The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About07-12-1993 Council PacketMINUTES OF A REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD JULY 12, 1993 ROLL The Council met on the above date with the following members present: Mayor Edward Callahan, Counci I members J. Diann Goetten, Charles Kelley, and Gabriel Jabbour. JoEllen Hurr arrived at 8:04 D.m. The following represented the City stiff: City Administrator Ron Moorse, Public Works Director John Gernardson, Zoning AdminiStrator Jeanne Maousth. Assistant Planning 'and Zoning AdminiStrator Michael Gaffron, City Engineer Glenn Cook, City Attorney Kevin Staunton, ana City Clerk Dorothy Hal I in. Sandra Smith, Candace Rowlette ana Steonen °eterson was present to represent the Planning Commission. Mayor Callahan called the meeting to order at 7:30 P.M. (#1) CONSENT AGENDA Goetten added Item #15. Jabbour removed Item #3 and acded Items #6, 7. 9 and 11. Mayor Callahan removed Items ^16 and 21. It was moved by Goetten. seconded oy Mayor Callahan, to approve the Consent Agenda as amended. Ayes 4, nays 0. Motions for ail items adopted oy consent agenda wi In the minutes in their respective numerical order. be included («2) APPROVAL OF MINUTES Jabbour asked that the verpatim portion presented be included in the minutes for Item #23 on the agenda. It was moved by Jabbour, seconced oy Goetten, to approve the minutes of the regular Council meeting held June 28, 1993 as amended. Ayes 4, nays 0. PARK COMMISSION COMMENTS The'e were no comments. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS There were no comments. PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no comments. MINUTES OF A REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD JULY 12, 1993 (*#3) mail C. Jack Remien, 3237 Casco Circle - Variance - Resolution #3300 It was moved by Jabbour, seconded by Mayor Callahan, to adopt Resolution #3300 for Aoplication #1811 for C. Jack Remien, 3237 Casco Circle, aooroving lot width and lot area variances to construct a new residence. Ayes 4, nays 0. (#4) #1821 MARGO & STEVE WIRTJES, 3085 WATERTOWN ROAD - PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION - RESOLUTION #3301 John Ploetz, aoolicants attorney, was ore.sent. Mabusth explained the conditions of aporoval. Mayor Callahan clarified that the resolution requires relocation of the well prior to final subdivision aoproval. Mabusth concurred that it does oased on the Planning Commission recommenda tion. Ploetz said his client objects to this condition based on cost factors of moving the well. He referred to a declaration of restrictive covenant that could be filed in the chain of title that would notify future owners that the well would need to be relocated if the alternative septic system were to be used. • • Mabusth said the on-site septic inspector granted a setback variance for the existing seotic system to al'ow the current owners use of such system. The septic system was installed first and the State Well Inspector approved a 50’ setback which does not meet City Code requirements calling for a 75’ setback. Row Iette explained she voted against the motion to require the well to be relocated as she felt it was a burden to the current owner. It was moved by Jabbour, seconded by Gcetten, to adopt Resolution #3301 for Application #1321 for Margo and Steve Wirtjes, 3085 Watertown Road, granting prelim.nary approval of a Class III two lot plat, subject to the resolution being changed not requiring the well to be relocated at this point. Ayes 4, nays 0. MINUTES OF A REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD JULY 12, 1993 (#5) #1823 MARGE ROSSING, 130 CYGNET PLACE - VARIANCE Mabusth explained the application was reintroduced to the Planning Commission at their June meeting because the applicant had failed to locate a 4x12’ deck to the northeast side of the 20x28’ proposed addition. The proposed addition will require a street and rear setback variance, and the deck wiI I be 26’ from the rear lot Iine. The major issues raised were regarding the con'dition and use of the property, specifically a home occupation I icense for the comme rcia I use of the property. She noted staff has witnessed a great d. al of improvement on the property from /ears past. The problem is the additional parking on the property. The major concerns raised did not have a direct correlation to the variance requested, and it was felt the violations should be dealt with under a home occupation license. Since the last review by the Planning Commission, the BuiIding Official has requested that the appiicant apply for a home occupation Iicense. Also the applicant proposes the installation of a second accessory structure and a o.-ivacy fence to buffer vehicle parking near this structure. The Planning Commission did not approve the addition of the decx. The variance approvals were conditioned on the staging of the improvements. Mabusth said the problem is with the exterior storage of equipment for the son’s home occupation. Mayor Callahan asked if staff feels there is a problei. Mabusth stated she-has not had any reports on the Rossing property in the last few years outside of complaints expressed at the public hearing during the current review of this application. It was moved by Jabbour, seconded by Goetten, directing staff to prepare an approval resolution for the addition to the principal structure and to deny the variance for the 4x12’ deck for Application #1823 for Marge Rossing. 130 Cygnet Place. Ayes 4, nays 0. (*#6) #1830 RICHARD F. OORLOG, 1058 LOMA LINDA AVENUE - VARIANCES - RESOLUTION #3302 It was moved by Goetten, seconded by Mayor Callahan, Resolution #3302 for Appl ication #1830 Richard F. Oorlog, Linda Avenue, to permit the construction of. a lower level dining room addition. Ayes 4. ayes 0. to adopt 1058 Loma deck , and MINUTES OF A REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD JULY 12, 1993 (*$7) #1833 LAWRENCE ELSEN, 2879 CASCO POINT ROAD - VARIANCES - RESOLUTION #3303 It was moved by Goetten, seconded by Mayor Callahan, to adopt Resolution #3303 for Application #1333 Lawrence Elsen 2879 Casco Point Road, granting an average setback variance for a two-story enclosed addition and hardcover variances within the 75-250’ zone for the construction of additional additions. Ayes a, nays 0. (#8) #1834 MARY K. MCCARTY, 245 TONKA AVENUE - VARIANCES - RESOLUTION It was moved by Mayor Callahan, seconded by Jabbour, to table Application #1834 for Mary McCarty, 245 Tonka Avenue, to allow the applicant to be present. Ayes 5, nays 0. (*#9) #1835 DAVID & ELLEN PHELPS, 1950 FOX RIDGE ROAD - VARIANCE - RESOLUTION #3304 It was moved dv Goetten. seconded by Mayor Callahan, to adoot Resolution #3304 for Appl ‘Cation #1 835 David and El Ien Phelps, 1950 Fox Ridge Road, granting a front/street setback variance to construct an addition to the existing residence. Ayes 4, nays 0. (#10) #1837 CINDY FREDRICKSON, 1516 LONG LAKE 8LVD - VARIANCES - RESOLUTION #3305 Mabusth explained the applicants propose a 24x32’ detached garage to be located 2’ from the eastern lot line and 6’ from the rear and the removal of an existing garage. This allows for only a 6’ separation setbacK. The aoolicant proposes that the structure be moved 2’ back allowing only a 4’ setback from the rear lot line but an 8’ separation. Keiley Questioned the applicants’ hardship for the variance. Fredrickson replied they have a small lot and are subject to 2 acre standards. Mayor Callahan read a letter in favor of the app I i cat i on f ronr. James E. Bigham, 1540 Long Lake Blvd. Jabbour felt the proposed garage will be an improvement to what is currently on the property, but he felt uncomfortable granting a separation variance. jJ MINUTES OF A REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD JULY 12, 1993 ZONING FILE #1837 - CONT. Moors© explained the reason for tne 10’ separation requirement to avoid fire jumping between buildings. Mabusth replied they wouId be required to UDrovide fire walls. I s It was moved by Jabbour, seconded oy Mayor Callahan, to adopt Resolution #3305 for Aopt ication #1837 Cindy Fredrickson, 1516 Long Lake 3lvd., granting variances to permit the construction detached garage allowing an 3’ separation, a a a 2’ side setoack. Ayes a. nays 0. rear of a setpack, and (»#11) #1839 ROBERT H. OWENS, 1700 BOHN’S POINT ROAD - VARIANCE - RESOLUTION #3306 It was moved by Goetten, seconded by Mayor Cal lahan, to adopt Resolution #3306 for Acpi ication #1339 Robert H. Owens, 1700 Sohn ’ s Point Poad, granting a variance to permit tne construction of a third stall to the e<i3tmg attached garage, an addition to tne kitchen and a stair leading from main level patio doors. Ayes 4, nays 0. (#12) ROY RASMUSSEN REQUEST FOR REVIEW OF NONCONFORMITY SEPTIC SYSTEM Mr. Rasmussen, Jerry Johnson, septic contractor, and Patrick Neaton, applicant’s attorney, applicant’s realtor, were present. Moorse explained that the septic inspector.ident i f i ed their system as being non-conforming in terms of the required 3’ separation. Rasmussen is requesting a variance to that separation requirement. Neaton explained the system was installed in 1978 and was found to be conforming at the time. The system is a working system with no evidence of contamination. The difficulty lies in meeting the standards of the recently adopted shoreland regulations. This presents a major hardship to the applicant. Kelley felt they need to understand where the 1,000’ line is Iocated. Mabusth explained this property is just at the edge of the 1,000’ setback from French Lake, upper basin. MINUTES OF A REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD JULY 12, 1993 RASMUSSEN REQUEST - CONT. Moorse explained the buyer of the property requested septic certification, which was done and the inspector found the system did not meet the 3’ separation, which was reported on the certIfication. Rasmussen stated the most recent inspection was done in July 1991 and the system was found to be adequate at that time. The later change in the ordinance created the problem. He said they are not asking the Council to say the e<isting systern is conforming with the 1992 standards, but merely requesting a variance to those standards as the system is a functional system. Moorse said the City has always had the 3’ separation requirement, but did not enforce in prior years if the system was functioning. Rasmussen stated when the system was originally installed there was a larger than 3’ separation. but due to the mottled soil requirement, the system is now considered non-conforming. Jabbour clarified the system was installed in 1978, and in 1979 the standards were adopted but not forced upon existing systems. In 1992 with the adoption of Shoreland Management regulations, the City decided it would become tougher on enforcement of the standards and all systems in the City will be requI red to meet the stricter standards. Neaton said as a practical matter this issue will surface again when the new owners wish to improve the property, but he felt the current owners should not have to bear the cost of a new system because the current system is functioning and was legal when built and should therefore be grandfathered. Mayor Callahan opposed the term grandfathered. Jabbour said he has a problem in the past with the terms legal non- conforming versus illegal non-conforming. When a buiiding is standing up and a new ordinance is adopted that makes the building non-conforming, should the building be removed? He said he has justified in his mind that somehow non-conforming means it becomes a detriment to the public health and welfare. He said just because his septic system has been found co be dumping some residue into the lake does not mean that le has the right to forever after continue to do so. He saic there may be some justification in allowing the home to be sold with the current system anticipating improvements to the property when the new owners take ownership. MINUTES OF A REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD JULY 12, 1993 RASMUSSEN REQUEST - CONT. Goetten stated it has been suggested that Council allow up to one year to bring a non-conforming system into conformance, and asked if the current owner knew the buyers’ intentions. Applicant’s realtor stated obviously tne new owners are not very happy about this future expense. He noted the time table has created a major harcsnip to the present and future owners. Hurr asked if the mortgage holder conf o»'mi ng. IS reouiring the system to be Applicant’s realtor stated the mortgage company is more concerned that the system is functioning, which it is. The buyer has indicated he would possibly like to construct a deck and has reviewed with the City the requirements. Jabbour said the City currently does not have a policy on when all systems will be required to conform, but they do have a policy on how often to inspect and beginning this year alI systems will be inspected for separation. He oid not anticipate a change in the septic system requirements. He said he would not have a problem with allowing a two year time period to make the system conforming. Mayor Callahan suggested they not take any action that evening. He stated they all- feel the system wi*l I need to be upgraded to be conforming, but the real estate agent has suggested an extension to the time period for which the system must conform would be helpful. Hurr felt the owners should be given a one year time period from the date the entire neighborhood is inspected, the same as anyone else would be allowed. Jabbour felt a two year time period would be fair, or buyer improves the property, or the City adopts a new enforcement. Goetten agreed. untiI the poI icy on Mabusth stated the City currently does have established of one year. a time period Johnson noted mottling is not a true indicator of separation, and he felt the City will be faced with many similar judgement calls. He stated Ine system was highly inspected during installation and is functioning. MINUTES OF A REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD JULY ^2, 1993 RASMUSSEN REQUEST - CONT. It was moved by Mayor Callahan, seconded by Goetten, to find that the septic system is non-conforming and moved to give the appi icant or his successor two years to correct the situation, or until the time the system is proven to be failing. Staunton deemed this reouest to be a variance from the policy. Mabustn stated this could be interna My. an administrative variance and handled Mayor Callahan recessed the meeting for 10 minutes. Staunton explained the applicants' counsel has suggested the triggering event for a correction to the situation be an application for some improvement by the future owner. The Council has correctly stated the policy that a non-conforming situation must be corrected witnin one year, and if Council wishes to grant a variance for this situation, they will establish a precedent for any other requests, and if it is Council's wish to allow owners two years to remedy the situation, then the Code should be changed. Mayor Callahan withdrew his motion and Goe^tten her second. It was moved by Mayor Callahan, seconded by Goetten, to change the ordinance allowing a one year grace period for non-conforming systems to become conforming to a two year period. Ayes 5, nays 0. (*#13) JOINT USE DOCK LICENSE - BIG ISLAND VETERAN’S CAMP - RESOLUTION #3307 It was moved by Goetten, seconded by Mayor Callahan, to adopt Resolution #3307 issuing a joint use dock license to the Big Island Veteran’s Camp. Ayes 4, nays 0. (*#14) FOREST ARMS SILT PROBLEM UPDATE It was moved by Goetten, seconded by Mayor Callahan, to accept the information presented on the Forest Arms siltation problem. Ayes 4, nays 0. 8 - MINUTES OF A REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD JULY 12, 1993 MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT Jabbour said he has heard from one contract city that the canine unit has been discontinued as of last Friday. Moorse reported they have not done so yet- but are looking to do so because the canine they currently have was not meeting the requirements of the'City. Jabbour asked :f there is a dog on duty currently. Moorse stated ht believes so. Jabbour said he does not want to be questioned on a policy decision and not know the correct answer. Moorse assumed the Chief will be presenting the information at the next monthly report. Kelley questioned about the guarantee on the landscaping for the new City Hall and asked who was monitoring the orogram. KeMey asked for year-to-date budget information through June 30th including budgeted, actual and variance. Kelley suggested they discuss with the Planning Commission the City’s policy on exchange of non-structure hardcover for structural Hardcover. Mayor Callahan commented that most plastic in approved in the first place. place was not Matusth said the problem is the code does not distinguish between structure and non-structure hardcover. Kelley stated he would like to give more direction to the Park Commission in terms of direction and how broad their vision should be. *** Kelley felt they should do something about lakeshore lots regarding lot width and the standards for determining such. MINUTES OF A REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD JULY 12, 1993 MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT - CONT. Kelley asked Gerhnirdson when the cross walks will be marked with s i gns. Gerhardson said he hopes wiI I be done within the very near future. Kelley stated over the oast inspector to aetermme if regulations. He asked if it inspector wi I I be doing a inspection. years he has relied on the City’s his septic system complies with is true starting in 1993 that the sepi'®'*at I on *est w'th each septic Mabusth concurred that is the current procedure. Hurr reported tne Highway 15 Committee will meet on Thursday morning at 7:30 a.m. and someone from Hennepin County will be in attendance. CITY ADMINISTRATOR’S REPORT (*»15) RESIGNATION OF CITY RECORDER It was moved by Goetten, seconded by Mayor Callahan, to accept the resignation of the City Recorder. Ayes 4, nays 0. (#16) SUMMARY PUBLICATION OF THE 1992 FINANCIAL REPORT Mayor Callahan said he never received the information in his packet and suggested they do not approve the annual financial report unti I the audit is performed. Kelley clarified that the i nf orr>idt i on was received. It was moved by Mayor Callahan, seconds'^ by Jabbour, to table approval of the 1992 Financial Report until July 26th. Ayes 5, nays 0. (#17) COOPERATIVE SERVICE STUDY AGREEMENT Kelley asked why Long Lake was not included. Moorse replied that it is the 14 lake cities that have been meeting. Once the analysis is compiled, Long Lake will be included. Jabbour felt we have a lot more in common and a much bigger commitment with Long Lake than some of the other cities around the I ake. MINUTES OF A REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD JULY 12, 1993 COOPERATIVE STUDY - CONT. Hurr stated she was just informed about the meetings about two weeks ago and was concerned about this lack of information. Moorse explained up until recently they were unsure of any outcome and funding for the project. Mayor Callahan feit it was a worthwhile program. Kelley felt it was a way to find creative ways of doing certain tasks. It was moved by Mayor Caliahan, seconded by Kelley, to join in the agreement and move the program ahead. Ayes 5, nays 0. Jabbour said it appears that Mayor Callahan is removing himself from an administrative position to being c» salesman. He felt they have already done a good job for their sister community, Minnetrista, to try and reduce their inspection charges and got creamed in the politics. He felt they have to make sure each admi n i St rator is a part owner of the policy. He felt the City Council should be informed of such programs right from the beg inning. Moorse said basically the Administrators and Department Heads will be Involved along with the Metropolitan Council and their interns* He agreed this will take alot of work from the City staff, but wl I I be worthwhile in the end, and he felt this should be a part of the City staff's general responsibility. Goetten said she has advocated this for several years and hoped the Metropolitan Council will have some innovative ideas. Hurr felt this may not be the ideal study group to work with. Kelley said they neeJ to start somewhere and may pick up some ideas that can be used with other cities. Vote: Ayes 5, nays 0. (#18) MUSA EXPANSION ALTERNATIVES Moorse stated this memo presents two phases: 1) the Nettles’ and the sewer plant property; and 2) future "hot spots" for sewer. It was moved by Mayor Callahan, seconded by Jabbour, to direct staff to proceed in the manner indicated. Ayes 5, nays 0. MINUTES OF A REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD JULY 12, 1993 (i19) PRELIMINARY LONG LAKE FIRE CONTRACT Kelley felt the preliminary contract is great. The main isiues are the sharing of the revenue loss and procurement