garage on the propert” that subdividers would like to dispose of and has offered the building to the City of Orono at no charge if the City would move the building off the property. Because we are short of equipment storage at the Orono Golf Course, I have researched the feasibility and costs for moving the building to the golf course. I have inspected the building and have determined that it is in excellent condition and is of the design that will blend in at the golf course. It is three times the size of the current garage/shop and will house the equipment that now must be left outside exposed to the elements and possible vandalism. I have checked with a building mover and have been informed that the building can be moved to the golf course for $2,900 if the City will provide police escorts. I have talked with a contractor and have been told that a floating concrete slab of this size would cost $2,000 - $2,500. There would also be clearing and preparation of the site which could amount to $1,500. Other incidental costs for electrical wiring, moving the furnace and removal of the existing one stall garage could cost $2,000. I estimate the total costs to be $8,900. In 1987 we did budget $5,000 to add on to the existing one stall garage. TO: Mayor Grabek & Council Members FROM; Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator^ « Forwarded recommending approval with the $3,000 increase in budget ex penditure will result in long term operational savings through reduced equipment maintenance and repair and upkeep to the existing structure. PROPOSED MOTION: Moved by _, seconded by _, that the Orono City Council approves expenditure of $8,900 for moving of an existing garage and related costs for utilization at the golf course. Ayes , Nays JJ b o 3 "O o<o 3o D W» </» (/»(/></«</) -Dca “ Ic*. I H2 „ oj •K •< n 0 VI + 0 Jo =i - c 3 nrc o f) -n C DT D «< n ^ O S 3 — CJ ki O o’f i? # v» 11 j ^il i< 1 '1 IV. r*1 1 '*00 > 1 U) ,0Q 1 r- H ^ o tf» — ;/) b o ^ o oC - o b m M -% ij in U3o bn S’ o< b 5 3 0 ^ < I? 1 B 2 oo 3T n ^ O ^ C-' rp - - 3 S o a *J3 -n -n S 4 § 5 5 - a > o > o3 Q i/i 3 ^ 'g) N •9- II II o -c. OQ 1 b i 1I 1o !i 1 ♦f 11 1 ioS i \ofr 1 , i 1j 11 j ‘ 1 11 1 1) 1 1 i K X ( X 1 X X X X X X : J 10 1 1 1 IT' •1 II II II II •1 •»II I* ^ I'e)(|) (© .“a) ^ <§) <D ii II II II II II II II O 3 •Jt 5 3(/> CT. X) < b co o b ui O > u ^ ^ ‘ » '1‘it? *. f * - •;■' m J • ^ V. ' . . 9 4 r ■ • ' •4 ^ (J‘ CD C Fo zo •0m a S H C/l i iI I i i ,1______ (a)o\-=^7 ! > 0 C fvJ -C.e.. ! n • • « • ; . . . . i: • ' ■"; 1 ! i •’ ■ • ■ 4 • • • • i ■ • • • • 1 ■ ' 1 • J- * t ... • . • . • • • ■r • 1) < . . > . . ... J I ] ' . ! ‘ . i • • i ... L ■ ,. ,. —..................... .... Cfc (> \) CITY OP ORONO NOTICE The Planning Conunission will hold public hearings in the Council Chambers at 1275 South Brown Road on Monday, December 21, 1987, on the matter of reviewing the following land use applications; 1. #1229 Richard E. Hanson of 3826 Cherry Avenue seeks hardcover and lakeshore setback variances to construct a three season porch addition. 2. #1230 hardcover residence. Raymond & Susan Johnson of 2670 Pheasant Road seek a variance for a lakeside sun porch addition to their 3. #1233 William & Mary Mernik of 2715 Pence Lane seek a conditional use permit and variance for proposed land alterations within 75 feet of the shoreline. 4. #1235 The City of Orono seeks a conditional use permit for a garage/storage building to be installed at the Orono Municipal Golf Course located at 265 Orono Orchard Road. All persons wishing to be heard will appear at this time. The meeting starts at 7:00 P.M. Written comments are solicited. Plans are available for review in the City offices, by appointment. By: Planning Commission JeanneJA. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator To be published the week of December 7, 1987. CITY OF ORONO CERTIFICATE OP MAILING STATE OP MINNESOTA ) ) COUNTY OP HENNEPIN ) ss. 1, Jamie Bosma, of the City of Orono, Hennepin County, Minnesota, do hereby certify that a Notice of Public Hearing concerning the matter of #1235, was mailed to the attached list of property owners . In Witness Whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and seal this 3rd day of December, 1987. Jamie Bosma y r rj-uijui. oMiiuxa Mxuiixn JDU Ui. ^oo uiuiiu urcnaiu noau.r 02-117-23-24 0003 280 Orono Orchard Rd S. Victoria Raiche 280 Orono Orchard Rd S. Wayzata, MN 55391 02-117-23-23 0002 385 Orono Orchard Rd. Ruth Snith 3400 City Center 33 6th St. S. Mpls., MN 55402 02-117-23-24 0002 320 Orono Orchard Rd. Benjamin Jaffray 320 Orono Orchard Rd. Wayzata, MN 55391 02-117-23-24 0006 360 Orono Orchard Rd. Steele Osborn 360 Orono Orchard Rd. Wayzata, MN 55391 02-117-23-21 00009 190 Orono Orchard Rd. S. Jane McClaren 190 Orono Orchard Rd. S. Wayzata, MN 55391 02-117-23 21 0010 180 Orono Orchard Rd. Joseph Rokke 180 Orono Orchard Rd. Wayzata, MN 55391 02-117-23-24 0001 1315 Woodhill Ave. David Li.ndstrom 1315 Woodhill Ave. Wayzata, MN 55391 02-117-23-24 0007 