of equipment. The contract provides for Orono sharing in the operating loss •the same percentages as is shared for the operating revenue. The language related to dissolution of the agreement was discussed In terms of the division of assets amoung the cities. Moorse stated m terms of the past purchases this may be a critical issue, but Long Lake coes not have a problem with this language relating to future purchases. Kelley stated in the last couple years they have spent major money on equipment. Jabbour noted ne views his relationship with Long Lake totally different than a year ago, and now they are just fine tuning the contract. Hurr questioned the automatic renewal. Moorse stated after the first three yea- contract, they would automatically go with a one-year renewal contract. Hurr felt the market value was not a fair comparison to use In the formuI a. Kelley stated Moorse has also calculated into the formula the number of fire calls and man hours. Hurr felt they should include past equipment purchases in the dissolution section. Mayor Callahan felt the termination notice was excessive. He questioned the dissoI iition process. Kelley stated this can be worked out with Long Lake. It was decided that the City should share the preliminary contract and excerpts of these minutes with Long Lake. (»H20) 1992 POLICE BUDGET REPORT It was moved by Goetten, seconded by Mayor Callahan, to accept the 1992 Police Department Operations financial data. Ayes 4, nays 0. MINUTES OF A REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD JUNE 28, 1993 ZONING FILE #1825 - CONT. Dan Sadlack, 2409 Old Beach Road, stated during the Planning Commission a petition of opposition was presented expressing concerns for environment, aethestic, and safety on the single lane. Mayor Callahan noted the objections raised at the Planning Commission were valid, but added if the applicant meets all the rules and regulations of the City, they are reojired to aporove the appIication. Hurr felt there should only be one curb cut allowed for the pro; ^ ty and should be on an out lot. Kathleen Ronald, 2430 Old Beacn Road, stated they purchased their property because it was a two acre parcel with privacy. Because of the elevation of the McCarthy property and the addition of a new residence, that privacy will be lost. Paul Anderson, 2530 Old Beach Road, asked the required cul-de-sac radius. Mabusth indicated a cul-de-sac is required to have a 100’ platted right-of-way diameter and 80’ paved width. The turnaround currently located at the end of the street does not meet the standards, but the right-of-way is available. Staunton stated the code indicates it is the obligation of the developer to bring the road up to standard. Jabbour reminded the public that the applicant is not requesting any variances with the most recerit proposal. David Schneider, 2540 Old Beach Road, expressed opposition to the propose I. Jabbour noted if the application meed’s all standards, reg"*rdless of the affect it will have on aesthetics, they must approve. Hurr indicated the City Engineer suggested only one curb cut for the property because of safety reasons, and she felt they should listen to his recommendation. It was moved by Hurr, seconded by Goetten, to deny Application #1825 for Thomas L. McCarthy, 3490 Old Beach Road, for a preliminary subdivision because they felt there should only be one curb cut for the property which djes not leave enough acreage to subdivide, based upon the City Engineer’s recommendation. MINUTES OF A REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD JUNE 28, 1993 ZONING FILE #1825 - CONT. Gronberg asked if they would consider the apolication if the developer upgraded the road. McCarthy requested the application be tabled fpr 30 days. Hurr withdrew her motion, and Goetten withdrew her second. It was moved by Hurr, seconded by Goetten, to continue Application #1825 for Thomas L. McCarthy, 24.90 Old Beach Road, to the July 26, 1993 meeting to allow the applicant time to revise his proposal. Ayes 5, nays 0. (»#6) #1826 ROBERT & ANN HENSON, 2166 SHADYWOOD ROAD - VARIANCE - RESOLUTION #3295 It was moved by Jabbour, seconded by Mayor Callahan, to adopt Resolution #3295 ^or Application #1825 for Robert and Ann Henson, 2166 Shadywood Road, approving variance for the construction of an attached garage and lakeside deck. Ayes 5, nays 0. (#7) #1831 EDWARD ENGLER, 3450 BIRCH LANE - VARIANCE - RESOLUTION #3296 Mr. and Mrs. Engler were present. Mabusth explained the applicants propose the addition of a 10x20’ lakeside addition to be placed over an existing patio, with the remainder of patio to be removed, and a 16x24’ addition to the east side of the residence. Fourteen percent of the excessive hardcover in the 75-250’ zone is due to the asphalt drive which Is used as a turnaround for Birch Lane and used by the City for snow storage. The Planning Commission requested an easement over the asphalt area, but the applicants did not wish to encumber the property with an easement. A condition of the approval resolution is that the City be allowed continued usage of this area, and the applicants have agreed to such. Staunton noted the condition of the resolution wiI I not bo binding to future owners. Hurr felt if this is being considered as a hardship for the granting of the variance, then they should require the easement. Goetten objected past. as they have never required an easement in the MINUTES OF A REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD JUNE 28, 1993 ZONING FILE #1831 - CONT. Staunton noted the City could deny any subseauent owners future improvements if the condition were not upheld. Gerhardson noted the City has been using the asphalt area for 27+ years without a problem. Kelley disagreed with the Planning Commission recommendation for approval as they are exchanging non-structuraI hardcover for structural hardcover. Mabusth agreed, but noted according to the applicants’ contractor, the foundation could not support a second story Hurr noted one hardship stated is financial reasons. Mabusth said State Statute allows financial considerations as one of the hardships. It was moved by Jabbour, seconded by Mayor Callahan, to adopt Resolution #3296 for Application #1831 for Edward Engler, 3450 Birch Lane, for variances to construct additions to his residence. Ayes 3, nays 1. Kelley voted nay and Hurr abstained. Motion carried. (*#8) #1832 SCOTT A. MABUSTH, 740 BROWN ROAD NORTH - VARIANCE - RESOLUTION #3297 It was moved by Jabbour, seconded by Mayor Callahan, to adopt Resolution #3297 for AppIication #1832 for Scott Mabusth, 740 Brown Road North, for a variance to construct a shed in front of the front line of the principal residence. Ayes 5, nays 0. (#9) #1838 ROBERT OWENS, 1700 BOHNS POINT ROAD - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - RESOLUTION #3298 Mr. Owens was present. Hurr questioned the hardcover percentages for the site. Mabusth responded that there will be an additional 82 s.f. of hardcover in the 0-75’ zone because of the tiered walls. Hurr asked if this is the only way to repair the wall. 6 Jl MINUTES OF A REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD JUNE 28, 1993 ZONING FILE #1838 - CONT. Mabusth replied this is the preferred design. She noted the Planning Commission requested screening of the concrete patio wall with vines. She added the slopes will be reduced to 3:1 making the area much easier to maintain. It was moved by Jabbour, seconded by Goetten, to adopt Resolution #3298 for Application #1338 Robert Owens, 1700 Bohns Point Road, approving a conditional use permit to permit land alterations in excess of 100 cubic yards. Ayes 5, nays 0. (#10) ORDINANCE AMENDMENT CHAPTER 5.42 - ORDINANCE #117, SECOND SERIES Gaffron referred to the draft ordinance presented in December 1992 which separates the joint use dock license from the marina licenses. He notea the addition of a suspension of the marina license in the ordinance allowing the City to remove the iicense for a shorter period of time than an entire year. It would be considered a misdemeanor to operate without a Iicense. Staunton noted the City could build into its ordinance sanctions for the misdemeanor. Mayor Callahan stated It is as simple as operatIon". no I I cense, Gaffron stated in the past Orono has been concerned that marinas do not make good neighbors. He referred to the list of permitted business uses included in the revised draft ordinance. He noted the license can be issued without meeting all the B-2 zone standards. Kelley felt some Items on the list cannot be quantified. Gaffron replied that many of the standards included are directly from the existing B-2 standards. Jabbour asked if there has been input from marina owners. Gaffron noted that the marinas were notified of the proposed ordinance but he has not received any comments. Kelley asked if all marinas currently meet the 7 criteria set forth. MINUTES OF A REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD JUNE 28, 1993 ORDINANCE AMENDMENT - CONT. Gaffron noted most meet the criteria, but things chanpe frequently and they may not always meet al I the operational criteria on a day- to-day or houi—to-hour basis. That is why it is important that marinas micro-manage their operations. Jabbour noted in the recent past marinas have gone out of their way to more fully comply. Gaffron concurred. He stated all the marinas have agreed to a site plan on file at the City, and they generally meet all the criteria. Jabbour stated they must realize that marinas exist and the City is not willing to go to court over this issue. He stated they must work with marinas to make them comply as often as possible. Hurr noted one LMCD Iicense. condition of approval of the license is a current Mayor Callahan suggested they remove tnat condition. It was moved by Mayor Callahan, seconded by Kelley, to adopt Ordinance #117, Second Series, Joint Use Dock and Marina Licensing, Section C.42-5.43, adding minimum operational standards and revocation clause and removing the condition of requiring the LMCD license. Ayes 3, nays 1. Hurr voted nay and Jabbour abstained. Motion carried. to approve the (#11) 1993 MARINA LICENSES It was moved by Mayor Callahan, seconded by Kelley, 1993 marina licenses for the following: Windward Marina Minnetonka Boat Works SaI Iors World Lakeside Marina Gayles Marina Crystal Bay Service Ayes 3, nays 1. Hurr voted nay because staff could not assure her all the marinas meet the required criteria. Jabbour abstained. Motion carried. 8 MINUTES OF A REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD JUNE 28, 1993 (»#12) 1993 JOINT USE DOCK LICENSE - NAVARRE COVE - RESOLUTION »3299 It was moved by Jabbour, seconded by Mayor Callahan, to adopt Resolution #3299 approving a 1993 annual Joint Use Dock License for Navarre Cove Homeowners Association. Ayes 5, nays 0. (#13) ALAN NETTLES, 1940 SHORELINE DRIVE - SEWER REQUEST Mr. Nettles was present. Gaffron explained the Nettles prooerty is adjacent to tne Crystal Bay sewer project. The applicant requests permission to connect to the sewer as his septic system is faiIing. Gaffron said to do so the City must readjust the MUSA boundaries, and questioned whether the Council would like to consider other properties at the same time. The applicant also requests that the sewer connection charge be assessed to his prooerty ever 15 years. He reminoed them this is lakeshore property. Mayor Callahan suggested inriusion of other properties with the request to extend the MUSA boundaries, such as the sewer plant property. Gaffron indicated there were other property owners near this residence who have inquired whether sewer could be extended to serve them. Mayor Callahan suggested staff research the possibilities and report back to Councii. Jabbour recommended they go forward with the request to sewer Nettle’s property. Kelley questioned whether the prooerty would be reassessed if connected at this time and later sewer was installed in the area. Mayor Callahan suggested the City would be fair about the situation. Hurr suggested they request an easement across the property for future expansion of the sewer system. She asked that properties bonefitting be required to pay the cost to realign the MUSA boundaries. She questioned the ability to subdivide this or other properties in the area. MINUTES OF A REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD JUNE 28, 1993 1940 SHORELINE DRIVE - CONT. Gaffron stated this parcel could not be subdivided and he was unaware of any other in the area. He noted in the past the City has been able to uphold its requirement of larger parcels even in sewered areas. Jabbour asked the expected time frame for a MUSA expansion. Gaffron stated the Metropolitan Council has indicated if the City is willing to do a trade-off of existing MUSA acreage, they could fast track the request and have approval within 4 to 6 weeks, otherwise it would be 90+ days for approval. He noted Noerenburg Park may be an option for a trade. Mayor Callahan suggested staff investigate whether a trade is available, and directed staff to review adjacent properties and others in the City for sewer expansion. Mayor Callahan recessed the meeting from 9:55 to 10:00 p.m. (*#14) SHORELAND ORDINANCE - DNR APPROVAL RECEIVED It was moved by Jabbour, seconded by Mayor Callahan, to accept the information regarding the DNR approval of the Shoreland Ordinance as presented. Ayes 5, nays 0. (#15) SHORELAND SEPTIC SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS Kelley questioned the number of properties affected by the shoreland regulations with regard to septic systems. He asked if variances will be allowed. Goetten noted she recently spoke with a resident, and indicated to him that the City may have some flexibility when requiring a system to conform. She felt it to be an undue hardship to require a property owner to immediately upgrade a non-conforming system. Gaffron explained most systems less than 10 years old most likely will not be affected. He noted out of 1,200 systems in the City, 600 probably will be required to be upgraded within the next few years, which is not a feasible number for staff to monitor or homeowners to comply with. He noted per the current septic program, owners have one year to comply If their system Is found to be non conforming. The DNR’s ordinance suggests a 2 year grace period. Gaffron felt this may allow the City additional flexibility. MINUTES OF A REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD JUNE 28. 1993 SHORELAND SEPTIC SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS - CONT. Mayor Callahan suggested they research the oossibiIity of a program similar to sewer project financing whereby the public could borrow at a low rate for long periods for system repair/reoIacement. All members agreed with this suggestion. Goetten felt they should gather all pertinent information prior to holding an informational meeting. Gaffron explained under the current septic program, it will take three years to inspect every system and to do the necessary soil boring tests to confirm the separation. (#16) KENNETH FIGGE, 2004 SUGARWOOD DRIVE - REQUEST TO VARV FROM COVENANTS REVIEW OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION It was moved by Mayor Callahan, seconded by Jabbour, to accept the information regarding the Kenneth Figge request for 2004 Sugarwood Drive for a request to vary from covenants as presented. Ayes 5, nays 0. MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT A) Mayor Callahan reported both he and Todd Olson of Long Lake agreed they should press the mediator. Moorse reported he has talked with the mediator who indicated they are moving rapidly. B) Mayor Callahan noted Todd Olson also agreed that they need to do something regarding the intersection of Willow Drive and Highway 12 with regard to a signal light. C) Mayor Callahan referred to a letter from Minnetonka concerning ground water quality control, and suggested staff resend Orono’s original response. D) Mayor Callahan noted the Metropolitan Council representative’s for this areas term is up for reappointment. Goetten stated currently Mary Smith is the representative, and also a resident of Orono. MINUTES OF A REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD JUNE 28, 1993 MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT - CONT. E) Mayor Callahan referred to a letter from Mound regarding a signal light at County Roads 15 and 51. He suggested this matter to discussed by the County Road 15 Committee. F) Mayor Callahan noted the administrator is working with other cities on an agreement with the Metropolitan Council to provide grants for technical assistant in researching a cooperative agreement. Moorse reported the next meeting will be held at the City of Shorewood on Wednesday at 5:30 p.m. G) Hurr noted the second quarter payment is due the LMCO and requested the City decide if it is to be paid. KeI ley suggested they pay the biI I and discuss the strategy later. It was moved by Kelley, seconded by Goetten, to authorize payment of the second quarter due the LMCD. There was no vote. H) Kelley reported the City Administrator will present the draft fire contract at the next meeting. I) Kelley Inquired about the ball field at Hackberry. Gerhardson reported the pipe Is in and the field is drying. J) Kelley suggested the crossing be marked for the Luce Line Trail at Willow Drive and Old Crystal Bay Road. Hurr felt if the crossing were marked, this would only encourage those using the trail not to be cautious. Mayor Callahan suggested they post signs. K) Goetten reported Buckhorn Days was an enjoyable event. L) Goetten reported the next Highway 12 Task Force meeting will be held at the Norseman on July I5th. M) Kelley asked if the Old Crystal Bay Road bridge is scheduled for replacement this year, and felt it should not begin at this time as it is too near the opening of the school. MINUTES OF A REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD JUNE 28. 1993 POLICE CHIEF REPORT (*#17) ACTIVITY SUMMARY COMPARISON 1991-1992 It was moved by Jabbour. seconded by Mayor Callahan, to accept the Information on the Activity Summary Comparison 1991-1992 as presented. Ayes 5, nays 0. CITY ENGINEER’S REPORT (#18) REQUEST FOR PAYMENT #6 IMPROVEMENT - STUBBS BAY SANITARY SEWER It was moved by Mayor Callahan, seconded by Goetten, to aoprove Payment #6 to Progressive Contractors, Inc., for the Stubbs Bay sewer improvement in the amount of $77,011.11. Ay^s 5, nays 0. (#19) BIKE/HIKE TRAIL PROGRESS REPORT Lili McMillan reported the Park Commission has discussed the bids and the agreement and requests a work session with the Council. She reported Hennepin Parks wiI I provide a lancscape plan by July 20th. The bids expire by the end of July. Kelley stated he was afraid their decision would be driven by the bids. He said he would not mind waiting another year. Jabbour noted they can ask for a bid extension Doug and Kim Hile stated they are still unaware of what is to happen on their property. Mayor Callahan explained that is because the City Is waiting for a landscape plan from Hennepin Parks and cannot commit to any plan until that time. Jabbour suggested they share the landscape plan with the affected neighbors immediately upon receipt. Kelley reiterated the trail will go down a public street, Starkey Road, and the neighbors have not even been notified. A meeting was scheduled for Wednesday, July 21st at 7:45 a.m. (#20) REVIEW OF BIDS - BIKE/HIKE TRAIL No action required. MINUTES OF A REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD JUNE 28. 1993 CITY ADMINISTRATOR’S REPORT (»t21) RECORDER’S CONTRACT ADJUSTMENT It was moved by Jabbour, seconded by Mayor Callahan, to approve a fee change for the recorder’s contract as follows: $115.00 base fee per meeting for the first two hours, plus an additional $5.00 per 15 minutes thereafter, effective May 15, 1993. Ayes 5, nays 0. (#22) ANIMAL CONTROL IMPOUND FACILITY Moorse explained Reo Raj Kennels will no longer be boarding dogs, but the City has worked out a program with Wright County Humane Society where by they would add onto their kennels and do the boarding. The City will be required to contribute $1,000 in the future for the expansion. The City will begin using the Humane Society as of July 1, 1993. It was moved by Mayor Callahan, seconded by Kelley, to approve the temporary use of Wright County Humane Society’s facilities for the boarding of animals. Ayes 5, nays 0. (#23) DEMOLITION OF CITY BUILDINGS IN CRYSTAL BAY It was moved by Hurr, seconded by Goetten, to approve proceeding with the demo Iition of the City buildings in Crystal Bay for a cost not to exceed $16,275.00. Ayes 5, nays 0. (#24) LOWRY WOODS ACCEPTANCE .*^POM NATURE CONSERVANCY It was moved by Mayor Callahrr, ‘.econdecl by Jabbour, to accept the Lowry Woods area from the Nature Conservancy. Hurr requested a public hearing oe held prior to acceptance. Jabbour agreed a hearing should be held prior to the development of any traiIs within the area. Ayes 4, nays 1. Hurr voted nay. (#25) LMCD USE OF LYDIARD BEACH FOR MILFOIL HARVESTING It was moved by Mayor Callahan, seconded by Jabbour, Lo approve the use of Lydiard Beach by the LMCD for milfoi' harvesting, and to close the beach from Wednesday to Friday, Ju.«e 30 to July 2 from 7:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Ayes 5, nays 0. •I * % MINUTES OF A REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD JUNE 28, 1993 (#26) RECOMMENDATION FOR DISCIPLINARY ACTION It was moved by Hurr, seconded oy Goetten, to approve staff’s recommendation on this matter. Ayes 5, nays 0. (*#27) LICENSES It was moved by Jabbour, secondod by Mayor Callahan, to approve the following Iicenses: Special Event Application - Viking Bassmasters 10/3/93 - 6 a.m. - 3 p.m. Launch from North Arm Landing Site Evaluator/Designer License - Koch’s Soil Testing Otto Associates, Inc. Residential Kennel License - L. James & Kathleen Marier Ann A Rod Crawford Ayes 5, nays 0. («#28) BILLS It was moved by Jabbour, seconded by Mayor Callahan, to approve payment of the All Funds Account. Ayes 5, nay 0. ADJOURNMENT It was moved by Mayor Callahan, seconded by Kelley, to adjourn the regular meeting of the Council at 11:15 p.m. to executive session. Ayes 5, nays 0. Edward J. Callahan, Jr., Mayor ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hal I in, City Clerk -'5 , ? To: k From: Date: ^ 2 1993 cmroFORONo Michael P. Gaffron, Assistant Planning & Zoning Administrator Mayor Callahan and Orono Councilmembers Ron Moorse, City Administrator July 7, 1993 Subject: #1811 C. Jack Remien, Casco Circle - Variance - Resolution List of Exhibits A - Notice of Council Action 6/30/93 B - Approval Resolution On June 28, Council voted 3-2 to conceptually approve the variance request and direct suiff to draft a resolution for formal action. Such a resolution is attached, and I would .note the following revisions or additions since the approval resolution contained in the May 19 staff memo: • Findings, Item 6 - The wording is revised to indicate that the City approved a policy change rather than a proposed amendment of the municipal code in December, 1983. • Findings, Item 8 - Since ii was brought out during discussions that this 55’ wide lot is the same width as at least two other adjacent or nearby lots rather than being 5’ short of the narrowest lots in the neighborhood, this finding is revised to correct that statement. • Findings, Item 9 - The introductory sentence is revised to reflect the Planning Commission vote; Subitem B is revised to clarify that sewer and water are available to the property rather than stating the property is served with those utilities. • Findings, Item 10 - Revised to reflect all three previous variances that were granted. • Findings, Item 11-15 - Have been rearranged and/or added. Finding 11 is added to document the City’s review process; Item 13 is added to reflect the Council s acceptance of the three specific findings noted by applicant’s attorney; and Finding 15 documents Council’s vote on June 28, 1993. Pursuant to the request from the DNR in its June 14 letter, staff will forward a copy of this resolution to the DNR within ten days. At this lime, we do not anticipate further action on this matter by the DNR. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval per the aluictied resolution. Motion: Moved by____, seconded____, to adopt Resolution No. — lot width and lot area variances for C. Jack Remien at 3237 Casco Circle. Vote. Navs. approving Ayes, CITY OF ORONO P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, 55323 473-7357 APPLICATION NO. 1811 NOTICE OF COUNCIL ACTION Date of Notice: 6/30/93 TO: C. Jack Remien 3235 Casco Circle Wavzata, MN 55391 COPIES:Tom Zappia, Iverson, Bemdt & Zappia, Ltd., 941 Hillwind Rd. NE, Suite 301, Fridley, MN 55432 Peter Backman, Leonard, Street & Deinard, Suite 2300. 150 S. Fifth St., Mpls., MN 55402 Gary Nasiedlak, 1910 Shadywood Rd., Wayzata, MN 55391 Dave Truax, 4879 Drake St.. Maple Plain, MN 55359 type of APPLICATION: Variance DATE OF MEETING: 6/28/93 VOTE:3 FOR 2 AGAINST COUNCIL ACTION - MOTION: To conceptually approve lot area and width variances, directing staff to draft a resolution for formal action at the Council’s July 12th meeting. Applicant’s next scheduled meeting is confirmed as City Council, Monday, July 12, 1993; meeting starts at 7:30 p.m. This item will be placed on die CouncU’s consent agenda, and is anticipated to be acted upon at the beginning of the meeting with other items. However, applicant should plan on being present at the beginning of that meeting in case the applicauon is removed from the consent agenda for questions. If you desire certified w «pies of the official Council minutes, they are avaUable from the City Recorder after review and approval by the City Council. A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.25, SUBDIVISION 6 (B) FILE NO. 1811 WHEREAS, C. Jack Remien (hereinafter "the applicant") is the owner of the property located at 3237 Casco Circle within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as follows: Lot 18, Spring Park, also all the land including the vacated highway. Lake Shore Drive, lying between the Northeasterly line of said lot and the shore of Lake Minnetonka and between the Northwesterly and Southeasterly lies of said Lot 18 extended Northeasterly to said lake shore, and being part of Government Lot 6, Section 20, Township 117 North, Range 23 West of the 5th Principal Meridian, and also indicated on the plat of said Spring Park (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City for variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.25, Subdivision 6 (B) to permit the construction of a new residence on a property that is 16,748 square feet in area or 77% of tlie minimum area required of 21,780 square feet or half acre and the width of the property is 55 feet or 55% of the required 100 feet of lot width. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #1811. The property is located in the LR-IC Single Family Ukeshore Residential Zoning District. 3.The property was in common ownership with contiguous Lots 16 and 17, Spring Park prior to 1967 through 1977. Lots 16 and 17 are now legally combined. The property is now in common ownership with Lot 19. 4.Section 10.03, Subdivision 6 (A) (1) of the Municipal Zoning Code provides for development of lots of record held in separate ownership since prior to the effective date of the zoning regulation, provided a lot of record meets 80% of the required lot area and lot width and has municipal sewer available. Page 1 of 6 J 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. Prior to December 19, 1983, the City Council always required that when two or more lots were owned in common, each lot must individually meet or exceed the requirements of the Zoning Code before any of the lots can be built upon and that two or more substandard lots owned in common must be combined so that the resulting combined lot meets the requirements of the Zoning Code before Lhe lots can be built upon. Upon completion of a 6 month City wide review of the common ownership issue, on December 19, 1983, the Cit) approved a policy change to permit all substandard undeveloped lots within the sewered areas of the City regardless of the ownership of these lots, the same standards for review. The property is 16,748 square feet or 77% of the required area. The property is consistent in area with 7 other developed lots within a total developed neighborhood of 33 lots. The property measures 55 feet in lot width, identical in width to two neighboring developed lots but narrower than the majority of lots in the 33 lot Casco Circle neighborhood. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on April 19, 1993 and on a vote of 3-2 recommended approval of the variances as proposed based upon the following findings: A. No available land - lots are developed on both sides of property. B. Sewer and water are available to the property. C. A house and improvements can be constructed without the need for additional variances. D. By granting this variance there will be no negative effect on the public healtli, safety and welfare. E. By granting this variance it is consistent with the development of the area. F. By granting this variance there should be no need for future hardcover and setback variances. Page 2 of 6 10. 11. 12. G.The special conditions applying to the parcel of land in question are peculiar to such property or immediately adjoining property. H.The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which said land is located. I.The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant. J.The granting of the proposed variances will not in anyway impair the health, safety, comfort, morals, or in any other respect be contrary to the intent of the Zoning Code. K. That the granting of such variances will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable hardship or difficulty. This application is a renewal of variances granted on February 27, 1984. January 13, 1986 and February 9, 1987, and the findings stated in those approval resolutions (No’s. 1607, 1904 and 2123 respectively) were acceptable at the time they were adopted and are still valid. A public hearing was held pursuant to proper legal notice by the Planning Commission on April 19, 1993 at which time all patties wishing to speak regarding the application were heard. Further, at City Council meetings on May 24, June 14 and June 28, 1993 all persons present wishing to comment on the matter were heard, and their comments are a matter of record in the official City Council minutes. Further, the City Council in reaching its decision has taken into account written submittals by the applicant, applicant’s neighbors, the attorneys for the applicant and applicant’s neighbors, and other parties with intercut in the matter. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicani and other parties and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. Page 3 of 6 13. The City Council finds that the property cannot be put to a reasonable use unless the variance is granted, and that use of the property as additional yard is not a reasonable use given applicant’s reliance when he purchased the property that it constituted a buildable lot as evidenced by three prior variance approvals. The City Council finds that the applicant’s situation is due to unique circumstances not created by the landowner, and that applicant’s purchase of the propem while applicant owned the adjacent developed lot does not place applicant in the position of being required to adhere to a higher standard of review as compared to an owner of the property who does not own adjacent developed land. Further, the Council finds that there are other similar sized lots in the locality that have been developed, that development of the property will be required to adhere to the same setback standards that apply to other properties in the area, and that construction of a single family residence on the property will not alter the essential character of the locality. 14. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variances would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely ser\'e as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable 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. 15. On June 28, 1993 the City Council on a vote of 3 ayes and 2 nays granted conceptual approval for the variance request and directed staff to draft a resolution of approval. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.25, Subdivision 6 (B) to permit the construction of a new residence on a property 16,748 square feet in area or 77% of the required 21,780 square feet (1/2 acre) and with a lot width of 55 feet or 55% of the required 100 feet of lot width, subject to the following conditions; 1. The detached garage located within the right-of-way of Casco Circle is a non- conforming structure and subject to all pertinent municipal ordinances for non- conforming structures. Page 4 of 6 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. The only variances granted with this approval are lot area and lot width. No other variances are granted. Applicant is hereby advised that in approving the development of this substandard property that all ftiture improvements must meet the current standards of the code and that a ftiture Council might not approve any improvement to the property that requires a vanance Applicant shall pay the appropriate water unit charge and sewer connection fees at the time that the building permit is issued. The property owner shall bear all costs of connection to the municipal sewer and water, including the installation of new stubs to serve the property, if required. An easement must be granted in favor of 3241 Casco Circle over the portion of the sewer line which lies within the subject property. 3237 Casco Circle. The easement area must be of sufficient size to allow maintenance of the sewer line. Side, street, and lakeshore setbacks are approved \ er the attached survey (Exhibit A). As part of the normal building permit procedure, applicant shall provide a grading and drainage plan for the property. Authorities granted by this variance ton with the property not with the applicant, but are permissive only and must be trercised by application for a building permit within one year of the date of Coupcil approval, or this variance will expire on that date (July 12, 1994). Violation of or non-compliance with any of the cerms and conditions of this variance shall constitute a violation of the zoninp code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be puirishable as a misdemeanor. 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. Page 5 of 6 Adopted by the City Council of the City of Ore no, Minnesota at a regular meeting held on the 12th day of July, 1993. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk Edward J. Callahan. Jr., Mayor Property Owner (s) STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 12ih day of July, 1993 by Edward J. Callahan, Jr. and Dorothy M. Hallin, Mayor and City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public Page 6 of 6 EXHIBIT A RESOLUTION NO. 4'^ „.. • Crrtifirat** of Sur/®/ for TlioifAB K. Johnson of Ut 18, spring ?srV 4^o^opin County, Minnesota I ortlfy / la 9 t>u<V and corircf f|M” 3,ntatlo:> Xa our>'ay of «h. tharaon, ami tha ..... a propoaad bulldlne. port to ahcu olhor l=prov"n^n.n «, encroachwanta. i' ^1® l.\S^ J ni k\ - 1IS83-W. ......- CITY Or Uf?0N0 CORCCM R. COFriN' CO., INC. Scale I Ch ta : o 5 s 40' 6-17-R3 Iron mnrkrr 'feFdSn R. Coffin R*fi» Bnrk S. Cronbarg Rag. No. Rag. No.l?7?S Und Surveyors and ?Lftiu»ar« L/)ng Lake, Pinna no tn #761 .! TO: DATE: Mayor Callahan and Orono Council Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator COUNCIL MEETiNG JUL 1 2 1993 CITYOFORONO July 7, 1993 SUBJECT: it\^2\ Steve and Margo Wirijes, 3085 Watertown Road - Preliminary Subdivision - Resolution Brief Review of Application The applicants propose a two lot subdivision of the 5+ acre rural property. In 1990 applicants had filed an earlier subdivision application of the property but withdrew the application when applicant chose to construct new residence on proposed Lot 1. The former residence has been demolishv. i. Review Exhibits G and H, Uie original proposal showed the division line in a straight line configuration where both lots met the required lot width. In the current application the division line is drawn to the center line of the drainageway that intersects the property. Profwsed Lot 2 will reqt'.ire a lot width variance ot 28’ as lot measures 172 at the front setback line. The boundarie. of the properties are now defined by the physical barrier of the drainageway and will preserve fiii ire owners use of the developed lots. The City has approved lot width variances at the time o. subdivision when it can be found that the lots could be configured to meet the lot width requirement as shown in the original proposal. All other rural standards of the RR-IB Zoning District have been satisfied. Access shall be a shared accer.s via the private driveway outlot shown along the east boundary. The existing accessory structure to remain within Lot 1 is located 5 ’ from the lot line. The structure exceeds 750 s.f. A 15’ setback is required. Applicants have advised that a 14x26.4 rear addition to the bam is in a serious state of disrepair and can easily be removed. The resulting total area would be 627.9 s.f. and would require only a 10’ setback. As City has no standard for the width of shared driveway ouilots, road outlot to the south may be reduced in width to 25 ’. It is recommended that the road outlot at the north be expanded to include the new improved curb cut at Watertown Road that serves the existing residence and to maintain the 30’ width until roadway approaches the detached accessory stiucmre. Applicants are asked to construct access drive to west side of road outlot providing as much distance between traveled road and existing residence on property to immediate east In the 1990 review, drainage was a major concern. Originally drainage was directed along the northwest lot line and drained northward via a 12" culvert at Watertown Road. Concern was raised because of the location of the septic site areas proposed for Lot 1 and the need to keep the flooding elevation below the 974.5. Applicants had to reconstruct drainage improvements if new septic test sites were to be accepted by City. These drainage improvements were completed at the time of the issuance of a building permit for the new p Zoning Memo /S'1821 July 7, 1993 Page Z residence. The 12" culvert was plugged and underground tile and drainage swale were installed along the west side lot line redirecting drainage to the south and eventually to the drainageway that divides the proposed properties. This north to south drainageway must be tnaintained if the proposed septic areas are to remain conforming. It will be necessary to take a 20* drainage easement over the drainageway along the west lot line and then evenmally southeast as it extends ove*" the rear yard of proposed Lot 1. The major concern for the current review is the issue of the septic system as it relates to the well installed on proposed Lot 1. Review Exhibit 1, the on-site evaluator who completed the septic test review for the earlier 1990 subdivision application clearly advised that a future well was to be located to the south of Lot 1 in order to meet the 75’ required separation from tested drainfield areas to well. It is unfortunate that both the well inspector from the State H‘-j!th Department and well contractor failed to heed the City’s separation requirements. The well has been installed meeting the State’s 50’ separation setback from the principal septic system. Review Exhibit J, the alternate septic test site has been negated as it is located 40’ from the well and will now not even meet the State’s separation setback standard. The on-site septic manager has recommended to the Planning Commission that a covenant be filed in the chain of title of proposed Lot 1 placing a future property owner on notice that if the alternate site is to be utilized that a new well would have to be installed meeting the 75’ separation setback. The Plaiming Commission took the position that it was the current owner ’s responsibility as subdivider to adhere to standards noted during the earlier review and that the approval must be conditioned on the existing well on Lot 1 being abandoned and a new well installed meeting separation setback prior to final subdivision approval. Planning Commission Recommendation The Planning Commission voted to approve the two lot subdivision subject to the conditions set forth in the staff memo of May 10th, page 4. Approval of the lot width variaiKe for proposed Lot 2 was based on the following findings: A. Lots can be platted so that the required lot width can be met. B.Shared lot line has been defined along the meandering drainage way that intersects property fr'^m east to west. C. Lot lines reflect functional usage area for each property. The enclosed approval resolution has been drafted per the Planning Commission recommendation. It is staffs understanding that applicants will ask for special consideration of the Council and have agreed to file a covenant against the chain of title of Lot 1 advising future owner of need to install new well if alternate septic site is to be utilized. Zoning Memo #1821 July 7, 1993 Page 3 Please review the enclosed packet of information and minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of June 21, 1993 for a more detailed review. A RESOLUTION GRANTING PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF A CLASS HI TVVO LOT PLAT OF PROPERTY LOCATED AT 3085 WATERTOWN ROAD - FILE NO. 1821 WHEREAS, Steven P. Winjes and Margo M. WIrtjes, (hereinafter "subdividers") on April 21, 1993, filed a formal subdivision application with the City for approval of a two lot Class III residential subdivision of property legally described as follows: See Exhibit "A" attached (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, after due published and mailed notice in accordance with Minnesota Statutes 462.358 et. seq. and the City of Orono’s Zoning and Planmng Codes, the Orono Planning Commission held public hearings on May 17 and June 21, 1993, at which time all persons desiring to be heard concerning this application were given the opportunity to speak thereon; and WHEREAS, at their regular meeting held on July 12, 1993, the Orono Oty Council considered the subdivision application of the subdividers noting the following findings of fact: 1. 