1255 Woodhill Ave. John S. Pillbury Jr. 1300 TCF Tower Mpls., MN 55402 02-117-23-21 0007 1230 Woodhill Ave. Michael & Darlene Blazek 1230 Woodhill Ave. Wayzata, MN 55391 02-117-23-21 0019/0018 170 Smith Ave. Jerome & Julie Carlson 170 Smith Ave. Wayzata, MN 55391 02-117-23-21 0033 120 Orono Orchard Rd. Louis Merchant 120 Orono Orchard Rd. Wayzata, MN 55391 02-117-23-?! j022 lie Orono Orchard Rd. Steve Cu» ran 110 Oror-o Orchard Rd. Wayzatc, MN 55391 02-117 -23-21 0032 100 Orono Orchard Rd. Margart t Schopf 100 Oroi o Orchard Rd. Wayzata, MN 55391 02-117-23-21 0023 60 Orono Orchard Rd. Claudia Myers-Whiteley 60 Orono Orchard Rd. Wayzata, MN 55391 02-117-23-22 0008 45 Smith Ave. Gilbert & Elaine Thompson 45 Snith Ave. Wayzata, MN 55391 02-117-23 21 0017 125 Smith Ave. James & Linda Gasch 125 Smith Ave. Wayzata, MN 55391 02-117-23-21 0016 115 Smith Ave. Benny Dye 115 Smith Ave. Wayzata, RN 55391 02-117-23-21 0031 95 Smith Ave. James & Dianne Ahlberg 95 Smith Ave. Wayzata, MN 55391 02-117-23 21 0029 160 Smith Ave. Michael Bean 160 Smith Ave. Wayzata, MN 55391 02-117-23-21 0028 140 Smith Ave. Thomas Hunt 140 Smith Ave. Wayzata, MN 55391 02-117-23-21 0026 110 Smith Ave. Katherine Filkins 110 Smith Ave. Wayzata, MN 55391 02-117-23-21 0004 80 Smith Ave. Frank Voigt 80 Smith Ave. Wayzata, MN 55391 02-117-23-21 0003 60 Smith Ave. Edward Glampe 60 Smith Ave. Wayzata, MN 55391 02-117-23 21 0002 40 Smith Ave. Gary Peterson 40 Smith Ave. Wayzata, MN 55391 02- 117-23 23 0001 1580 Fox St. Whitney MacMillan 1580 Fox St. Wayzata, MN 55391 03- 117-23 14 0002 1640 Fox St. Susan Velie Norton 1640 Fox St. Wayzata, MN 55391 34- 118-23 44 0003 135 Orono Orchard Rd. Edmund Rydell 135 Orono Orchard Rd. Long Lake, MN 55356 02-117-23 22 0002 15 Orono Orchard Rd. Michael & Debra Robinson 15 Orono Orchard Rd. Wayzata, MN 55391 02-117-23 22 0003 Longridge Assoc. % D.E. Billie Dept 28 P.O. Box 9300 Mpls . , MN 55440 35- 118-23 33 0004 25 Orono Orchard N. John Gilmer 25 Orono Orchard N. Long Lake, MN 5535u 35-118-23-33 0009 20 Orono Orchard Rd. Cheyenne Land Co. 742 Twelve Oaks Center 15500 Wayzata Blvd. Wayzata, MN 55391 35-118-23-33 0010 30 Orono Orchard Rd. Stephen Neslund 30 Orono Orchard Rd. Wayzata, MN 55391 i L.„_k It ^ t tt IMlrTt—t-ff—VAit. m ■ fi I r~ri ikii 'TV ki ■ r—n ■■ It '. .T •. »r**f*»»»* Y -t f^***«»-«t*^f»*t* ‘i ■ i ti.Y—ti t-r - i» i»n Bft tt r— ~ - • ) To:Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson From Date Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning 6 Zoning Administrator December 14, 1987 Subject: Zoning Code Amendment Conditional Use I- Oversized Accessory Structures as a Attached please find the memo of June 29, 1987 suggesting possible changes to the Zoning Code section dealing with accessory structures. This is Item #9 of your December 21, 1987 agenda. Since I will not be 3 <h r. IV- " * o - S'-.-o -y-t^’.t f r To; DRAFT Planning Conunission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson < . 72087.1 From: Michael P. Gaffron, Asst 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. L„.. 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. 2. Revise Section 10.03, Subdivision 9 (B) to make barns and stables subject to the height conditions of the conditional use permit. 3. Revise Section 10.03, Subdivision 9 (C) by removing the exceptions (barn, stable, green house) and noting that accessory buildings over 1,000 s.f. are allowed subject to conditional use permit. 4. Revise Section 10.20, Subdivision 4 (B) to define tennis courts and swimming pools over 1,000 s.f. as subject to conditional use permit requirements if they are enclosed (i.e. have a roof). (Fences around a pool or tennis court would not alone instigate the need for a conditional use permit.) 5. Add Section 10.20, Subdivision 3 (Q). Accessory buildings in excess of 1,000 s.f. (use of the word buildings will exclude non roof ed structures such as tennis courts and pools) with standards for allowable floor area based on acreage and required setback a function of floor area and peak height. Proposed Language - The Municipal Code of the City of Orono, Minnesota is amended by adding Ordinance No. _ _, Second Series: SECTION I. Orono Municipal Code Section 10.02 is hereby amended by adding the following definition: "BUILDING HEIGHT- ACCESSORY STRUCTURE" - The vertical distance from the elevation of the adjoining ground level to the top of the cornice of a flat roof, to the deck of a mansard roof, to the uppermost point on a round or other arch type roof, to the highest ridge of a hip o;r pitched roof. Zoning Code Amendment June 29, 1987 Page 3 of 5 SECTION II. Orono Municipal Code Section 10.02, Subdivision 9 (B) is hereby repealed and the following language substituted in its place; B. HEIGHT RESTKICTIONS. No accessory building or structure in the ”R” District shall exceed the height of the principal building except as allowed by the provisions of a conditional use permit. SECTION III. Orono Municipal Code Section 10.03, Subdivision 9 (C) is