3. 4. The property is located within the RR-IB Rural Residential Zoning District requiring a minimum of two acres of contiguous dry buildable land within each newly created lot. 2. The property contains a total of approximately 5+ acres. The proposed plat contains two lots each exceeding the 2 acre minimum lot area requirement. Access has been approved via a shared driveway at the existing curb cut that currently serves the residence on proposed Loi 1. Page 1 of 6 5. 6. 7. Each lot has been found to have suitable area for on-site septic use with both primary and alternate sites. The existing structures within proposed Lot 1 meet all required setbacks and proposed Lot 2 can be developed without the need of future variances. Proposed Lot 2 does not meet the required width of 200 ’ at the rear of the 50 ’ front setback as division line has been proposed along an irregular drainageway that divides the property. Approval of lot width variance is based on the following finding: A. Lots can be platted so that required lot width can be met. u * B Shared lot line has been defined along the meamiering drainageway that intersects property from east to west. C. Lot lines reflect functional usage area for each lot. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that based upon either one or more of the findings noted above, the City Council of the City of Orono hereby approves the preliminary plat application for Steven P. Wirtjes and Margo M. Wirtjes per survey dated 10-27- 89, revised 3-25-93, by Mark S. Gronberg of Coffin and Gronberg, Inc., subject to the following conditions: 1. Prior to final subdivision applicants shall complete the following: A. B. Relocate existing well on I.x)t 1 to south of existing structure so that 75 ’ separation setback is maintained from existing septic system and future alternate septic system. Applicant shall remove 14x26.4 addition at south side of existing accessory strucmre on proposed Lot 1. Structure shall remain at 18.2.X34.5 ’ at a total 627.9 s.f. Page 2 of 6 3. 4. 5. 6. Shared driveway, Oullol A. shall be amended to include new curb cut installed at Watertown road serving existing residence on proposed Lot 1. Outlot shall remain at a 30’ width until it approaches accessory structure to southeast side of pru'osed Lot 1 where outlot can be reduced to a 25’ width. Shared drive to serve both Lots 1 and 2 shall be installed to western side of outlot in an attempt to minimize impact upon existing development to east. 10’ drainage and utility easements shall be taken along all perimeter property lines except for tlie west lot line where drainageway must be shown at a minimum 20’ width to incorporate drainage ditch. As drainage swale extends south and east through Lot 1 the drainage easement should be shown at a minimum 15* width. Prior to any land alteration for development of proposed Lot 2, future owners shall be responsible for staking principal and alternate septic test site areas. Applicants’ engineer shall provide the necessary hydraulic information to support sizing of culvert for driveway serving Lot 2. The following list of final submittals must be submitted to the Zoning Administrator two weeks prior to the regularly scheduled Council meeting on the second and fourth Mondays of the month: 1. Record plat drawings in the form of two (2) mylar copies and one (1) copy reduced to 1" = 200’. Drawing to include: A.Lot lines platted per preliminary survey by Mark S. Gronberg of Coffin and Gronberg dated 10-27-89 most recently revised 3-25-93. B.Dedication of "drainage and utility easements" 10’ along all perimeter property lines (note lot lines platted at east/west drainageway should be shown as drainage easement at minimum 20’ total width). Page 3 of 6 c.Designation and dedication of a drainage easement within Lot 1 as noted in condition #4 above. D. Dedication of 33’ of right-of-way for Watertown Road. E. Naming of plat. Legal documents required: A.Title opinion addressed to the City. All owners, mongage holders or others with property interest indicated therein shall sign the plat and all other documents affected by such interest. B. '’ he applicants must provide certified copies of all recorded easements currently affecting the property. 3. Fees to be paid: Total due: S375.00* A. B. C. Final plat fee = $175.00 Legal review and filing fees = $200.00 *Upon Council’s approval of preliminary plat, the plat shall be referred to the City Assessor for the determination of the fair market value of the property so that a park dedication fee can be determined at 8% of the fair market value. You will be advised as soon as the City is in receipt of his findings. Park dedication fees must be paid upon the filing of the final plat application. Page 4 of 6 W Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held this 12th of June. 1993. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk Edward J. Callahan, Jr., Mayor STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 12th day of July 1993, by Edward J. Callahan, Jr. & Dorothy M. Hallin, Mayor & City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public Page 5 of 6 CITY of ORONO RESOLLTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ EXHIBIT It JK If m S 1 1 rj r, lir,M or. SCRIP MON: fh.it p.if » -'f i ?!•? fiw»'s ’ O'l.ir’ier of tfie Northwest Quarter of Section 4. TownsMii) itr. R.inne 2S. '1^ r i f)o<l as follows, to wit: Beginning 42 ro«ls (G^J f'^ct) East of tho Northwest corner of said Section 4; thence East iw rods (297 foot); ttience Soutli 44.44 rods ( 733.26 feet); thence West 18 rods (297 feet): thence North 44.44 rods (733.26 feet) to beginning.* That part of the Nortliwost Quarter of tlie Northwest Quarter of Section 4. Township 117 North. Kang« 25 West of the 5th Principal Meridian, descriliod as follows: Potunniog at a point in the North line of said Section i distant 60 ro»ls (990 feet) East of the Northwest corner thereof: thence east along Uie Ncrtii line of said Section 4, 33.5 feet to the Northwest corner of the East 100 acres of the Northwest Quarter of Section 4; thence South along the West line of the East 100 acres of the Northwest Quarter a distanro jf 44.44 rods (733.26 feet); thence West parallel with the North line of said Section 4, 37.53 fool i.tj .1 point M) rids (990 feet) East of the West line of said North west Quarter of Section 4; »honrn g.jrt'i parallel with .he West line of said Section 4, 44.M mds (731.26 fort) to the point of beginning. *for purposes of this d>'%r r i pt j'iti. Min [as* and Wes* I’nes of the abovn des(rihr*-| pr-npert V ha^e henn a'^-.'imed to be lines drawn parallel wiMi 1 ho fast linn of *M»n ?Jor f hw--' '.'uarier of said Section 4; further c 1 a r i f I (. <111 on nf the ahovn de'.'rip*inn rnav have to he accomplished througli a lorrens acti’n. Page 6 of 6 TO:Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator DATE:May 10. 1993 SUBJECT: ^1821 Steve and Margo Wirtjes, 3085 Watertown Road Preliminary Subdivision - Public Hearing The application involves a 2*lot subdivision within a rural residential zoning district, RR- IB, requiring 2 acres in area and a 200’ lot width. Applicants had originally filed a subdivision application in March of 1990 that was withdrawn when applicants pursued construction of new residence as shown on proposed Lot 1. review Exhibit J. The following sections of the subdivision and zoning codes are pertinent for the current review. 1. Definition Section 11.03, 66 (C) - Class 111 Subdivision Section 10.28, Subdivision 5 (B) A.Lot area Required = 2 acres of dry buildable Lot 1 proposed = 2.36 dry Lot 2 proposed = 2.52 dry B.Lot width Required at 50’ front/street setback = 200’ Lot 1 = 300’ + Lot 2 = 172’ Variance = 28’ or 1^% 3.Section 10.03, Subdivision 9 (B) - Setback for accessory structure on proposed Lot 1 Required setback = 15’ Proposed 5 ’ Variance = 10’ or 75% variance Total structure area = 997.5 s.f. Section 10.03, Subdivision 15 (F) ^ Required setback for accessory structures less than 750 s.f. in area = 10 5. Section 10.02 - Definition 34 - Lot area Drainage way that has been created along west lot line must be designated at a minimum 20’ width and excluded from total of dry buildable lot area Zoning File #1321 May 10, 1993 Page 2 6. Section 11.08 - Definition 24 - Lot area - minimum. All lots must contain a minimum of 2 acres of dry contiguous buildable land e.xclusive of wetlands, public and private rights-of-way, vehicular or pedestrian easements, surface areas below the ordinary high water mark of any surface water or areas at or below the flood plain elevation for a specific property. In cases where rural lots are encroached by drainage easements, areas of drainage ways are excluded from dry buildable but areas on either side of drainage way are considered inclusive within contiguous dry buildable inventory. Per the definition, lands divided by wetlands, floodplains or lake areas cannot be credited. List of Exhibits A - Application B - Property Owners List C - Plat Map D - Plan of Drainage Improvements Along West Lot Line E - Topographic Map of Area F - Map of Surrounding Area G - Original Plat for 1990 Review H - Engineer ’s Report I - Septic Report J - Current Preliminary Plan Description of Current Application Review Exhibits G and J, the original application proposed . a straight line division line further south. The current proposal shows the proposed division line to the center line of the existing drainage way that drains from east to west through the property. The drainage way ^“fines the actual physical barriers to both properties. Boih rural lots maintain the required 2 acres of dry contiguous land. The division line along the drainage way creates a need for a lot width variance of 28’ at the 50 ’ front setback line for proposed Lot 2. The City has approved lot width variances with the creation of new lots when it can be found that the lots could be configured to meet tne lot width requirement. The acnial boundaries of the properties are now defined by a physical barrier of the drainage way and would reflect the actual usage of each lot. Access to the property is via a shared private driveway outlot shown at a 30’ width along the east side of the property. Current driveway is located outside of the outlot and it is recommended that the shared drive be reinstalled within the driveway outlot. The City will ask for a dedication of the 33’ of right-of-way of Watertown Road. Note property line runs to the center of the roadway. Zoning File #1821 May 10, 1993 Page 3 The original application was withdrawn when applicants pursued the building permit for the new construction and you should be aware that once a subdivision has been commenced, building permits cannot be issued for any new construction until the subdivision has been approved. The former residence on the property (Lx)t 1) has been demolished. Access As already noted, the access shall be shared via the private driveway outlot. Note accessory su jcture is only 5’ from lot line. Private driveway outlot can be reduced to 25’ in width. The City has no required standards for driveway outlot widths. Applicants have advised that 14’ X 26.4’ addition to the bam can easily be removed and is in a serious state of disrepair. This would reduce the accessory structure to 627.9 s.f. requiring only a 10’ setback. By reducing outlot width to 25’, structure will meet required 10 setback. Owners to immediate east had voiced concern that a driveway could be placed so close to a property line. The City has no standards for setbacks for private driveways to adjacent lot lines. In order to provide adequate distance from adjacent property, outlot may remain at a 30’ width along the portion that abuts the residence strucmre to the east and then reduced to a 25’ width as it approaches the accessory structure. Please review Exhibit H, the Engineer has recommended that the size of the culvert to be placed under the drive that extends southward be designed by an engineer in order to assure that upstream storage is not increased. Access and utility easements will be taken at a 10’ width along all pvrimeter property lines. Drainage Issues Review Exhibits D and E. drainage was the major concern during the earlier 1990 review. Specifically, the area along the northwest lot line where drainage originally traveled northward collecting within the northwest comer of property before it drained through 12" culvert. Concern was raised because of the location of the septic site areas proposed for Lot 1 and the need to keep the flooding elevation below the 974.5. Upon application for the new residence, the applicants were required to install a new septic system. If the principal dramfield site was to be used, the drainage improvements had to be completed. Drainage improvements consisted of the plugging of the 12" culvert, the installation of an underground tile drainage swale redirecting drainage to tributary to the south along the proposed shared lot line. The drainage way must be maintained if the proposed septic areas are to remain conlorming. It w ill be necessary to take a 20’ drainage easement over the drainage way along the west lot line. Zoning File #1821 May 10. 1993 Page 4 Septic Please review Exhibit I. the on-site evaluator who completed the septic testing for the original 1990 subdivision review clearly noted that a funire well must be located to the south in order to meet 75 ’ required separation setback from drainfield to well. Unfortunately, both applicants and well inspector from the State Health Department failed to heed the City’s separation requirements. The well has been located to meet the State s 50 separation setback from the principal septic system. Review Exhibit J, the alternate septic drainfield has been negated as it is located 40’ from the well and would not meet even the State’s separation setback requirement. The funire owner of Lot 1 must be placed on notice that if the alternate site is to be utilized at some funire date that a new well would have to be also installed meeting the 75 ’ separation setback. The on-site septic evaluator must also provide confirmation that Lot 2 will support a 5-bedrcom septic system. It is also recommended that prior to any driveway construction or land alterations associated with the development of Lot 2 that the on-site septic test areas be staked and protected before land alterations take place. Staff Recommendation To approve the 2-lot Class III subdivision application of Steve and Mango Winjes for the property located at 3085 Watertown Road finding that all standards of the on-site septic code and RR-IB, Rural Residential zoning standards have been met except for the substandard lot width of proposed Lot 2. Approval of lot width variance is based on the following findings and hardships: A. Lots can be platted so that required lot width can be met. B.Shared lot line has been defined along the meandering drainage way that intersects property from east to west. C. Lot lines reflect functional usage area for each lot. Approval of the 2-lot subdivision is based on the following conditions: 1. Future Lot 1 is placed on notice that if alternate septic site is to be utilized that a new well must be installed on property to meet required 75 ’ separation setback. 2.Applicants shall remove 14 ’ x 26.4 ’ addition to south side of accessory structure on proposed Lot 1. Remaining structure at 18.2’ x 34.5’ shall remain at a total 627.9 s.f. area. Removal of the addition must be completed prior to final plat approval. Zoning File #1821 May 10. 1993 Page 5 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Private driveway outlet can be reduced in width to 25’ as it approaches accessory smicnire on Lot 1. Private driveway shall be reinstalled within driveway outlet and special care should be given to minimize impact upon existing development to east. 10’ wide drainage and utility easement shall be required along all perimeter property lines except for the west lot line where drainage way must be shown as a 20’ wide drainage easement. As drainage easement extends south and east through Lot 1, the 10’ width drainr.ge and utility easement shall continue along the perimeter of the west lot iine. Upon Council approval of preliminary plat, the plat shall be referred to the City Assessor for the determination of the fair market value of the property so that a park dedication fee can be determined at 8% of the fair market value. Dedication of 33 of right-of-way for Watertown Road. Prior to any land alterations for development of proposed Lot 2, applicants shall be responsible for staking principal and alternate septic test sites. Applicants’ engineer shall provide the necessary hydraulic information to support sizing of culvert. Zoning Memo #1821 July 7. 1993 Page 3 Please review the enclosed packet of information and minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of June 21, 1993 for a more detailed review. A RESOLUTION GRANTING PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF A CLASS III TWO LOT PLAT OF PROPERTY LOCATED AT 3085 WATERTOWN ROAD - FILE NO. 1821 W'HEREAS, Steven P. Wirtjes and Margo M. W irtjes. (hereinatter "subdividers ) on April 21, 1993, filed a formal subdivision application with Lhe City for approval of a two lot Class III residential subdivision of property' legally described as follows; See Exhibit "A" attached (hereinafter "the pioperty"); and W'HEREAS, after due published and mailed notice in accordance with Minnesota Stamtes 462.358 et. seq. and the City of Orono’s Zoning and Planning Codes, the Orono Planning Commission held public hearings on May 17 and June 21, 1993, at which time all persons desiring to be heard concerning this application were given the opportunity to speak thereon; and WHEREAS, at their regular meeting held on July 12, 1993, the Orono City Council considered the subdivision application of the subdividers noting the following findings of fact: 1.The property is located within the RR-IB Rural Residential Zoning District requiring a minimum of two acres ot contiguous dry' buildable land within each newly created lot. The property contains a total of approximately 5+ acres. 3.The proposed plat contains two lots each exceeding the 2 acre minimum lot area requirement. Access has been approved via a shared driveway at the existing curb cut that currently serves the residence on proposed Lot 1. Page 1 of 6 5. 6. 7. Each lot has been found to have suitable area for on-siie septic use with botli primary and alternate sites. The e.xisting structures within proposed Lot 1 meet all required setbacks and proposed Lot 2 can be developed without the need of future variances. Proposed Lot 2 does not meet the required width of 200 ’ at the rear of the 50 ’ front setback as division line has been proposed along an irregular drainageway that divides the property. Approval of lot width variance is based on the following finding: A. Lots can be platted so that required lot width can be met. B.Shared lot line has been defined along the meandering drainageway that intersects property from east to west. C. Lot lines reflect functional usage area for each lot. NOW» THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that based upon either one or more of the findings noted above, the City Council of the City of Orono hereby approves the preliminary plat application for Steven P. Wirtjes and Margo M. Winjes per survey dated 10-27- 89, revised 3-25-93, by Mark S. Gronberg of Coffin and Gronberg, Inc., subject to the following conditions: 1. Prior to final subdivision applicants shall complete the following: A. B. Relocate existing w ell on U:>t 1 to souili of existing structure so that 75 ’ separation setback is maintained from existing septic system and future alternate septic system. Applicant shall remove 14.\26.4 addition at south side of existing accessory strucmre on proposed Lot 1. Structure shall remain at 18.2.X34.5 ’ at a total 627.9 s.f. Page 2 of 6 5. 6. ShareU driveway, Ouiloi A, shall be amended to include new curb cut installed at Watertown road serving existing residence on proposed Lot 1. Outlot shall remain at a 30’ width until it approaches accessory structure to southeast side of proposed Lot I where outlot can be reduced to a 25 ’ width. Shared drive to serve both Lots I and 2 shall be installed to western side of outlot M an attempt to minimize impact upon existing development to east. 10’ drainage and utility easements shall be taken along all perimeter property lines except for the west lot line where drainageway must be shown at a minimum 20 ’ width to incorporate drainage ditch. As drainage swale extends south and east through Lot 1 the drainage easement should be shown at a minimum 15’ width. Prior to any land alteration for development of proposed Lot 2, future owners shall be responsible for staking principal and alternate septic test site areas. Applicants ’ engineer shall provide the necessary hydraulic information to support sizinc of culvert for driveway serving Lot 2. The following list of final submittals must be submitted to the Zoning Administrator two weeks prior to the regularly scheduled Council meeting on the second and fourth Mondays of the month: 1. Record plat drawings in the form of two (2) mylar copies and one (1) copy reduced to 1" = 200 ’. Drawing to include: A. Lot lines platted per preliminary survey ’jy Mark S. Gronberg of Coffin and Gronberg dated 10-27-89 most recently revised 3-25-93. B.Dedication of "drainage and utility easements" 10’ along all perimeter property lines (note lot lines platted at east/west drainageway should be shown as drainage easement at minimum 20 ’ total width). Page 3 of 6 c.Desicnation and dedication of a drainage easement within Lot 1 as noted in condition ^^4 above. D. Dedication of 35’ of right-of-way for Watertown Road. E. Naming of plat. Legal documents required: A. B. Title opinion addressed to the City. All owners, mortgage holders or others with property interest indicated therein shall sign the plat and all other documents affected by such interest. The applicants must provide certified copies of all recorded easements currently affecting the property. 3. Fees to be paid: Total due: $375.00* A. Final plat fee — $175.00 B. Legal review and filing fees = $200.00 C. *Upon Council’s approval of preliminary plat, the plat shall be referred to the City Assessor for the determination of the fair market value of the property so that a park dedication fee can be determined at 8% of the fair m.^rket value. You will be advised as soon as the City is in receipt of his findings. Park dedication fees must be paid upon the filing of the final plat application. Page 4 of 6 Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono. Minnesota at a regular meeting held this 12th of June. 1993. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Cle'*k Edward J. Callahan, Jr., Mayor STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 12th day of July 1993, by Edward J. Callahan, Jr. & Dorothy M. Hallin, Mayor & City Clerk of the City of Orono. a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public Page 5 of 6 r CITY of ORONO RESOLUnON OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO________________ 1'^ t/V EXHIBIT -A- i.fHtSCRIPMUN: Chat pat» tfM? Morthwt*s* Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 4, Township 117. Ran^e 21. <lt»S':rihe«l as follows, to wit: Beginning 42 roils (6'>J fno») East of the Northwest corner of said Section 4; • thence East ih rods (297 feet): thence South 44.44 rods ( 733.26 feet); thence west I8 rods (297 feet); thence North 44.44 rods (733.26 feet) to beginning.* That part of the Northwest Quarter of tiie Northwest Quarter of Section 4, Township 117 North. Kang** 23 West of the 5th Principal Meridian, described as follows: Pociinning at i point in the North line of said Section 4 distant 60 rods (990 feet) East of the Northwest corner thereof; thence east along the North line of said Section 4, 33.5 feet to the Northwest corner of the East ino acres of the Northwest Quarter of Section 4; thence South along tiie West line of the East 100 acres of the Northwest Quarter a distanr** <if 44.44 rods (733.26 feet); thence West parallel with the North line of said Section 4. 37.53 feel to a point r,n r-ids (990 feet) East of the West line of said North west Quarter of Section 4; thnnce fiurfi parallel with the West line of said Section 4. 44.14 rtuis (733.26 fort) to the point of beginning. ♦for purposes of this d«'sr r i pt i on. »im East and West lines of the above described property ha/e benn .I'^sumed to be lines drawn parallel wi»h the Fast line of thn Northw.'<;f '*u.*» ter of said Section 4; further clan f iciit ion of the al)ov*» de-'i {•’. i on nay have to he accompli sued thromih a lorreris action. Page 6 of 6 I 4 . . 4k...........■Wiki !> i'. :*• : r i' :: '.. TO:Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building Sc Zoning Administrator DATE:May 10. 1993 SUBJECT: #1821 Steve and Margo Wir^, 3085 Watertown Road Preliminary Subdivision - Public Hearing The application involves a 2-lot subdivision wifliina rural residential loning district, RR- IB, requiring 2 acres in area and a 200* lot width. Applicant had originaUy filed a ^ivision application in March of 1990 that was withdrawn when applicants pursued construction of new residence as shown on proposed Lot 1. review Exhibit J. The following sections of the subdivision and zoning codes are pertinent for the current review: 3. 4. 1. Definition Section 11.03, 66 (C) - Class ffl Subdivision 2. Section 10.28. Subdivision 5 (B) Lot area Required » 2 acres of dry buildable Lot 1 proposed « 2.36 dry Lot 2 proposed » 2.52 dry B Lot width Required at 50’ front/street setl Lot 1 - 300’+ Lot 2 - 172’ Variance « 28* or 14% ck » 21 Section 10.03, Subdivbkm 9 (B) - Setback for accessory structure Lot 1 Required setback » 15’ Proposed 5* Variance “ 10* or 75% variance Total structure area « 997.5 s.f. proposed Section 10.03, Subdivision 15 (F) Required setback fot accessory structures less than 750 s.f. in area • 10 5. Section 10.02 - Defimtion 34 - Lot area Draimige way that has been created aloi^ west lot line must be designated at a rniniimim 20* Width and excluded from total of dry buildable lot area / ■ a..- i’ Zoniog File #1821 May 10, 1993 P«ge2 6.SecdoD 11.08 • Definidon 24 - Lot area * minimum. All lots must contain a mintmum of 2 acfcs of dry condguous buildable land exclusive of wedands, public and private rights-of-way, vehicular or pedestrian easements, surface areas below the ordinary high water mark of any surfKe water or areas at or below the flood plain elevation for a ^lectflc properQr. In cases where rural lots are emToaptifd by drainage easements, areas of drainage ways are excluded from dry buildable but areas on either side of drainage way are considered inclusive within condguous dry buildable inventory. Per the deflnidon, lands divided by wetlands, floodplains or lake areas cannot be credited. List ef Exhibits A • Application B - Property Owners List C-Plat Map D - Plan of Drainage Improvements Along West Lot Line E - Topogrqdiic Map of Area F - Map of Surrounding Area G - Original Plat for 1990 Review H - Engineer*s Report I - Septic Repon J - Cutiem I^liminary Plan Description of Current AppUcatioo Review Exhibits G and J, the original application proposed .. . a straight line divisioo line ftirther south. The current proposal shows the proposed division line to the censer line of the exisdr^ drainage way diat drains from east to west dirou^ die proper^. The drainage way defines the actual physical barrien to both properties. Both niral lots mairnain the required 2 jcrtt of dry condguous land. The division dne aloog the drainage way creates a need Ibr a lot width variance of 28* at the 50* froin sediack line for proposed Lot 2. The City has approved lot width variances with the creation of new lots whro it can be found that the lots c luld be configured to meet die lot width requirement. The actual boundaries ot the properties are now defined by a physical barrier of the drainage way and would reflect the actual usage of each lot. Access to die proper^ is via a shared private driveway oudot shown at a 30* widdi along the east side of the property. Oirrent driveway is located outside of the oudot and it is Rcomniboded that the shared drive be reinstalled within the driveway oudot. The Chy will ask for a of the 33* of right-of-way of Watertown Road. Note property line runs to the center of the roadway. Zoning FUe #1821 May 10, 1993 Page 3 The original application was withdrawn when applicants pursued the builduig pemut tor the new construction and you should be aware that once a subdivision has been commenced, building petmiu cannot be issued for any new construction until the wbdivision has been ^proved. The former residence on the property (Lot 1) has been demolished. Accen As already noted, the access shall be shared via the private driveway outlot. Note accessory structure is only 5* from lot line. Private driveway outiot can bt reduced to 25 ’ in width. The City has no required standards for driveway ouUot widths. Applicants have advis^ that 14 ’ X 26.4* addition to the bam can easily be removed and Is in a serious state of disrepair. This would reduce the accessory structure to 627,9 s.f. requiring only a 10 setback. By teducine oudot width to 25', structure will meet required 10’ setback. Owners to immediate east had voiced concern that a driveway could be placed so close to a property line. The City has no standards for setbacks for private driveways to adjacent lot lines. In order to provide adequate distance from adjacent property, outlot may remain at a 30’ width along the portion that abuts the residence structure to the east and then reduced to a 25 ’ width as it approaches the accessory structure. Please review Exhibit H, the Engineer has recommended that the size of the culvert to be placed under the drive that extends southward be designed by an engineer in order to aswre that upstream storage is not increased. Access and utility ea.’tements will be taken at a 10’ width along all perimeter property lines. Drainage bncf Review Exhibits D and E, drainage was the major concern during ^ earlier 1990 review. Specifically, the area along the northwest lot line where drainage originally traveled northw^ collecting within the northwest comer of property be^ it drained through 12- culvert. Concern was raised because of the location of the septic site areas proposed for Lot 1 and the need to keep the flooding elevation below the 974.5. Upon applicato for the new residence, the qiplicants were required to install a new septic ^stem. If the principal dtainfield site was u> be used, the drainage improvements had to be completed. Drainage unprovemeois of the plugging of the 12" culvert, the installation of an underground tile and drainage swale icdirecting drainage to tributary to the south along the proposed shared lot line. Tte drainage way rniist be inaintained if the proposed septic areas are to rernainconfonning. Itwill be necessary to take a 20* drainage easement over the drainage way along the west lot line. k Zoning File #1821 Mty 10. 1993 Page 4 Septk Please itview Exhibit I. the on-siie evaluator who completed the septic testing for the original 1990 subdivision review clearly noted that a future weU must be located to the south in order to meet 75 ’ required separation setback fnmi drainfield to well. Unfortunately, both applicams and well inspector from the State Health Departmem fuled to heed the City’s separation requitements. The well has been located to meet the State’s 50’separation setback ftom the principal septic system. Review Exhibit J, the ahenate septic drainficM has been negated as it is located 40’from the weU and would not meet evra the S^’s separatioo setM requirement. The hiture owner of Lot 1 must be placed on notice that if the alternate site is to be at some ftiture <t««* that a new well w<^d have to be also installed meeting the 75 ’ separation setback. TTie on*siie septic evaluator nnist also provide confirmation that Lot 2 will rt a 5-bedroom septic system. It b also recommended that prior to any driveway itruction or land iterations assocbted with the development of Lot 2 that the areas be waifgj and protected before land alieratkws take place. I 11 -1, • Mcndarion To iqiprove the 2-lot Class in subdivbion application of Steve and Mango Wir^ for d» proper^ at 3085 Watertown Road finding diat all standards of the on-site septic code and RR-IB. Rural Residential zoning standards have been met except for the substendard lot width of proposed Lot 2. >^)pfoval of lot width variance b based on the foUowing findings anl hardi A. B. Lots can be platted so that required lot wj 1111i I be met. Shared lot line has been defitted al< intersects property from east to west. the n h < -ring drainage way that C. Lot lines reflect fi U I Ml • . I tl usage area for each lot. Approval of the 2-lot subdivbion b based on the foUowing conditions: 1.Future Lot 1 b placed on notice that if ahernate septic site b to be utilized that a new weU must be installed on proper^ to meet required 75 ’ separation setback. 2.Applicants shaU remove 14’ x 26.4 ’ addition to south tide of acceasoiy structure on proposed Lot 1. Remaining strucoire at 18.2’ x 34.5’ shaU remain at a total 627.9 s.f. area. Removal of the addition must be completed prior to final plat approval. e- ki- r-\ V Ir V ~ i-. \f. w< Zoning Fite #182) Miy 10. 1993 Fnge 5 3. 6. 7. 8 PrivBie driveway oucloc can be reduced in width to 25* as it approaches accessory structure on Lot 1. Private driveway shall be reinstalled within driveway outlot and special care should be given to minimize impact upon existing development to east. 10* wide drainage and utility easement shall be required along all perimeter property lines except for the west lot line where drainage way must be shown as a 20* wide drainage As drainage easement extends south and east through Lot 1. the 10* width drainage and utility easement shall continue along the perimeter of the west lot line. Upon Council approval of preliminary pUt. the plat shall be referred to the City Assessor for the determination of the fair market value of the property so that a park dedteation fee can be determined at 8% of the feir market value. Dedteatkm of 33* of right-of-way for Watertown Road. Prior to ariy land alterations for devetopmem of propo^ Lot 2. applicanu shall be responsible for staking principal and alternate sqptic test sites. Applteatus* engineer rirall provkte the necessary hydraulic information to support sizing of culvert. i ♦ 5 ■A • ,-«l. .Lsflw...• -ft. A* ^ . * I .‘••'7 CITY OP ORCNO - SUBDIVISION APP PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address Tat&llJ C> A A ~#*C* t I W'l k.‘*»wi«w^ *' • *»“ c* f“ c*c" 7»” rI ▲itrfiTwk. wi « A ww < y“n‘}A,^ru\\a w‘wrv*.t/v'wv /•» f rrj V ^ Wilf-Lrrr n 77n .•».• k/w'V' • V V 7“*. rt/- torrens?fTw » WV MVA # A t • Property Identification Munber (P.I.D.) •*vTrIV*r*7» rnA ^ Kfn* Ti * * fTw » V^4J»V WVVA Please check one - Property V abstract or - - Attach legal description to application. Ai\r^f <. A / APPLICANT Name Phone (home) V7:^->4«r^~7 Phone (work) Address: ^^T«r LJ47ft* /e»0juj City:Zip: <rT ? OWNER (if different than applicant) Name ;‘ J u • Phone (home) Phone (work) '6,iTC 7 Address: t^^jcuaaj City: (attach lisp if more than one) Zip: EXISTING LAND USE Number of Tax Parcels / Develcoment Size S', I ’ I imm S>32. Acres Dry Land Acres Wet Land Acres Total, all parcels Present Use (chec.k)Residential; no. of units Other (specify)_ _ _ _ _ _ _ Present Zoning District PROPOSAL Division for Tax Purposes Lot Line Rearrangement Only (no new building sites) Subdivision for New Building Sites Number of Building Sites Existing Units New Units Total Units Proposed Gross Density:Units per Acres Minimum Lot Size:Sq Feet Dry Buildable Land Proposed Use: (check)Residential Other (specify) MINIMUM MATERIAL NECESSARY FOR COMPLETE PRELIMINARY APPLICATION Ir Completed Application Form Preliminary Plat information on Certificate of Survey. Certified Property Owners List of owners within 350’ (you must obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Govt Center 348-3271). 4. As an addendum to this application^ please attach a^ separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this app?,ication. Certification by Zoning Department that Preliminary Plat Application is complete. Zoning Official's Signature _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Date_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ 1. Payment of fees (park fees, filing fee, sewer and water assessments). 2. Signed Certificate of Survey or mylar copies of formal plat. 3. Title opinion. 4. Easements, Covenants, etc. 5. Developers Agreement and Letter of Credit. Certification by Zoning Department that Final Plat Application is complete. Zoning Official's Signature_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _Date_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ FEES Sketch Plan Review (Class I, II & III)$200.00 Subdivision of a Lot Line Rearrangement Preliminary Review (Class I & II Subdivision) 300.00 3 00.00-;4 Preliminary Review (Class III S all non—residential) 325.00 + 25.00/Lot Final Plat Review (Class III) ♦(Plus any legal or engineering charges) 175.00 Renewal of Preliminary Subdivision Application Renewal of Final Subdivision Application 150.00 100.00 The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, City Engineer, City Attorney, Planning Commission and Council necessary to process this application and further agrees to pay ail additional fees established by ordinance. Applicant's Signature Date jP/ ^ 4 / Owner's Signature'7^Date //<?3 / Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. nini DATE 10/10/09DATCII 003 PROP ADOR CiniCR flAME TAXPAYER NAIIE/AODR PROP ADDR OiniER flAIIE TAXPAYCI( rJAflC/ADDR PROP AOOR OttMLR IIAttE TAXPAYER MAMC/ADDR PROP ADDR OIRiER tlAME TAXPAYER . UAtlE/AODR PROP ADOR OtCIER riAfiE TAXPAYER ?IAnE/ADOR PROP ADOR OirriER HAME TAXPAYER tlAltE/AODR IIEmCPir^ COUNTY PROPERTY irjrORIIATION SYSTEMLISTPROPERTY ONNERS30 O^f-117-23 21 0001 02905 HATCRTUia^ RD DONALD T TRO!.TJRIDGE ET AL DONALD A MARGARET TRONDRIDGE 2905 S IIAlERTOiai RO lotto LAKE MN 55356 30 0^1-117-23 22 0008 00065 CYCrJET PL DIANE L KOEPKE DIANE L KOEPKE 65 CYGtJET PLACE LONG LAKE \\tl 55356 38 0^1-117-25 22 0010 00105 CYGNET PL G J EHALT ETAL GREGORY J EHALT 105 CYCrJET PLACE LONG LAKE r:N 55356 30 0^»-117-23 22 0011 00135 CYGNET PL M e orcKrnp & k ■DECrgTtt) MONTE e-PgeKCW)^^^^^44./^ 135 CYGNET PL rhjr^sO.r'Tf- lOUO LAKE ruj 55356 30 00-117-23 22 0016 00060 CYGNET PL RTCIIAItli J IJuiilA^xurrin 60 CYGHET PLACE LONG LAKE UN G5J56 ni.ni’ , i ^ Oi^Aolcl 38 00-117-23 22 0017 00000 CYGfJET PL P A A VITKO PAUL A A AMI L VITKO 00 CYGNET PLACE lOllO LAKE tttt 55556 30 0'i-117-23 22 0021 00190 CYGNET PL MARQUETTE DANK OF MPLS N A RONALD A A ROOIN A HOtlRNAN 19D CYGflET PLACE LONG LAKE MJ4 553 56 30 06-117-23 22 0022 00100 CYGNET PL VIL OF ORONO CITY OF ORONO 30 C6-1.T7-23 22 0026 OOC^O CYGNET PL II J A M M PANUSKA HAROLD J/MARCARET M PANUSKA 20 CYGNET PL LONG LAKE MN 55356 3085 30 06-117-23 22 0027 03005 MATERTCT.IN RO S P MIRTJES A M M HIRTJE5 STEVEN P A MARGO M HIRTJES ■rnprn MATERTONN RD LONG LAKE IHI 55356 30 06-117-23 26 0006 DARRARA K COFFIN DARDARA K COFFIN 3025 IIATER10I8I RO LONG LAKE lUI 55356 30 33-110-23 32 nool 03160 NATERTON'!l RD DORSET DEVELOPMENT INC DORSET DEVELOPMUir INC 3125 FOX ST LONG LAKE IttI 55356 REPORT NO. P1635601 PAGE 538 06-117-23 22 0009 00005 CYGNET PL G J F.fN.LT ETAL GREGSP'* J EHALT 105 CYGNET PLACE LOITG LAKE MN 55356 38 06-117-23 22 0012 00165 r.YGNET PL A E BLOENENDAAL ETAL ARTHUR E OLOEMENOAAL -nr- 1 P177T LONG LAKE 181 55356 10 OLOEMENOAAL ^ •184 55356 #^O 38 O'i-117-23 22 0020 00160 CYGNET PL a JAHEO M emiPion .Rt^ Jftfieo >1 CAMPION Ot-U 160 CYCNET PLACE LONG LfKE lai 55556 erno. 38 0<i-ll?-23 22 0023 00130 CYCNET PL PATRICIA A HAROEN NARGARCr 0 ROSSINO 150 CYGNET PL LONG LAKE I0« 55356 30 0«»-ll7-23 22 0028 05065 NATERTOISI RD DRUCE C t KATHRYN S HALL DRUCE C ft KATHRYN S HALL 3065 NAtERIO'.lil RD ORONO IN 55.556 50 35-110-25 33 0001 05020 IIATERTOiaT RO R A SrUiMG ETAL R A SIL*: D3 5020 IIA FRTOIl^t RO LONG LAKE NN 55356 A #•• ^ 4 A RUN DATE XO/10/09 O . DATCII 005PROP AODR Ota«CR MANE TAXPAYER rMllE/AOOR \ l:;,: HEniEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY IJiTORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OiniERS LIST REPORT NO. PI^55A01 PAGE 658 55-110-25 5A 000600055 HEAR LA NHEAR ENTERPRISES PARTNERSHIPHEAR E»4TERPRISES PARTNERSHIP TOTAL BATCH 005 00019C/0 HILLIAM H HEARP 0 BOX 2A5LOf4G LAKE I1N 55556 i % • r;:* % I CERTIFY THAT. THE TACTS REPRESEMTEO ARE AH ACCURATE AtlO TRUE REPRESErirATlOH OF iriFOPIIATlOH AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON T!IE RECORDS OF THE HEiniEPIH COUHTY DEPARIMEHT.OF PROPERTY JAXATIOH, TO T>>6r DEST OF I1Y KHOIILEDGE AND OELIEF. DAT t <3 ■ 'k fi. o/ro —^ ^ I Bonestroo Rosene AnderllkA |\^| Associates Engineers & Architects 0^3 C W Ecser# • • CH3h C AASf-e. p£ va%A L V:-Me c'c/*A * coc^ T>e^#i r Sffyji P.f C. PS. Sk,iaa M £c ^"A C M •S#'^or A Ll".*;*- ^ CC*93A PS E 9* W PS »<hhC 0 Ucustf P£ 4:0#^ C tuistt. A ijA •^ry A louixy^ i>E M4'» a Miner. F£. r E^wirrinr. < P^ PS 9 Pj'zriZr A.IA. Oft-e^ C Su-;i*u. PS Thfl.