hereby repealed and the following language substituted in its place: C. AREA RESTRICTIONS. In all ”R” Districts, no accessory building shall exceed 1,000 square feet of floor area except as allowed by the provisions of a conditional use permit. SECTION IV. Orono Municipal Code Section 10.20, Subdivision 4 (B) is hereby repealed and the following language is substituted in its place: B. POOLS, ETC. Private swimming pools, tennis courts, and paddocks, subject to the area and height restrictions for accessory buildings and subject to a conditional use permit if such pools, tennis courts, or paddocks are enclosed by being covered with a roof and exceed 1,000 square feet in area. SECTION V. Orono Municipal Code Section 10.20 is hereby amended by adding Subdivision 3 (Q) as follows; Q. ACCESSORY BUILDINGS IN EXCESS OF 1,000 S.F. OF TOTAL FLOOR AREA. Accessory buildings in excess of 1,000 s.f. in total floor area, subject to the following restrictions; Zoning Code Amendment June 29, 1987 Page 4 of 5 A. B. MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE FLOOR AREA OF EACH •MAXIMUM AGGREGATE FLOOR AREA OF LOT AREA ACCESSORY BUILDING ACCESSORY BUILDINGS Up to 2.0 acres 1,000 s.f.2,000 s.f. 2.01 to 3.0 1,500 3,000 3.01 to 4.0 2,000 4,000 4.01 to 5.0 2,500 5,000 5.01 to 6.0 3,000 6,000 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 sf/ac 15.01 to 20.0 10,000 Over 10.0 acres 20.01 +15,000 Note that no conditional use permit wcbld be required if, say, an 8.5 acre lot had 9 - 900 s.f.buildings, since the aggregate is less than 9,000 s.f. and each is less than 1,000 s.f. in area. BUILDING MINIMUM REQUIRED SETBACK FLOOR AREA FROM ALL LOT LINES 1,000 s.f.10' 1,500 15' 2,000 20' 2,500 25' 3,000 30' 3,500 35' 4,000 40'• 4,500 45' 5,000 50' 7,500 75' 10,000 100' 15,000 150' Zoning Code Amendment June 29, 1987 Page 5 of 5 C. DEFINED PEAK HEIGHT MINIMUM REQUIRED SETBACK 0 - 15' 15.1 - 20’ 20.1 - 25* 25.1 - 30' As in (B) above As in (B) above, but in no case less than 20' As in (B) above, but in no case less than 35' As in (B) above, but in no case less than 50' D.Accessory Buildings shall be setback from all other accessory or principal buildings by a distance no less than 10* (maybe this should go back in Section 10.03, Subdivision 12. . .). E. Consider screening requirements? f Vsubd. 7. A-r Li^T s 10.03 ,. .One Building Per Lot. Except in the case of Planned R^identjiarl Developments as provided for hereinafter, no more than one principal building shall be located on a lot. Subd, 8, Lots to Face Streets. Each lot shall face on a public street or appropriate private easement. Subd. 9. Accessory Buildings. A. Time of Construction. No accessory building or structure shall be constructed on any lot prior to the time of construction of the principal building to which it is accessory. B. ^Height Restrictions. No accessory building in the "R" Distr^PP^hall exceed the height of the principal building except barns or stables which shall be subject to the approval of the Council. ;^^nq >Area Restrictions. In all ”R" Districts no accessory building shall exceed 1,000 square feet of floor area except barn, stable or greenhouse. ^ tlfcV'S-c/o /"^ D. Location. No detached garages or other acces sory building shal'l be located nearer the front lot line than the principal buildTng on that lot except on lots which have frontage on a lake. Source: Municipal Code Effective Date: 9-14-67 1. Location of Principal Building to Lakeshore. No principal building shall be located closer than 75 feet to the natural ordinary high water mark of a lake abutting the property. This lakeshore setback shall be determined as the mean horizontal distance between the natural ordinary high water mark on the lakeshore and the allowable building line. 2. ■ Variance From Lakeshore Setback.Any application for a variance from the requirements of Item 1 above shall be referred to the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District for its approval before final action by the Council. Source: Ordinance No. 155 Effective Date: 2-14-74 Subd. 10. Conditional Use Permit Required. 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) § 10.20 (SEC. 10.20. R-IA ONE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT c Subd. 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-1A" 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 Sxmilar 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. * Serv ice Structures. Public service structures, irttTiuding but not limited to electric transmission linos, 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) r r * 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. (fO Recreation Areas. Private gun clubs, archery ranges, riding^"ktables, ski slides, provided the area is fenced and no part of the principal use is less than 100 feet from any lot line. 5CCT 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. f I, Duplex Credit. One duplex may be located on a single lot as a conditional use upon application therefor