^41 t Af>c^i PS iv-tr VjrrrfT 9f a ? fJU. ^4. J 96 /S-^fJ V A fc » Thcmn 'ji/ M<rj^ C ^5 f ViEre. Pg ;r-> 0 At-jicr. Pf ^Crf.rKn P Arcne/\ Pf V4*1t t fspj. P£ V p ^ A. PS di/y 'Jtj P/cf*A pg J, Cj;#Ptn PS A*ih •» J Cpj^ PS Q Afjrsi >1 V6.fl i P# t P^A^ c t •» <4Th L. PI Cery 3 CTfx/a •! f TtOG PCtt«». PI «p<r E PS Ocjgu J linr.l Pf Sf\Pwn 3 Guiu\Vl Pf. Cff»9 Pf Crj'Pi A. C*icuc'^ Lpc M PAwuy *-•*-<40 M. Owi 9 tr^MX May 7, 1993 Ms. Jeanne A. Mabusth Building and Zoning Administrator City of Orono Post Office Box 66 Crystal Bay, Minnesota 55323 Re; Wirtjes Lot Division File No. 139“1821 Dear Jeanne, We have raviewed the proposed property division for Steve Wirtjes in the Northwest Quarter of section 4, located on the south side of Watertown Road. The division is acceptable from an engineering standpoint. Drainage and uti' '.ty «?asements should be provided 10 feet wide along the right-of-way for Watertown Road, 5 feet wide along the easterly and westerly property lines for each lot, and 5 feet wide along the south line of Lot 2. The existing driveway should bo relocated within Outlet A, as it Is proposed to function as a common access for both lots. The extension of the driveway to serve Lot 2 will require a culvert crossing at the existing drainage ditch. Tho size of the culvert should be designed by an engineer based on tho tributary area, so that the upstream storage is not increased. Please contact me at this office if you have any questions. Yours very truly, BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC. Shawn D. Gustafson, P.E. 7 To: From: Date: Subject: Jeanne A. Mabuslh, Building & Zoning Administrator Stephen Weckman, On-Site Systems Manager May 11. 1993 Subdivision #1821, Steven Wirtjes - Septic Review Soil testing and system design was submitted for this two-lot subdivision in 1989. Lx)t 1 contains a home which is connected to a conforming septic system with an alternate site available for a 5-bedroom home. Lot 2 has approved soil testing and systtin design for a 4- bedroom home. The site evaluator, Steven Schirmers, will be reviewing the site to verify that the sites are suitable for a 5-bedroom home. Although Lot 1 has suitable existing and alternate drainfield sites, the poor placement of the well has resulted in sites which do not meet the City's required 75 ’ well setback. The existing drainfield site is 50 ’ from the well with the alternate site encrcaching within 35 ’ of the well. As the State of Minnesota requires that a minimum 50 ’ setback be maintained from the well to a drainfield, staff will allow well in its current location. However, at the time the alternate drainfield site is required for use, the well must be abandoned and located at least 75 ’ from the septic system. Staff will recommend approval of the septic system siting as proposed, provided the above condition is met. Also, both primary and alternate drainfield sites on Lot 2 must be fenced prior to construction. .*• ••• •»* •% 41 / ___ ^ 2 1993 cmroFOROMo UwVii^ LAW CFPICES MORRIS, FULLER & SEAVER. P.A JOHN W. PLOETZ Ano^r^f a: A PROFESSKyJAL association SUITE 525 SOUTHDALE office C£^rr3E 6600 FRANCS AVENUE SOUTH MINNEAPOLIS MINNESOTA 55435 TELEPHONE |612) 927-SS15 telecopier |612( 927-8752 Real Prooarty Soecialist C^nrtiod by tn« Mtnn«sota Stata Bar Association VIA PACBTMILg TRANSMIflSIOW FACfllMILB KO! 473-0510 July 8, 1993 Jean Haybush CITY OF ORONO P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 RE: Wirtjoc/Wheaton Construction, Inc. Subdivision our File No. 16297 Dear Ms. Maybush: Pursuant to the City's request please find enclosed a proposed Declaration of Restrictive Covenants to be duly executed by Wheaton Construction, Inc. Please contact me with your ^estions, comments or concerns preferably prior to the Monday City Board meeting. At this time I am not sure whether I will be in attendance or whether Mr. Wlrtjes will attend on behalf on Wheaton Construction, Inc. Very truly yours. sbAver, P.A John jWP/wb Enclosure jusi i J_ _ _ _ _ DECLARATION OP REBTRIGTIVE CQVBiniirPfl THIS DECLARATION/ is entered inbo tihls day of July, 1993 by Wheaton Construction, Inc., a corporarlon organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota (hereinafter "Wheaton”). WHEREAS, Wheaton is the current fee owner of certain property described as set forth on Exhibit A attached hereto and Incorporated herein located in Hennepin County, Minnesota; , ^^HEREAS , Wheaton has reguested that the City of Orono approve * of the property into two separate tax parcels (hereinafter referred to as "Parcel A and Parcel B'») the legal descriptions which are sat forth and attached hereto and incorporated herein on Exhibit B; WHEREAS, there is currently existing on Parcel A, a one- family residential dwelling which Is serviced by a septic drain field system as well; WHEREAS, an alternate drain field septic area has been located for future use should the existing drain field septic area fail;&nd f WHE^AS, the future drain field septic area does not conform to the City's setback requirement from the existing well. NOW, TREREPORE, in consideration of the City of Orono granting the aforementioned two lot subdivisions the sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged by Wheaton, Wheaton hereby declares and states as follows: 1.Wheaton, its successors and/or assigns shall replace the existing well currently located on the property and move the well location to a site agreeable to the City of Orono upon the latter of: a. The sale by Wheaton of Parcel B; or b.Failure of the existing septic drain field area; 2. 3. at the sole cost and expense of Wheaton, its successors or assigns. This Agreement shall mind and enure to the benefit of Wheaton and its successors and assigns. This Agreement shall be construed in accordance with applicable Minnesota law. A r This Declaration is' entered into as of the date first set forth above. WHEATOH CONSTRUCTION, INC. By; Its: STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) SS. COUNTY OF _ _ _ _ _ ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledge before me this day of _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _1993 by- - - - - - - -___f theof Wheaton Construction, Inc., a Minnesota Corporation. Notary Public THIS DOCUMENT WAS DRAFTED BY: Morris, Fuller & Seaver, P.A. 525 Southdale Office Centre 6600 France Avenue South Minneapolis, MN 554353 / To:Orono Planning Commission Members W Ron Moorse, City Administrator COUNCIL MEEIii 13 From:Jeanne A. Mabusih, Building & Zoning Administrator JUL 3 2 I'- -’-' Date: Subject: July 8. 1993 #1823 Marge Rossing, 130 Cygnet Place - Variances CITY OF ORONO The application was reviewed by the Planning Commission at both the May 17th and June 21st meetings. At the May 17th meeting, applicant proposed construction of a 20 ’ x 28’ Vh- story addition to the west side of the existing residence requiring street and rear setback variances. Applicant requested to be rescheduled before the Planning Commission at the June 21st meeting as applicant failed to note a 4’ x 12 ’ deck and stair addition to the northeast side of the proposed addition. All property owners notified for the May review were again notified of the amended proposal by applicant. The Planning Commission approved the original request of applicant at the May meeting (review Exhibits M-1-4) and denied the request for the deck (review minutes of June 21, 1993 meeting). In 1989 applicant leceived approval of a setback variance to the rear lot line with the installation of a deck. In addition to the improvements proposed with the current variance application, applicant advises that she proposes to install a 26’ x 38’ detached garage at a total area of 988 s.f. The proposed detached garage will meet the 10 ’ separation between principal struemre and existing detached garage and as structure exceeds 750 s.f., it will meet the 15’ required setback from all lot lines. Please review Exhibit I. The topographic map of the area shows half of the property located within 300 ’ of the Swan Lake tributary. Staff has included the entire lot area to determine the hardcover invento^. List of Exhibits A -Application A-1- Applicant’s Addendum - Request to be at June Planning Commission Meeting B - Property Owners List Plat Map Applicant’s Addendum Survey Submitted with Application #1387 Elevations Floor Plan Proposed Site Plan Topographic Map Resolution No. 1387 Floor Plan of Proposed Deck Elevation C D E F G H I J K L M-1-4 Minutes of May 17th Planning Commission Meeting ( J Zoning File #1839 July 8, 1993 Page 2 1. The following ordinances are pertinent for this review. Section 10.28, Subd. 5 (A) - Rear ana street setback variances required for two-story addition. A. Rear Required = 50’ Proposed = 28.8’ Existing = 11 ’ 4” Variance = 21.2 ’ or 42.2% i : 1' f r- -I 2. B. Street setback Required = 50’ Proposed = 41.14 ’ Existing = 37’ Variance = 8’ 6" or 17.2% C. Rear setback variance for proposed deck Required = 50’ Existing = 11 ’ 4" Proposed deck = 26 Variance for deck construction = 24’ or 48% Section 10.56, Subd, 16 (1) - Hardcover limitations for properties located within the shoreland areas of tributaries. Total lot area = 71,734.5 s.f. or 1.64 acres Allowed = 17,933.7 s.f. or 25% OR Allowed = 21,520.5 s.f. or 30% Proposed = 9,440. 5 s.f. or 13%* ♦House = 2,492 s.f., deck = 1,323 s.f., existing garage garage = 988 s.f. Paved area = 3,887.5 s,f. 750 s.f., proposed 3. Section 10.03, Subd. 9 (C) (2) - Total allowed area of accessory structures = 2,000 s.f. Existing = 750 s.f. Proposed = 1,738 s.f. (750 s.f. + 988 s.f.) Zoning File /I^1839 July 8. 1993 Page 3 Revie>^ of Application Please review the enclosed staff memos of May 17ih and June 21st. The original application seeking approval of the 2-story 20’ x 28’ addition was unanimously approved by the Planning Commission. Major concerns raised during the review was the need for natural screenin'! to buffer exterior yard storage from adjacent residences. Members of Council may rememb-jr in 1987, applicant appeared before the Council to appeal violations of exterior yard storage dealing with the parking of commercial vehicles and other building materials within the residential property. The condition of the yard has been greatly improved over the years as applicant has planted trees within the street and side yards in an attempt to screen the existing accessory structure and parking area. One neighbor to the south of the property appeared before (he Planning Commission at the May meeting and voiced concern with the condition of the yard during the winter months when existing vegetation failed to screen the yard. Planning Commission members noted that the existing accessory structure was still not completed and advised it would be difficult to '•ecommend approval of new construction until former improvement projects were completed. Members also noted that upon their inspection, a large truck and commercial vans were parked at the property. Applicant advised that a large truck was her son ’s who lived in Spring Park. The only member of the household involved in construction was her one son who drove two vans allowed by Orono code. The Planning Commission ’s recommendation of approval at the May meeting was conditioned as follows: 1.Existi.ng detached garage currently under construction was to be completed before a building permit can be issued for the second accessory structure. 2.The second accessory structure was to be completed before building permit could be issued for addition to residential strucmre. 3.Landscape plan to be presented for Council ’s review with type and schedule of plantings. 4.Driveway and parking boundaries were to be physically defined on property in order to elimiriate uncontrolled parking of vehicles on grassed area. Approval was based on the hardships noted by applicant as follows: a. b. c. d. Unusual shape of lot. House located on lot prior to existing zoning setbacks. Principal suaicmre met zoning standards at the time of construction in 1969 and was allowed to be constructed 25 ’ instead of 30’ from the rear lot line. Interior layout of house limits construction of addition to the west side. I I 1 Zoning File #1839 July 8. 1993 Page 4 At the time of the June review, the applicant advised that the existing detached garage had been completed. Review Exhibit H. The applicant proposed the installation of a privacy fence to be placed in front of the existing garage and a gravel area to be installed along the east and north boundaries of the garage. Parking and drive areas were to be physically defined by a split rail fence. Major concern was once again raised by Planning Commission members concerning the condition of the yard. Staff advised that exterior storage problems were really not related to the variance request but should be controlled via the home occupation license and the standards that govern a home occupation use of a residential property. Since the June meeting, the Building Official has sent a letter to the applicant advising of the need for Robert Rossing to apply for a Home Occupation License. In the future, the continued violation of the allowed level of commercial use of the residential property may result in the revocation of Mr. Rossing ’s home occupation license. The majority of the Planning Commission voted to deny the amended variance application seeking approval of the 4’ x 12 ’ deck and stair strucmre to the northeast side of the proposed addition based on the following findings: 1.Approval of this variance would only add to the further abuse of this residential property. 2. Deck proposal should have been included with the original application. Members representing the minority opinion had proposed an approval recommendation that would have reaffirmed the conditions of the original variance approval and once again asked that applicant provide a landscape plan that would include naniral plantings. Options of Action Deny applicant’s multiple variance application for the 20 ’ x 28 ’, 2';^-story addition and 4’ X 12 ’ deck and stair addition; OR To approve the application as proposed by Planning Commission eliminating 4’ x 12 ’ deck and access stair; To approve the setback variances for the 2'/^-story addition and deck. (' A- L Zoning File #1839 July 8, 1993 Page 5 Both options of approval may be subject to one or more of the following conditions 1.Applicant to complete installation of 26’ x 38’ detached garage prior to the City issuing a permit for additions to principal structure in an attempt to eliminate the storage of materials and vehicles in residential yard now stored in attached 2-car garage. 2.Parking and drive areas to be physically defined by split rail fence along north boundaries as shown on site plan (review Exhibit H). 3.Applicant to provide landscape plan providing year-round natural buffer to exterior parking area. 4.Applicant and owner is further placed on notice that the business use of the property shall be subject to standards set forth in the Orono code as it relates to a home occupation and limitations on commercial use of the open yard areas. Council Action To provide concepnial direction to staff so that an appropriate resolution can be prepared for formal action at Council ’s July 26. 1993 meeting. •I To:Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator From: Date: Subject: Jeanne A. Mabasth, Building & Zoning Administrator May 12, 1993 i?1823 Marge Rossing, 130 Cygnet Place - Variances - Public Hearing The applicant has applied for variances to permit construction of a 20’ x 28’ 2'/2-story addition to the west side of the existing residence requiring street and rear setback variances. In 1989 applicant received approval for a setback variance to the rear lot line with the installation of a deck. The applicant also proposes the installation of a 26’ x 30’ detached garage that meets the required 15 ’ setback for structure at 988 s.f. in area. Review E.xhibit I, topographic mapping of the area. Half of the property is located within 300’ of the Swan Lake tributary. Staff has considered the entire lot area for hardcover purposes. The following ordinances are pertinent for this review: 1. Section 10.28. Subd. 5 (A) - Rear and street setback variances required. A.Rear Required = 50’ Proposed = 28.8’ Existing = 11 ’ 4" Variance for new construction = 21.2’ or 42.2% B.Street setback Required = 50’ Proposed = 41.14 ’ Existing = 37’ Variance = 8’ 6" or 17.2% 2.Section 10.56, Subd. 16 (1) - Hardcover limitations for properties located within the shoreland areas of tributaries. Total lot area = 71,734.5 s.f. or 1.64 acres Allowed = 17,933.7 s.f. or 25% OR Allowed = 21,520.5 s.f. or 30% Proposed = 9,440. 5 s.f. or 13%* ♦House = 2,492 s.f., deck = 1,323 s.f., existing garage = 750 s.f., proposed garage = 988 s.f., paved area = 3,887.5 s.f. < "----- Zoning File #1823 May 12, 1993 Page 2 3. Section 10.03, Subdivision 9 (C) (2). Total allowed area of accessory structures =2, Existing = 750 s.f. Proposed = 1,738 s.f. (750 s.f. + 988 s.f.) s.f. List of Exhibits A - Application B - Property Owners List C - Plat Map D - Applicant’s Addendum E - Survey Submitted with Application #1387 F - Elevations G - Floor Plans H - Proposed Site Plan I - Topographic Map - Definition of Shorelands Adjacent to Tributaries J - Resolution #1387 Description of Request Applicant proposes a 28’ x 20’ Vh-siovy addition to the west side of the existing residence requiring rear and street setback variances. In 1989 applicant received approval for a rear setback variance for the deck installed at the north side with the final setback at 11’ 4". Applicant also proposes the installation of a detached garage measuring 26 ’ x 38’ at a total 988 s.f. area. The structure requires a 15 ’ setback from all lot lines and clearly meets the setback standard with 57 ’ setback from the rear and a 64 ’ setbtick from the street lot lines. The detached strucnire will retain the required 10’ separation from borh the principal structure and the existing garage. At the time of the platting of the Swan Lake Subdivision, the minimum area standard was 25,000 s.f and 120’ width at building line. In April of 1969 when the house was constructed on the property, the property was zoned R-IC requiring a minimum of 1 acre and a 140’ width with 35 ’ front, 30’ rear and 10’ side setbacks. The house was placed 25 ’ from the rear lot line instead of the required 30’ (no record of a variance setback). All other required setbacks were satisfied. Review Exhibit I. A third of the property is located within the shoreland area of the adjacent tributary. Staff has considered the total lot area in determining approved hardcover. Total hardcover with proposed improvements is at 9,392.5 s.f. or 13%. At 25% hardcover the property would be allowed 17,933.7 s.f. or at 30% 21,520.5%. Clearly there is no hardcover problem for the property. Zoning File #1823 May 12. 1993 Page 3 Review Exhibit D. Mrs. Rossing reviews the need for the addition and notes the second accessory structure is now needed to house the cars stored in the attached garage now to be converted into living space within the principal structure. As already noted above in the pertinent ordinances, the property with less than 1.99 acres is allowed a total of 2,000 s.f. ot accessory structures. Applicant ’s total accessory structures are proposed at 1,738 s.f. Applicant advises that in addition to the construction of the proposed addition, the design of the roof will be changed and new siding provided for the entire structure. The City has received no comments from the neighbors notified for the variance re' ew, Statement of Hardships Review Exhibit J. The following hardships and findings are appropriate for this review, 1. Unusual shape of lot. 2. House located on lot prior to e.x'sting zoning setbacks. 3. Principal structure met zoning standards at the time of construction in 1969 and was allowed to be constructed 25’ instead ot 30 from the rear lot line. 4. Interior layout of house limits construction of addition to the west side. Issues for Consideration 1.Will the addition to the west have an impact on adjacent neighboring properties? Note property to immediate west is an undeveloped City park. The property to the immediate north (proposed Wirtjes subdivision. Lot 2) is at higher elevations and based on proposed location of house, the addition will have no impact. The City has received no comments from the neighbors notified for tlie variance review. 