provided that public sanitary sewer service is available, and the lot is adjacent to a commercial or industrial district, and the duplex is constructed within 200 feet of the commercial or industrial district. A duplex is defined as a two-family unit residential building. J. Apiaries. (kj Animals. The keeping of domestic animals for non-commerciair 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.y Farms (Crop). Provided that the area is ten or more acres. \_/ Source: Ordinance No. 172 Effective Date: 1-1-75 ORONO CC 280 (4-1-84) s 10.20 M. Antenna Structure. One independent antenna structure with antenna or combination of antenna attached thereto, subordinate to and servicing the principal use or structure on the same lot and customarily incidental thereto that is not attached to another structure provided the height of the antenna structure does not exceed 65 feet and the antenna structure is set back from any lot line a distance at least equal to the total height of the antenna structure. A' 0 r- Subd. 4 f W Source: Ordinance No. 177 Effective rate: 6-5-75 Acnessorv llaRS.Within any "R-IA" One Family Residential District, no accessory structure or use of land shall be permitted except for one or more of the following uses: courts ^^^^^arages. Private garages and parking space. ^*B^^jools, etc. Private swimming pool, tennis and . C. Home Occupations. Any gainful occupation meeting all of the following requirements when engaged in only by persons residing in their dwelling, when there is ro 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 permitted in the district in which it is located. A professional person may use his residence for consultation, emergency treatment or performance of religious rites but not for general practice of his profession when such general practice will involve the need for more than three off-street parking spaces for the occupant and visitors. D. Signs. Signs as regulated in the Zoning Chapter. E. Temporary Structures. Buildings temporarily located for purposes of constructing on the premises for a period not to exceed time necessary for such constructing. F. Gardens, etc. Gardening and other horticultural uses including aviaries and decorative landscape features. G. Roadside Stands. One roadside stand offering for sale only farm products produced on the premises provided that such stand does not exceed 200 square feet in area and that it is located at least thirty feet back from the public right-of-way. Source: Ordinance No. 172 Effective Date: 1-1-75 ORONO CC 281 (4-1-84) 0 7^ 1 V c § 0 O*n Or- 0 r* 0 1 < 'i tor> >r II O ^c» 5: ✓u* I 7^ 0 • R 0 n ^ (1^ N N • 1 ^ (\) CP r Ss ror> 5 i c: 9<L ii Sr 2 1^ TO: From Date Subject: Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator December 17, 1987 11236 0. Larry Lee, 1050 Garden Lane (N % Section 7) Subdivision - Sketch Plan (No legal notice published or mailed notice to affected neighboring property owners required at this stage of review) ZoiLlng District - LR-IB Total Area - Approximately 33 acres Pertinent Ordinances - Section 11.10, Subdivisions 6, 7 and 8 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 Included Within Plat Cook's Letter Cook's Sketch of Proposed Road Metro Urban Service Area Map Trapp Platting "West Branch Acres" Soils Map/Drainage Map Sketch Plan Drainage Sketcn The total 33 acres is located within the LR-IB zoning district. Lots 1, 2, 3, and 4 along the northeast edge of the plat are already platted and meet the required 1 acre in area but not the 140' width required. They appear to be at approximately 125 average width satisfying the 80% standard at 112'. All other proposed lots as shown meet the required 1 acre in area. At the curved section in the proposed road along the west edge. Lots 5 and 6 do not meet the required lot width and Lots 3 and 4 to the north along the cul-de-sac. r Zoning File #1236 December 17, 1987 Page 2 of 3 Garden Lane and Highview Lane are platted unimproved public roads. The looped road “proposed road" along the west edge would meet public road criteria and would be constructed per the same standards of other defined public roads. Spur road from north would remain a private road. As Cook's letter recommends the proposed construction of Highview Lane between Garden Lane and Wildhurst Trail would be difficult because of the steep topography. The area is also deeply wooded and to construct roads with such deep cuts would require major removal of these trees. Cook suggests realignment to the north per attached Exhibit E. The current sketch plan includes land holdings of four owners. It my understanding that other adjacent land owners may also join in the formal subdivision application (re/iew Exhibits B & I). Note the Morgart property - this property provides the complete connection to Wildhurst Trail. It is staff's under standing that this property may also be included in the formal application. The Morgart property is not included in the M.U.S.A. District, and if included within the subdivision, would require rezoning and a Comprehensive Flan amendment. It is interesting to note that although considered rural the property has been assessed 2 sewer units??? Refer to Exhibit F, it does not make any planning sense to include the property in the rural zone to the north. Cook has also advised in his commentary, the need to upgrade specific sections of existing streets: 1. The intersection of Wildhurst Trail and County Road 19. 2. Tonkaview Lane from Wildhurst Trail to Garden Lane. 3. Wildhurst Trail from Forest Lake Landing to Highview Lane. The developer would be ask-d to share in the cost for certain improvements. As to the actual determination of the share or which of the above noted improvements would be considered, cannot be defined at this point in our review. As for sanitary sewer capacity, three of the four lift stations would appear to have adequate capacity. Lift Station #10 is to be upgraded as part of a comprehensive metro-sewer project within the area and is due for upgrading next year. Cook has stated that it would take one month to m xe a complete analysis of the sewer capacity and recommends that a trunk sewer charge De determined for the property. Storm sewer will be required in order to re-direct major portions of surface run-off from the proposed developed area to the northeast, away from the already defined drainage area to southeast (see Exhibit H, drainage plan). Future access to west via Highview Lane corridor must be dedicated and designated as 30* along north line of Lot 1 (see Exhibit B). This would fulfill earlier planning decisions in Trapp application to define future through corridor to County Road 19. At the time the connector road between Garden Lane and Wildhurst Trail is located on preliminary plat. Planning Commission may recommend an additional access corridor to the north. Zoning File #1236 December 17, 1987 Page 3 of 3 General Directions to Applicant *- 1. If the Morgart property is to be included within the formal subdivision application, this inclusion would require rezoning and a Comprehensive Plan amendment. 2. A future connection from Garden Lane to Wildhurst Trail should not be through the platted right-of-way of Highview Lane but should extend northward as shown in the Engineer's Sketch. Highview Lane would be vacated and a realignment of the lots required. Applicant would now include vacation of public road within the formal application. If the 10' alley along the Palmer and Valek property is planned, include all vacations under one application. 3. Sanite\ry sewer capacity to be determined within one month by the engineering staff. It would appear that there is adequate capacity in three of the four lift stations. Formal application must include a petition for extension of sanitary sewer to serve lots within plat. A trunk sewer charge will be determined for the property. 4. Storm sewer will be required to direct drainage away from current drainage path via ravene to Wildhurst Trail and re-directed to the wetlands to the northeast. 5. Extension of right-of-way for Highview Lane at the northwest edge of the property to be extended along north lot line of Lot 1 for 30' width. If there is to be a future access to the north, this would be determined at the time of preliminary plat review. 6. Based on Section 10.03, Subdivision 6 (A) 1, already platted Lots 1 through 4 do not require variances to current LR-lB standard and meet 80% of the required lot width. 7. All roads within the plat, either already defined as public roads or that loop and carry sewer lines, will qualify for public road maintenance. 8. One designated wetland, l.^cated within boundaries of Lot 6, 7 and within the newly defined Valek homestead lot, must be designated as drainage easements. Storm sewer must also be shown as drainage easements with a minimum width of 20'. 9. The City will ask for 2' contours of all property included within formal plat application. New road right-of-way to be shown at 50' width. The applicant has 90 days to file a formal subdivision application with the City. If there are any delays, the applicant should advise the City in writing 2 weeks before the deadline date (March 21, 1988). tr CITY OP OROrO SUBDIVISION APPLICATION it 1 r '’\b 7 .V- •u • Date Rec'd H “ ^NBy. “ ... Fee Rec ■ ' a. T^Z/.t "I APPLICANT Name /^/'lAAy ^Telephone PROPERTY OWNER Mailing Address Name --A— ' i-^U/'O > i > firL/p^ ij f'AliL r<v, Arr/h /}<J Telephone Mailing Address _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ (Attach list if more than one) PROPERTY LOCATION Street Address 4 rl A, /, .J JC'^' I h-v^ Property Identification No. (P.I.D.)A nj^k Complete Legal Description to be attached to application EXISTING LAND USB Number of Tax Parcels _ Development Size 31 in cm Of BROHO Present Use (check) Acre’s Dry Land r n rtrrjrr 1 u*/ t JLXmim Acres Wet Land 1 1 t.*u'Vw WV'V V* Acres Total, all Residential; no. parcels rz-.i •• VJl U?L.M fCA Af X W‘V ff VV of unitiS'^^'^ 2-Ji frA AA i w* V • W # Other (specify)-'Z~-/b^y.‘' YDU Present Zoning District r.v.f r.-M T,-ip;erjrr f 1 %J 1 uvv a nvi i i :nsr/07 ^ JL/ C. w.'/ U* I PROPOSAL \ /X Division for Tax Purposes Lot Line Rearrangement Only (no new building sites) Subdivision for New Building Sites Number of Building Sites:/- ) h ) A' Existing Units New Units Total Units Proposed Gross Density Minimum Lot Size: Proposed Use; (check) L J Ac A Units per f Acres Square Feet Dry Buildable Land Residential Other (specify) _ _ _ _ _ _ trMINIMUM MATERIAL NECESSARY FOR COMPLEX PRELIMINARY APPLICATION 1. Application Completed 2. Preliminary Plat information on Certificate of Survey. 3. Certified Property Owner's list of owners within 350' (this list can be obtained from the Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Government Center 348-3271) 4. Stamped, legal sized envelopes (#10) pre-addressed to each of the names on the above list with no return address. Certification by Zoning Department that Preliminary Plat Application• is complete. Zoning Officials Signature __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ Date- - - - - - - - - MINIMUM MATERIAL NECESSARY FOR COMPLETE PINAL PLAT APPLICATION 1. Payment of fees (park fees, filing fee, sewer and water assessments) 2. Signed certificate of survey or mylar copies of formal plat. 3. Title opinion. 4. Easements, Covenants, etc. 5. Developers Agreement and acceptable form of security. Certification by Zoning Department that Final Plat Application is complet Zoning Officials Signature_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _Date - - - - - -- _ FEES Preliminary Review (Class III and all non-resiccntial) >iFinal Plat Review (Class III!) ♦(Plus any legal or engineering charges) $150.00Sketch Plan Review (Class I, II & III) Preliminary Review (Class I i II Subdivisions) $250.00 $300.00 plus 20.00/lot $150.00* Applicant has read the above and hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, City Engineer, City Attorney, Planning Commission and Council necessary to process this application and further agrees to pay all additional fees established by ordinance. Applicant's Signature Owner's Signature _ _ *^7 X I 7z: 7 ‘t.hs third Monday of oach month* PROPERTY INFORMATION - "fl £ Steven F. Valek Box 386 Mi478 Shoreline Dr. Spring Park, MN 5538^ PID // 07-1 17-23-23-0001 07-117-23-23-0008 07-117-23-23-0009 07-117-23-23-0010 o O Mrs. Karl Sollner 371^ Manor Road Chevy Chase, MD 20815 PID // 07-117-23-22-0007 07-117-23-22-0008 07-117-23-23-0019 Ralph Winton Palmer 4750 Tonkaview Lane Orono, MN 55364 ^ PID // 07-117-23-23-0011 \ 07-117-23-23-0012 J 0. Larry Lee 1690 University Ave. St. Paul, MN 55104 PID 0 07-1 17-23-23-0020^^ 07-1 17-23-23-0021 \ 07-117-23-23-0022 I 07-117-23-23-0023 \ 07-117-23-23-0031 I 07-117-23-23-0033 I 07-117-23-23-0034 ) 07-117-23-23-0035 / D m r Bonestroo Rosene Anderlfk & Associates Olio G Bonettroo. PC Roty*rt W PE Jov^ph C AfnJerfik. PE Bedford A Lcmbffg. PE Richjird E Turner. PE Jjtmei C Ohon. PE Gtenn R Coon. PE Tr>cm,ii E Noyes. PE Robert G Schunicht. PE V(«rvin L Sorvala. PE Ke*lh A Gordon. PE RKhard W Eosier. PE Donald C Burgardl. PE Jerry ^ Bourdon. PE Mark A Hanson. PE Ted K Field. PE Michael T Rautmann. PE Robert R Pfefferle. PE David O Loskota. PE Thomai Engineers & Architects V' A tfKkion \ ’ Leo M PavweJsky ^ ^>id. PE Marian M 0»son Anderson, PE Susan M Fberlm B^nhrrann.^E ^ Seip iV^tVn C rJCiVa i A yT»VsrttaS E Ar>guv. PE jwaid A Sanford. F£ I i \ I P i - December 15, 1987 City of Orono Box 66 Cryotal Bay, MN 55323 Attn: Jeanne Mabusth Re: 139-1300 Yorkton Development Dear Jeanne: Ve have reviewed the preliminary Information submitted by Yorkton Development. The property proposed to be developed is West of Wildhurst Trail and North of Tonkaviev Lane. The sanitary sever system which serves this area includes four lift stations. Lift Station #10 is currently over capacity and is planned for replacement with a gravity sever in the next few years. Lift Station #14, #15 and #17 are currently opei ting under capacity and appear to be adequate to handle an additional fifty units. We will have to complete an analysis of the area prior to making a final decision. The work will take approximately one month to complete. There will be a sanitary sever trunk charge assessed to the property. The streets in the area are generally substandard with several problems that should be corrected. The Intersection of Wildhurst Trail and County Road 19 should be improved. Tonkaview Lane from Wildhurst Trail to Garden Lane should be upgraded. Wildhurst Trail from Forest Lake Landing to Uighviev Lane should be upgraded. The const^'uction of Highview Lane between Garden Lane and Wildhurst Trail would be very difficult. We would suggest some realignment of this conn-=»ction to the North as shown on the attached plan. The other streets in the subdivi sion should be realigned as shown to meet city standards. Page 1. 2335 West Highway 36 • St. Paul, Minnesota 55113 • 612-636-4600 m I Vo po/i ( CM 'HWv.. ^R'€A^ t I ■ ■ M^rif! l-LAIN IS[-'^BG. ....^^^ll.SL ; • ;7l.^ r 1 r.nrLSI ! f;' 0 AS^AJLlAlcb lii AA^e # WEST .BRANCt! ACi . J.__..Cfn--------- - -f t)|-\/-%iyi^r SC9 50 OM^09 •/M-x =?5J .0 ^ ^ ?i' \ 4 I / “ <r o -, vju» O Li D <( -J ‘0 UJ -1 r- c-i i' O L'J •S9^.5- ^Ms.]fOs/^/9€/^09/^/f4 Ac. 7 f tirn'L, n.i.'i.iL.iiw;i ^ r\ S4^,40 •to ‘.*''N-. I K S4^ p^rtu^m^ /• f9rr<ni C4U Ak ///;i i; ^t> 1^ ir • u> <r is>- .-K- L*J!>• / ^ • ^ ^#tvrww^T 4S.00 AS89•»^^a•£ a»4.»{ ^89^rZ8 ‘t N < Sco/c /eef ^ f'uriusntimhrren% c*^ y, jffjf S) •Ct Va o o h’/o ------------?Ukfc4- ' • j HIGHVItW LANE y. i ^ ^'^A/SS^0974*'AV S^or/rr^S sAowy^rj ore ^SSUmCa ^ i/coo/cs /aott A&ci.rf*Arr/ O'; * I * 1. ^'///'/^ cr^{/T4./70f^ eosc^^ ^X.^jfvrp Ah/S-‘ <l<r- \ 'J^ ^s/yt <y } 1:84 o •'^’vnVir 'A* t'-' Vo I A fcir* »^ J T • A A ir • %.<••! ^l*. $ X. -s r A' %nKhndi Ui h , . hl^nn^fin \. ’ 4ittfieufj >■ — . \ S^int^ 5 r iff i/ff/ifss ^/i1cr»%^sc /rrjico/to /w/ iff fVi(/M fX^Oift.^^ ryA/'o/' tHfOy os sAcff^ff Of7 /4h» r.c’\ Cf-cf i$U , (farffV ‘8* |f./!4r/4rWj ) h Af^ffiiii^mifJWtcklyHj'i iJfkT itSifitf if m C.'^8f*f/r 8 A^f0/fSkf/4 DOCAM C^tL LA?rOit»'r««ii.iKC. 1% •I •v KJ y-. , ♦ I I . i 4 i'» l-'V 17. !t ♦ I ? 5 n, \i I 4;rr f -*'4- ^ 1) \ • '*a V’ '•/■o \ • Mg ' t:. \ t'. ^I iv< U I ‘I - '^/M * I V • * «i •• ! • i • I '» ;•? .->4 \•«•J'l'C -,"V-i <^‘•0 f. * * .< ' A 3 • . t -r. >.• ^ y i v ‘» f*m m 0 I CJ w I j : ^ 'Vi V f ^ I 9 07 b > . ' 1 -;r-_ '} ; LV.. - s > -43 • u<- >v.rL r > ’; -■ 5: *; \ V ^ «T V • *i •I '1 }'/ <- < »-, ^ I •» t-*- •'% -n V .tT 7*i- A--, - •s. # . A-woV , ;. • J». ,n . ^ ■'• ;. ■’ > «?^v/ • V ■•* A i.'V; . - .V ,. . ^ ' '>V ■<i* %. •* ^ K ■ 4 ■A ' r-"’ 'VM‘ V" _______r' ........- - : • • . / • - - , r,.. 3 / . * 6 • ,'•> t'i-; \ *- •- • ' e \ \-, \ 1 •< '■■•V “\l•t»r ./u.., ---- :Tt;* -------- t V <4 * -- V '•'/ • • « r>. I .3* :.i k/ ^\^‘>V''V »o . - V. ■)v> ^“C5 •■■./■ A.' 'W u'.-*' ---' V V ’c * :> > ►" •»./ * - >#< "'I . ’ 4 ^ ^ > * ' 4 A • *r» * •4 » 4 \ I ’ ^ ;• • A . V V-A; ' ' •' ,, - C-‘ / \ m a ♦ *t \ V M 0 ll /It V C 4-> i A'14^ .1 ^ Ju '••* • ««> • J <»•>/ '5% 'ip--' ► • ' z..M *- / a A. r, ^ / / ‘ /■ ^------------ \ .-^A '7 */\Nc. ■ fflS V / r /^ w * * • • -V. ' y 1 'i •' ,>’ / .F*/ ' '‘^'fn^vc4hCKi4*J TO:Mayor Grabek Orono Council Members City Administrator Bernhardson FROM:Jeanne A. Mabusth, Zoning Administrator DATE: SOBJ: December 9, 1987 #1216 Clark Winslow, 1595 Bohns Point Road - Amendment of original Conditional Use Permit/Variance List of Exhibits - A - Original Plan B - Amended Plan C - Cross Section of shoulder of road At the request of the City of Orono, the applicant has agreed to reopen consideration of application #1216 that involved the dredging and removal of 1548 cubic yards of spoils from a designated wetlands. In the process of making borings in the area to be dredged, the contractor discovered extensive pockets of yellow clay. The soil's stability - cohesive, plastic qualities are excellent for City to use in restoring and widening shoulder areas of Bohns Point Road. Please note these soils are not customary spoils ladened with rich nutrients. There is no danger of contaminating water quality of runoff to and from wetlands. Portions of the road right-of-way are located within the wetlands. The area of the road restoration runs a distance of 130 feet adjacent to wetlands for a depth of 12 feet. The 650 cubic yards of clay will be deposited or filled within the east edge of the wetland. Winslow has agreed to excavate the west edge of the existing wetland to compensate for filling on the east side of wetlands. Staff recommends approval of the land alteration that would allow the filling of the designated wetlands located within the road right of way of Bohns Point Road based on these additional findings: 1. The land alteration will greatly improve the existing road by widening the road bed and providing gentler slopes adjacent to wetlands. 2. Owner of adjacent property will provide additional ponding area on his property to compensate for fill of vv? ands. Resolution #2296, approved by Council on 11/9/87, has been amended to include this final land alteration. This amended application will be presented to the Planning Commission at their 12/21/87 meeting as an information item. The scheduled dredging by the applicant and the normal schedule of the Planning Commission meetings made it impossible to schedule at the Planning Commission before Council action. A RESOLUTION GRANTING A VARIANCE TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.55, SUBDIVISION 8 AND A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PER SECTION 10.03, SUBDIVISION 19 FILE #1216 WHEREAS, Clark Winslow (hereinaiter "the applicant") is the owner of the property located at 1595 Bohn's Point Road within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as Lot 2, Block 1, Beth and Bridget, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "property"); and WHEREAS, the applicant has made application to the City of Orono to permit the dredging of 1,548 cubic yards of spoils from a pond approximately 1/2 acre in area and the excavation of 650 cubic yards of dry land area adjacent to the pond to compensate for filling of road bed located on east side of pond requiring a conditional use permit per Section 10.03, Subdivision 19 and per Section 10.55, Subdivision 8 seeks approval of a variance because the pond is classified as a designated wetland. Minnesota: HOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #1216. 2. The property is located in the LR-IB Single Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District. 3. The property is approximately 2.12 acres in area. 4. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on October 19, 1987, and recommended approval of the proposed variance to Section 10.55, Subdivision 8 allowing the dredging of a designated wetland, and recommended approval of a conditional use permit per Section 10.03, Subdivision 19 to allow the dredging of 1,548 cubic yards cf spoils from the pend, based on the following findings: A) The actual alteration will involve only 25% of the pond area at approximately 1/2 acre. B) The proposed depth of 12 feet will reduce algae growth and pond orders. C) The scope of the overall project is minimal and will result in a negligible impact on the lake and wetlands. Page 1 of 4 D) In a report dated October 12, 1987, the City Engineer Glenn Cook had the following conunents: i. The proposed alteration will improve the sedimintation capacity available and widlife habitat. ii. The proposed alteration would not appear to have any long term adverse effects on Lake Minnetonka, iii. The alteration will reduce the assimilative capacity of the marsh slightly. 5. Based on a review of the necessary findings in approving the alteration of a protected wetland, the Planning Commission made the following findings; A. The proposed alteration will not restrict the passage of flood water or run-off. B. The alteration will not pose a danger to life or property C. The proposal appears to be compatible with the City's desire to preserve natural land forms, vegetation and wetlands. D. The alteration will provide greater storage or retention of run-off as a result of the increase in depth. 6. The land alteration will greatly improve the safety of the users of Bohns Point Road by widening the road bed and providing gentler slopes adjacent to wetlands. 7. The applicant has agreed to excavate an adjacent land area of the wetlands to compensate for area filled on east side of pond with the improvement of the public road. 8. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this pro perty are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variance would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring properties; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate a demon strable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicant; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. 9, The City Council finds that granting a conditional use permit to allow the dredging of the wetland will not be detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare of the public, would not adversely Pago 2 of 4 affect light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring properties, nor will it depreciate surrounding property values and that the proposed level of use of the property will be in keeping with the intent and objectives of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.55, Subdivision 8 and a conditional use permit per Section 10.03, Subdivision 19 to allow the dredging of 1,548 cubic yards of spoils from a wetland on the subject property, subject to the following conditions: 1. Prior to dredging, silt fencing must be installed near the pond outlet. 2. Applicant shall excavate 650 cubis yards of dry land area to compensate for filling of designated wetlands per plans referenced as exhibit B in Council packets for December 14, 1987 meeting. 3. The hauling of the spoils shall not take place on Saturdays or Sundays and shall only be conducted Monday through Friday, 7:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. The City must be advised in writing if there is a valid need to vary from this approved schedule. 4. Authorities granted by this resolution run with the property not with the applicant, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit within one year of the date of Council approval, or the special conditions of this resolution will expire on that date (November S, 1988). 5. Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and condi tions of this resolution shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 6. The undersigned applicant has read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of himself, his heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. 1987. Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 14th day of December, ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk James R. Grabek, Mayor Property Owner(s) Page 3 of 4 r ft- r