2.Mrs. Rossing has had a difficult time with maintaining outside storage of varied construction equipment stored on the property. Staff would recommend that approval of the variance include a condition that applicant be required to store all construction vehicles and equipment within accessory structure and if equipmfut is to be stored outdoors that appropriate screening be provided. Options of Action Approval as proposed. Or Conditional approval, OR Denial. To:Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator /CL From: Date: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator June 15, 1993 Subject: #1823 Marge Rossing, 130 Cygnet Place - Request to Review Amended Proposal Tlie Planning Commission reviewed the Rossing application at their May 17th meeting and conditioned approval on the following: a.Existing detached garage currently under construction is to be completed before a building permit can be issued for second accessory structure. b. Second accessory structure must be completed before building permit can be issued for addition to residential structure. c.Landscape plan to be presented for Council’s review with type and schedule of plantings. d.Driveway boundaries and parking areas to be physically defined on property in order to eliminate uncontrolled driving and parking of vehicles on grassed areas. Mrs. Rossing has asked to be rescheduled before the Planning Commission as she omitted the addition of a deck providing access from the upper level bedroom. Written notice has been resent to all affec'ed property owners (Exhibit G). List of Exhibits A B C D E F G Applicant ’s Addendum Site Plan Minutes of Planning Commission of May 17, 1993 Floor Plan Northeast Elevation Staff Memo of May 12, 1993 Renotification Notice Amended Setback Variance Information Section 10.28, Subd. 5 (A) - Rear setback. Required = 50’ Original Proposal = 28.82’ Amended Proposal = 26 ’ Existing = 11’ 4" Variance for new construction = 24 ’ or 4S% ^ . Zoning File /S'1823 June 15. 1993 Page 2 The applicant failed to designate a 4’ wide catwalk/deck providing access from the upper level bedroom with the original proposal. The additional deck will be located 26’ from the rear lot line. The e.xisting deck to the north side is 11’ 4". Review of Landscaping The applicant asks that e.xisting plantings along the south and east side of the property be considered as part of the final landscaping plan. In addition she proposes the installation of a 6’ high solid wood privacy fence along the south side of the existing garage and the installation of gravel along the perimeters of the garage along the north, east and south sides. Note privacy fencing has not been shown enclosing the entire gravel area. Applicant suggests that ladders and scaffolding will be stored within the gravel area. It would seem this would be completely against the intent of the Planning Commission’s recommendation to have all of the son’s work related equipment stored within the interior of structures. If Planning Commission approves the gravel yard expansion for exterior storage, staff would recommend that either manire evergreen plantings or fencing be continued along the gravel area. It is still not clear how parking and drive areas are to be physically designated. Applicant should provide additional inform^ition. The applicant may be asked to consider boulders for defining the drive and parking areas. In earlier discussions during the review, the applicant had considered the installation of a berm from the materials excavated from the foundation for the addition. Applicant has been advised that the majority of the existing berm is located within the road right-of-way and that berm could not be expanded within the right-of-way. Issues for Consideration A. Will the deck to the northeast side of the new addition present new concerns? B. Has applicant ’s landscape plan addressed concerns expressed by the Planning Commission at your May 17th meeting? C.As applicant has not noted that the gravel area would be underlain with plastic or geotechnic fabnc, hardcover facts have not been amended, although hardcover is not an issue for this property now proposed at 13+ %. D. Privacy fence will be located 60 ’ from the street lot line meeting the minimum required setback for fences in e.xcess of 3'/i’. Applicant may install privacy fence without City ’s approval. Plea.se refer to staff memo and minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of May 17th in making your final recommendation. Isv :i CITY OP ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATIONj^^ Initial Application Fee $175.t)0 ($50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Pee $100.00 (no change from original application) Variance for non conforming use $200.00 After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) /V ( ) / V A t 'O 4 i?; i-\ <VTV mc iicm/n i/MWML/ A- — _ ____ . _i/I I awwnccrrc Jk w’«-» V/C. w * f i>»»X I 1 ’V4i. WVW '*•' CDIX/X UCI #*urrri> I <k.hrli f 7? #* X f »/ • V PROPERTY INFORMATION Site Address dj^nei- RECEIPT-TH^^K rCiJ li-i-niTn Ci-|f 7<7* .TT*. I v*T • V uwA Mva /■k /Vv*»/ / / Property Identif. Number (P.I.D. ) HI^0.3 5^— • .. ... . t- 4 ^Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. Dat^ Property Acquired /9S*A_ __(month/year) I (d^ido not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. Present use of property: )( residential _ _ _other (specify) APPLICANT Naune Pf]f^i^GE lfO(r> Phone (home) 4^7:3 ”538/ Phone (work) Address: /30 d\^(f)A/£'T LotOG Zi.xi\^3S(o ONNER (if different than applicant) Ncime Phone (home) Phone (work) Address:City:Zio: DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $ _ _ _ _ _ _ poer'rihe request in detail: — VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area Lot Width Hardcover Lot Coverage *jC Setback: Front Side )C Rear Average Lakeshore Other (specify) HARDSHIP/DBSCRIPTION of UNUSOAL property CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty and unusual property conditions preventing aompliance with Zoning Code requirements ; 1 (attach additional sheets if necessary) All of the following information must be submitted by the—application deadline date in order for your application to be considered cociplet^ 1. _Completed Application Form 2. _ _Certified Property Owners List of owners within 150' (you must obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Govt Center 348-3271). 3. _Plat Map (obtained with property owners list). 4. _Certificate of survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) to include hardcover calculations as required (provide one (1) copi 8J5*'xll for reproduction). 5. Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing grade are proposed (provide one copy 8%"xll"). 6. _S)cetches or plans of floor & elevation views (provide 1 copy 8%"xll"). 7. As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. 8. __^Additional items as may be requested by City staff. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your variance application is not complete__if—the— infor™*tion has not been included. APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment) and/or consultant expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the~best of his/her knowledge. Applicant's Signature Date - 93 OWNERS SIGNATURE The owner hereby ackowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents. Commission members, and Council members for purposes of investiga tion and verification «of this request. j __________ Date 93 *m Owner's Signature _ Applicant must have all suT^mittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Plcuming Conmiission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building s Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. MARGE ROSSIMG 130 Cygnet Place Orono, 55356 (612) 473-2381 Qll on Of_ _H--IORONO June 3, 1993 'JUN 1 1 1993 City Council and Planning Commission City of Orono P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MM 55323 Re: Variance and Permits for Addition and Garage, 130 Cygnet Place Ladies and Gentlemen: I would like to address the conditions noted from the meeting on May 17, 1993. 1. We have completed the existing garage. 2.Upon approval of following proposals, we plan to commence with the new garage. 3. Regarding the landscaping: 1.I propose to build a wooden privacy fence, 20-25' from the front of the existing garage, approximately 40-50' long and 6' high. 2.Next, I propose to lay a gravel base inside that fence and alongside the garage, approximately 30' x 75' to accomodate whatever construction equipment, such as ladders and scaffolding we may need to store. This will also afford us a place to park our boats and trailers and also vehicles. My son carries most of his tools in his van which he drives to and from work each day. 4.Several years ago I planted seedling trees in the area south and west of the existing garage, which included various varieties of evergreen and several other faster growing varieties, some of which are now 4-5' high. This spring we spread wood chips in that area to help keep down the weeds. This should provide very good screen from the road and from the south very soon. When reviewing the plans for the addition, I noticed we had not included a second exit from the bedroom on the upper level of the house. We propose to build a catwalk from the northeast corner to connect with the present catwalk on the north side of the existing house. We will need to build a stairway to get to that upper level. Drawings are attached. I respectfully request your approval of these proposals and look forward to a favorable response from the Planning Commission and the City Council. Yours truly, Ma r ge//Ko s s i/ng ^ « •RUM OATf 04/25/95 BATCH 001 HENNEPIN COlAlTY PROPERTY INFORHATION r.YSTEM PROPERTY OIAJERS LIST€.v PROP AODR 0»MER NAME TAXPAYER NANE/ADDR SB 04-117-25 22 0010 OOlOS . CYGNET PL 6 J EHALT ETAL GREGORY J EHALT 105 CYGNET PLACE LONG LAKE Ml 55556 ■ V A*''-f "i PROP ADDR V OMIER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR6 • SB 04-117-2S 22 0020 00160 CYGNET PL P.A DEBERNAROl A J L OLSON J L OLSON A P A OEBERNARDZ 160 CYGNET PL LONG LAKE Ml 55556 f-V PROP AODR OMCR NAME TAXPAYER NAHS/AOOR SB 04-117-2S 22 002S 0S045 NATERTOMI RO BRUCE C A KATHRYN S HALL BRUCE C A KATHRYN S HALL S045 NATERTOMI RD ORONO Ml 55556 r>I • *. *• • r . € T. >:•' % s % •t « . «■ ^ ** • ;i» i i , » . » * 9 ’. ♦.nv ... •* * ’ *' ' • ' ■ V ‘i ‘ • . ‘ V 1 •- . \ • • *v G. •• ■ 4 ^ •*. V- fTl • * . ’ ' •. S ' ‘ ,1*K ) ; * '• t'- -V V 7. . - - • Q,; , w « . . t* ^ \vf ’ . * • •' 'N * * U-■'' . •*•••' 0. ........... V ■ O” '■! 4 *•», * * i A IV /v ' ' * ■■ ' * r «.• .'i t • * ' •• «■ './*«■ jAtaaAlliMi REPORT NO. PI4SS401 , ..PAGE 150 04-117-25 22 001100155 CYGNET PLH R ANOERSSON A E E MOPIARTYH R ANOERSSON A E E HORtARTY155 CYGNET PL LONG LAKE Mi 55556 50 04-117-25 22 0025 00150 CYGNET PL MARGARET D R0SSIN6 MARGARET D ROSSING 150 CYGNET PL LONG LAKE Ml 55556 56 04-117-25 22 0012 •♦00145 CYGNET PL #. t* \♦AN*A E BLOEMENOAAL ETAL • •• <» * •ARTHUR E BLOEMENOAAL •RT I BOX 50IF ,• • * LONG LAKE Ml 55556 • • --iXf 58 04-117-2S 22 0027 \ ‘ i-’ .05005 NATERTOMI RO ■ A'iHHEATON CONSTRUCnON INC • VSTEVEN A MARGO MIRTJES 1 V ' 5005 NATERTOMI RO • • LONG LAKE Ml 55556 * t '•V.f" . ’• f so 04-117-25 24 0006 00275 OLD CRYSTAL BAY RO S G R A 0 K COFFIN GORDON A BARBARA COFFIN 5025 MAtERTOIAI RD ORONO Ml 55556 ' • , V V • , * -V • 1 TOTAL BATCH 001 00008 •• »> ■ t J » . « » ‘ V . 1 . !• il V‘ -5 V ' * ■; ■ ■•.■.r'-V--.' / • 'V*• * ■ • f I • ■ V 9 9 • I ’ * .. ••b‘‘ r -r- • * f - * .7. A . ♦ • ' 4 V- . *: .W \. ■ .w.—: * ' I I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE ANO TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORHATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS ‘ ’ OF THE HEMIEPIN COMITY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION, TO THE BEST OF MY KNOHLEDGE ANO BELIEF. / ^ ~ DATE .'•p- :• , .rr» * . ^ i •. ?, ^ * *\V * V‘ •r * ^ ' 1- . ..•T .-AV ‘ ♦ A :• • i ;• f- 6 . **- V; • • • ; .• * ’ ■ > ‘ '• i't ».*?-5-rVripr. . '■M: ry V.i,7P'- *.f ?*A . ' *I MARGE ROSSIMG 130 Cygnet Place Orono, MM 55356 (612) 473-2381 April 22, 1993 D City Council and Planning Commission City of Orono P.O. Box 66 .« -rr « . Crystal Bay, 55323 J J w - Re: Variance and Permits for Addition and Garage, 130 Cygnet PI Ladies and Gentlemen: I a requesting to build these additions to accomodate ray brother and his possessions. My Mother passed away in 1991 and I was appointed Personal Representative for her estate. My brother, who cannot read and write, was always taken care of by my Mother. After her passing, I was appointed his guardian by the Sibley County Court. He is disabled and unable to work and receives Social Security. My brother inherited her house in Arlington, Minnesota, which with the limited amount of Social Security he gets, he cannot afford to live there. Also because he does not drive, I am required to drive to Arlington almost weekly. My biggest concern is that he might get sick and not tell me, and even if he does tell me, I am at least an hour away. Therefore, I have chosen to sell the house in Arlington and move Eugene into my home. Most of the addition to my home will be for his benefit. We are hoping to get permission from Sibley County to use Eugene's funds for this addition. So far this plan is looking very favorable and that this request will be granted. My children are in various construction fields and will provide most of the labor for this project. Since we are changing the roof line on the house and because the present roof is just about due to be replaced, we will reroof the entire house. The present siding is also deteriorated, so that will also be replaced. Because our present garage will become part of the house, we will need a new garage to house our vehicles. We propose to start with the garage so we will have storage during construction. Two of ray sons have had considerable experience installing sewer hook-ups. In fact they installed ray present septic system in 1984, that has been working perfectly. Because this addition requires that I hook up to our new sewer, I respectfully request that _I be issued the permit to hook up and have my sons do that while excavating for the addition. We can use the dirt from the excavating to fill the old tanks. This should save me considerable $ and because ray sons are so knowledgeable in this field, all requirements of the City will be met. I am trying to carry out my Mother's wishes to take care of my Brother as best I can. I am also operating with budget constraints, so will appre ciate your timely and favorable per-raission to proceed with this addition. Thank you for your time and effors for this project. ^rs erul)^ , ^os r* —Marge tossing I CERTIFICATE . OF SURVEY ^\^a6g^ p.nssiN6 L£6AL b£iCRl?7ioN ijOTi I ^ 2,, "ZLDCX 3, Su»ftN LfiKS flJJ/i-ion, H£NNfPlN^ CauriT'i n»/vrg \ O * IRON MON. SETC » WOOD STAKE PLACED ®-“- ■ BEARINGS ON ’’”°'’<=®“rF?ooTElIS? ASSUMED DATUM---------------E^. IRON MON. INPLACE GARAGE FLOOR ELEV. TOP BLOCK ELEV. DRAINAGE 000.0 » EXI§T. ELEV. (O00.0.j» PROPOSED ELEV. ppo Q - EXIS ■. & PRO^-------- ______ ' JQS H ,SCHOBORG I JlND SURVEYING iNCi 972-3221 RL I. 00* 2C8 Ccuno. MN SS32S 1 hereby certify that this plan, survey or report wm prepared by me or under my direct supervision J a duly Registered Land Surveyor under the laws of the State of MlnnesQiaf^ ^ Date: .— /pad _____ Registration No. 14700 . * I I. V- .^4 X . - n t-V^’^ 3-. \ * f '.: m".■/..':- t ^ • T Tf ' ! j j d «iiL . i• ) •• 1 1 » * 'H. i / rjK 133 tr? c ;c f i / % V —X V y 3 o -4 't. S^4 Q'i:S- £=: _^v ST !•0? * I .*>• 1) .V .'» r n' « « * s J I* ’ * * * I 4 .V • • f ■/r ?; r ic\\s :h Tt o Sc7 » ,f f f C c Cc ? G) r» 0 •s C7 0o 7> ^ A#%. w fJ ■ /i’ CITY ‘ ,OP .• ORONQ • V./. y 4/-,7^77 City of ORONO RESOLUTIOM OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. *61*» I'l A \ ► m ' r V # • •% « A SSSOU7TZOV GSAVTIVO A> AITBB-m-rACT VAXIAKX TO NinnciPAZ. lonac coos SaCTXO* 10.3t, 8OBOIVI8Z0I8 S (A) PXLS 11387 VHBUA8, Margaret D. Roaslog (haralnaftar 'the applicant”) la th« ewnar of tha property located at 130 Cygnet Place within the City of Orsno (hereinafter "City ”) and legally deacrlbed aa lota 1 and 2, Block 3, 8wan lake Addition, Hennepin County, Mlnneaota (hereinafter 'the property*)! and WHBUA8, the applicant haa applied to the City for an after-'tb*' fact variance to Monlclpal Zoning Code Section 10.28, Subdlvlalona 5 (A) to paralt a deck reconatructed without the benefit of a building peralt to reaialn that la located 11*4* froa the rear lot line Inatead of SO* aa required by the ordinance. ■0«, TH8MFOR8, BB IT RB80LVED by the City Council of Orono, Hlnneaotai FI>DI«C8 1. Thla application waa reviewed aa Zoning Pile 11387. zl 2. The property la located In the RR-IB Single Paally Rural Realdentlal Zoning Dlatrlct requiring 2 acrea In area. The property conalatn of acrea and waa created prior to the current zoning atandarda. •. . 3. The Orono Planning Coamlaalon reviewed thla applicatloa on March * vj' 20, 1989, and recoaaended approval of the after-tho'-fact varlasea baaed upon the following findlngai ■ ^ A) Dnuanal abape of lot. V \ .viJ'j i 1v.«5l B) Bouae located on lot prior to ezlatinq sonlng atandarda. The’ raar aetback of the principal atructure la 2S* where the current code requlrea a 50' aetback. . v,______ Z,ocatlon of houae on lot and Interior floor plan reatrlota eonatructlon of deck atructure. eaat and aoath alday PM* I of 4 ^ A . e . . _ 1a# * A a ^ t* 1 ’ 'Is- V Clf V i ■■ r'oF RONO Citv of ORONO HtSOLUTION OF THE CITY COUSCIL ^0 4. Th« City Council ha» conticJarad thla apcllcation Includimj th« tindingi and racoaiaandatlona of tha Planning Comaiaalon, raportt by City staff, co«na«nta by tha applicant and tha affact of tha aftar-tha- fatrt varitnca on tha haalth, aafaty and walfara of tha coaMunlty. 5. Tha City Council iinda that tha conditions ax-stlng on thi« proparty ara paculiar to it and do not apply ganarally to othar proparty in this zoning diatricti that granting tha aftar-tha-fact varianca would not advaraaly affact tra<’flc conditions, light, air nor poaa a fira hazard or othar dangar to nalghboring propartyi would not starely aarva as a convanianca to tha applicant, but Is nacasaary to allavlata a damonstrabla hardship or difficulty) is nacasssry to prasarva a substantial proparty right of tha applicant) and would ba in kaaping with tha spirit and intant of tha Zoning Coaprahansiva Plan of tha City. CO»CLOSTO«8, OKDES AMD COWDITTOMS oning C oda and V? i: Basttd upon on# or mor# of th# finding# not#d «bov#, th# Orono City Council h#r#by grant# an aft#r-th#-fact virianc# to th# Municipal Zoning Cod# Sactlon 10.28, 3ubdivi#lon# 5 (A) tc p#rmlt a d#ck con#tructad without a building parait to ramain at 11'4 “ from th# r#ar lot lln#, •ubjact to th# following condition#: 1. Authorlti## grantad by thl# r##olt .ion run with th# proparty not with th# #pplicant, but ar# p#rmi##iv# only and BU#t lijcaiciiad by application for a building parait within on# y#ar of th# data of Council #pproval/ or thi# varianca will axpira on that dat# (April 10, 1990). 2. Violation of or non-comp 11 anca with #ny of tha tarm# and conditiona of thia varianca ahall con#tituta a violation of tha aoning coda, ahall automatically tarminata any authority grantad harain, and ahall ba puniahabla a# a odadaisaanor. 3. Tha undaraignad applicant na# undaratood and haraby agraaa to tha tama of thia raaolution and on b#half of haraalf, , har haXxa#. auccaaaora and aaaign#s^«y haraby ^ *'r.solution In th. c/iain of tltls of •tbo ’'pTopirty.V • ^ -j .-s • • * V ' •4" Pag# 2 of I m V a 9 t- / ^ - • r.• V & ____T/ •.,ar*r CITYOF ORONO T* V* »isnsi »- •-“ •^' 'i - '* <*i •‘^ . » ‘I" i ^ ■' • -f f AVt ▲ 2^' ^ »V. ’ E‘V K-> _» I V«-*-f___* ^ • * -mt.xjJf , ^ -.1 ■' •’ « % \ \ MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEcTING held may 17, 1993 ZONING FILE 1M822 - CONT. ’! a“f ;3 r ... .ow,e.te vo,,a na. Mayor Callahan questioned how access is gained to .ne orooer.,. 1^,,^ an 3-cess easement running Prueter answered he thought ne had an a-cess parallel to the railroad tracKS. (i»5) <M823 MARGE ROSSING, JaRIA^Ce" PUSUc'hEARING 7:37 - 8:,4 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. Marge Rossing was oresent. Mabusth explained the ^PPlicaht proooses a 20x28’^ rhr^O.‘teprra'tronn“erbacr^fro.^Vd^l^^^^^^^^ -- - hardcover or structural coverage problems. . ^ aHHi*inn is to accommodate the care of her Rossing explained the needed as the existing attached brother. The detached ^ "esidence.garage will become a part o. uhe residence w4 will be stored in the new garage and notedPeterson questioned what will be sto ■ j 3 inspection. construction equioment on the property uiset there to faci I i tate the clean up Rossing stated the j | | be stored on the property,of the property, and none will oe sto Mabusth noted the encroachment onto the Wirtjes property. Rossing noted those items have been removed. Peterson duestic.ted the need for an additional garage. Rossing noted the large detacned garage ,s storage area for beats. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD MAY 17, 1993 ZONING FILE #1823 - CONT. Clair BIoemendaaI, 145 Cygnet Place, testified that the procerty is an eyesore in the neighborhood and has been for many years. She expressed concern that this proposal would only add to tfiat condition. Rowlette questioned the normal size of a three stall garage. Mabusth stated a three stall garage is typically 23 to 30’, and the proposal is oversized. She noted the existing garage exterior is not f i nished. Rossing indicated they hope to do so this summer. Smith inquired as to how long the garage has been uncompleted. Rossing answered two years. Berg asked who the contractor is for the proposal. Rossing said her sons would be aoing the addition. Nolan asked about the materials to be used on the addition. Rossing stated the garages and addition vill be sided with tne same material as the house. Rowlette questioned whether there are time const rue tion. ! imitat ~ Mabusth indicated the permit requires an inspection to oe made at least every 6 months or the permit will expire. Rossing indicated she had not been contracted by the BuiIding staff prior to last week regarding the completion of the existing garage. Rowlette said she understood the neighbors’ complaints and suggested screening along the road. Pederson asked if the driveway has been included in the Hardcover calculations ano noted its consicerable size. Mabusth indicated that was included, but added it is appropriate at this time to control the use of the grass for parking of vehicles. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD MAY 17, 1993 ZONING FILE #1823 - CONT. Bloemendaal noted there currently is * "9 Mabusth inouired if there is a business being run out of the home. H +Kaaro i<? hut the equipment otner than a van is s?“ed^off^sit^ She noted sometimes her otner son will stop by with his dump truck. Berg asked if a certificate is issued upon completion. Mabusth answered only with new resibenti*' const ruetion. and a final would only be required for this project. Peterson noted ,f the permit ^es 'h"t on I y ens.pes the C.ty that work will not continue until another is issu-O. the project wi I I continue. Chair schroeder expressed concern about the use of the garages. Mabusth expressed the difficulty tfje ' e'xl sVi nV°at tachedShe Questioned where the eouipment from the existing farage will be stored until the new garage is completed. Rossing said she proposes the construction of the garage prior to ths addition. Nolan felt they should require a screening plan. Mabusth noted the applicant in - Vh/;o‘'ad“ay“Jnd"%he "pfint ?n%" o? the construction of a berm along loS cupic yards evergreens, but because it Of fill, a conditional use permit is necessary. Rossing noted the sc'ub trees along the roadway on the second lot need to be removed. Lindquist suggested they approved Counci I along v/ith the apol i cat ion and tha^ tne p oj in phases. A MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD MAY 17, 1993 ZONING FILE #1823 - CONT. Rossing said she would like to commence with the addition as soon as possible, but noted she does not want to construct the berm at this time, but would like permission to place the fill from the addition where the berm would be located. Mabusth clarified that the Planning Commission would like to combine the landscaping with this request and that she could not stock pile fill from construction without a conditional use permit. Peterson approveIt was moved by Rowlette, seconded by AppIication #1823 for Marge Rossing, 130 Cygnet Place, for rear and street set*^ ack variances to construct an addition to the existing residence, on the hardships that the lot is an unusual shape and the house was constructed prior to adoption of the existing ordinance, subject to the project being staged beginning with the completion of the existing detached garage, and second the proposed detached garage be completed prior to commencing with the addition and a landscape clan to be presented to Council to be completed over the upcoming years, and the driveway boundaries identified. Ayes 7, nays 0. (#6) #1824 ERIC & SHELLY LILJEQUIST, 2490 birch lane - VARIANCES - PUBLIC HEARING 8:59 - 9:18 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mai ' ing were noted. Mr. and Mrs. Liljequist were present. Mabusth explained the applicants seek a street setback variance for a detached garage to be located in the street yard of the lakeshore lot. She noted that during the inspection of the ^ ' found it necessary to back out onto Baldur Park at i ntersection, and suggested they need to remedy this situat City Engineer has provided three options: 1. align the garage and drive with the house; 2. construct the garage so the doors face away from Birch Lane and angle the garage aligning it with the property boundary; or 3. directly angle the garage toward Birch Lane. Mabusth indicated the applicant has requested hardcover be a minimum as he wishes to complete future improveme i. t house. TO: FROM: DATE Mavor Callahan and Orono Council Members Ron Moorsc, City Administrator Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator July 9. 1993 COUNCIL MEEHNG JUL 1 2 1553 cnv OF ORONO SUBJECT: #1830 Richard Oorlog, 1058 Loma Linda Avenue - Variances - Resolution Brief Review of Apphco^ion The application involves the reconstruction of a lower I6*x26* lakeshore deck and the replacement of an upper level deck with an ll'/2’x9’ enclosed dining room and a connecting upper level dec' at 9’xl4 ‘/:’. The enclosed upper level addition will be located 16’ in front of the average lakeshore setback lii.» for principal strucaires. Please review Exhibit J. The deck structure shall be located 10' in front of the average lakeshore setback line established by the decks on the adjacent properties. The lower deck will encroach the lakeshore protected area by 5’ but will extend no closer to the lakeshore than the existing grade level deck. Hardcover excesses exist within the 0-75’ and 75-250’ setback area. The 75-250’ setback area has 92.9% as a result of the extensive bimminous paving and gravel landscape areas underlain with plastic. The adjacent neighbors have been shown the improvement plans and voiced no concerns with the proposal. Applicant claims the neighbor to the south created a major impact on the use of his lakeshore decks when the neighbor ’s lakeshore deck was extended closer to lake. The Planning Commission reviewed the issues of the earlier 1990 after-the-fact variance review foi the neighboring property noting the similarity of hardcover excesses (review Exhibits K 3iid L). Members concurred that reconstruction of the lower level deck where portions encroach into the 0-75’ setback area would be more acceptable if all plastic within the 0-75’ and 75-250’ was removed. Members also noted that the 10 s.f. of grade level stair leading from the reconstructed lower deck could be easdy relocated out of the 0-75 setback area. The Planning Commission recommended unanimous approval of the multiple variance application subject to the condition that all plastic beneath the landscape rock located within the 0-75’ and 75-250’ setback area be removed and noted that the gravel area adjacent to garage where boat is stored continue to be considered hardcover and that staff was to make the necessary adjustments in hardcover inventory. The enclosed resolution has been drafted per the Planning Commission ’s apprt)val recommendation including the hardships noted by applicant and Uie findings and conditions noted by the Planning Commission. Please review the minutes of the June 21st meeting and the staff memo for more background on the review. Zoning File #1830 July 9. 1993 Page 2 The amended hardcover facts per Planning Commission recommendation are reviewed as follows. Refer to Exhibit J. 0-75’ setback area = 3.750 s.f. Allowed = 0 Existing = 423 s.f. or 11.2% Per Planning Commission recommendation hardcover= 123 s.f. or 3.28% 75-2o0’ setback area = 6.230 s.f. Allowed = 1.557.5 s.f. or 25% PerPlaming Commission recommenda’ion hardcover^ 3-'^95-5 s.f. (includes removals as shown on Exiiibit J, and addition of 10 s.f. for relocated stairs) Total hardcover Area = 9.980 s.f. Existing = 6.215 s.f. or 62% Proposed = 3.918.5 s.f. or 39.2% A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10 03, SUBDIVISION 14 (C) AND SECTION 10.22, SUBDIVISIONS 1 (B) AND 2 FILE /j^isao WHEREAS, Richard S. Oorlog and Karen J. Oorlog (hereinafter "the applicants") are owners of tl:- property located at 1058 Loma Linda Avenue within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as follows; Lot 5. Loma Linda, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicants have applied to the City for variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.03, Subdivision 14 (C) and Section 10.2:, Subdivision 1 (B) and 2 to permit the construction of a lower level deck at 16’x26’ requiring a 10’ setback variance to the average lakeshore setback line determined by decks on adjacent properties and 9 xl 1 dining room addition requiring a 16’ setback variance to the principal structure average lakeshore setback line where no such encroachments are allowed and a connection upper deck at 9 ’xl4'-^’. The 16’x26’ deck will be reconstructed within 70’ of the lakeshoie where a 75’ setback is required. Structural improvements will result in 1,896.6 s.f. or 19% structural coverage where 19% exists and where 15% is allowed. The improvements will require the following hardcover variances: within the 0-75’ setback area, hardcover is proposed at 123 s.f. or 3.28% where 423 or 11.2% exists and where non*' is allowed; within the 75-250’ setback area. 3,795.5 s.f. or 60.9% is proposed and where 5,792 s.f. or 92.9% exists and where 25% is allowed. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #1830. Page 1 of 6 The property is located in the LR-IB. Zoning District requiring I acre in area. The property consists of 9,980 s.f. or .229 acres. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on June 21, 1993, and recommended approval of the multiple variances as amended based on the following findings and hardships; A. B C. F. The existing residence was constructed in 1971 prior to development of standards for the development of lakeshore properties. The former owner had obtained lot area and lot width variances in October of 1971 to permit residential construction. Based on the site plan approved with the building permit in 1971. the principal structure was located 68’ from the shoreline. Hardcover within the 0-75 ’ setback area has been reduced by 300 s.f. or 7.92%. Hardcover within the 75-250 ’ setback has been reduced by 1,986.5 s.f. or 31.8%. The adjacent property owners notified of these improvements have voiced no objection. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variance would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicants, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicants; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. Page 2 of 6 5. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City statf. comments by the applicants and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.03, Subdivision 14 (C) and Section 10.^^, Subdivision 1 (B) and 2 to permit the reconstruction of a grade level 16 ’x26’ deck and a 9 ’xl4'/:’ upper level deck and ll'/^’x9 ’ enclosed addition, subject to the following conditions: I All hardcover removals as scheduled for removal as shown on Page 6 of this resolution shall be completed prior to the footing inspection for new construction. 2. Authorities granted by this variance run with the property not with the applicants, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit within one year of the date of Council approval, or this variance will expire on that date (July 12, 1994). 3. Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this resolution shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 4. The undersigned applicants have 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. Pace 3 of 6 Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 12th day of July, 1993 ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk Edward J. Callahan. Jr.. Mayor Property Owner(s) STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) ss. The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this I2th day of July, 1993, by Edward J. Callahan. Jr. & Dorothy M. Hallin, Mayor & City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation ?.i»d said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public Page 4 of 6 STATE OF NUNNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this day of . 199 before me a .'/oiary Public withinand for said county, personally appeared________________________________ known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing'instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their/ free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this day of , 199 before me a Notary Public wiUunand for said county. described in and who ex^ the foregoing inimiment, andicknowledgcd that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBUC Page 3 of 6 Page 6 of 6 TO: FROM: DATE: Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator June 14, 1993 SUBJECT: #1830 Richard Oorlog, 1058 Loma Linda Avenue - Variances - Public Hearing The applicant proposes the reconstruction of a lower 16 ’x26' and the replacement of an open upper level deck at the lakeside with an enclosed dining room expansion of the kitchen at ll'/i’x9’ and the remainder an open deck at 9'xl4'/i\ The new construction will involve encroachment of the lower deck within the 0-75’ setback area. An average lakesbore setback variance is needed as second story construction and lower level deck will encroach setback line. Applicant has not provided hardcover facts but the detailed survey staff confirmed at site inspection finds extreme excesses within the 75-250’ setback zone and hardcover within the 0- 75 ’. The follow ’ ’ ordinances are pertinent for the review of this application: Section 10.03, Subdivision 14 (C) - Lot coverage. Total area = 9,980 s.f. Allowed = 1,497 s.f. or 15% Existing = 1.896.6 s.f. or 19% Proposed = 1,896.6 s.f. or 19% (425.4 s.f. or 4.26% deck reconstruction) Section 10.22, Subdivision 1 (B) - Average lakeshore setback, refer to Exhibit J A. B. Principal structure - for enclosed dining room addition, refer to average lakeshore setback of principal structures Allowed = 0 Proposed = 16 ’ 1 . Deck replacement based on average lakeshore setback of decks on adjacent properties Allowed = 0 Existin'; = 10 ’ Pro, ,.ed = 10 ’ Lakeshore setb'»ck Allowed = 0 Existing - 70 ’ Proposed = T Variance = 5’ or 6.6% Zoning File #1830 June 14. 1993 Page 2 C.Hardcover inventory 0-75’ setback area = 3,750 s.f. Allowed = 0 Existing = 423 s.f. or 11.2% Proposed = 433 s.f. or 11.5% (addition of grade level stairs at 10 s.f.) 75-250’ setback area = 6,230 s.f. Allowed = 1,557.5 s.f. or 25% Existing = 5,792 s.f. or 92.9% Proposed = 5,792 s.f. or 92.9% No change proposed List of Exhibits A - Application B - Property Owners List C - Plat Map D - Adjacent Property Owners Acknowledgment Forms E - Survey F - Floor Plan G - Elevation H - Elevation from 1971 Building Petiri.i I - Site Plan Approved with 1971 Building Permit J - Staff Sketch K - Survey of Hardcover Removals for Property Owner to West, 3/90 Variance Review L - Resolution 2904 - Application #1584 Description of Request In November of 1971 a building permit was issued for the existing residence. The former owner had obtained a lot area and lot width variance in October of that year. The owner had originally applied for a setback variance for a detached garage within the street yard but withdrew the application. The e.xisting garage structure was to meet the required 10 side setback. In tlie current application, the applicant propos«*s the replacement of the upper and lower decks on the lakeside of the lesidence. The upper level deck shall be replaced with a 9 xll'>^ enclosed dining room area and a 9’xl4'/i’ upper deck. The lower deck shall be rebuilt in its present confomration at 16 ’x26’ with new grade level stairs at approximately 2'/^-3’ in width located ir. d.e ‘ '-■'5’ setback area. Zoning File /!^1830 June 14, 1993 Pace 3 A third of the lower deck is located within the 0-75’ setback area, review Exhibit I. Accc'^ding to the site plan approved with the building permit, the principal structure was located 68’ from the shoreline. Review Exhibit H, at that time the upper and lower decks were approved 10’ beyond the principal structure. The code did not require a 75 ’ setback. In fact, there was no specific lakeshore setback merely rear and front setbacks. The front and rear setback was 35’ for this specific zoning district in 1971. The majority of the replacement structure is located in front of the average lakeshore .setback line. Staff has shown two setback lines, one for accessory structures and the other for principal strucmre. Review Exhibit D, note adjacent property owners have reviewed the plans and staff has received no comments or questions from adjacent neighbors. The enclosed dining room addition will have an impact on the residence to the west side. The upper and lower deck replacements will not change from the current structure. The applicant has not submitted a hardcover inventory although it was not very difficult for staff to determine the non-hardcover areas within the 75-250’ setback zone. The applicant may have assumed since he was not proposing any changes to hardcover that there was no need to provide a hardcover inventory. Staff has been in contact with the applicant and plans to meet with him prior to the meeting so that we may discuss possible removal of existing hardcover on the property. Mr. Oorlog will cenainly remember his neighbor s after-the-fact variance review in 1990. Staff has enclosed a copy of the hardcover removals site plan developed during the review of that application. Exhibit K. In the case of the neighbor, he proceeded without a building permit to complete the construction of a replacement deck within the lakeshore yard and had increased the lakeward extension considerably. Staff has advised the applicant that we could not recommend any action on the application in its present form. At the time of your meeting, applicant will have developed a schedule for hardcover removals and final hardcover facts will be presented at your meeting or with your final packet submittals on the 18th. Additional Comments The access stairs located within the lakeshore protected area can easily be relocated within the 75-250’ setback area. This can be done by relocating access stairs to west side of lower deck. Note the walkway that provides access to lakeshore yard is a shared access between the propeny owmer to the west. The setback for the shoreline has been determined at the rip rap area. Upon your inspection of the propeny. Planning Conunission members are encouraged to review existing landscape improvements to determine what hardcover improvements are nonessential and could be removed with minimal impact on property. The gravel areas adjacent to the detached garage have no landscaping. The gravel area along the west side of the residence has extensive landscaping. Clearly the goal of the Planning Commission shall be to reduce hardcover on this .229 acre parcel. ch 'ir \ u ■nII C» • ! 0 0 • »..7 \Atr CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee $175.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $100.00 (no change from original application) Variance for non conforming use $200.00 After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) PROPERTY INFORMATION 1058 Loma Linda Ave.Site Address_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ CD7V r*r I i/I c* 7 i/aIr C /"C'lL J X ww Vi. V'VV^VV Ti f rrv ♦V' A exit ^ # w* • W ,-Lrri' 7J 17=^ <viWlfWuA tu A I w* • W . C .* 1' V C* 7« “Lf> 4/ V* VT'i i - “ T “G’'.‘i I*'I•'! t V.* ^ 7 • T • t rr*. CW.I . • c* • c Vw*/ A u*/ Property Identif. Number (P.I.D.) Lin^- - Attach legal description to application if not included on required.survey. Date Property Acquired_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __(mcnth/year) I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. Present use of property: X residential _ _ _other(specify) Zoning District:_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ APPLICANT Name Phone (home) 6I2M72^ Richard F. Oorlog Address: 1058 Loma Linda Ave.City: Phone (work) 612/936-2520 55364OronoZip: OWNER (if different than applicant)Phone (home) Name Same Phone (work) Address:City:Zip: DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Est imated Construction Cost Describe request in detail: Replace existing d€Ck - same size and shape Add enclosed space 9'xl1.6' from existing deck piping_rc£)m VARIANCES REQUIRED _ _ Lot Area _ _ Setback: X Front Other (specify) Lot width Side Hardcover _ _Lot Coverage Rear Average Lakeshore EUUIDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty and unusual property on«? nrpventina comoliance with Zoning Code requirements ._----------- ^X 1 s 11 ng ftrfirture - fek lurber Is weak and needs to be replaced before semegne gets hurt_________ Upper deck space to becare part of kitchen/dininq roan so that ve can seat DecpJp Nien vp have rrnjxm. additiaial hardcover required in this request, ^ip tn nQinH-.'.r 1^0 — (attach additional sheets if necessary) required submittals ftll of the following information must be submitted by the application deadline date in order for your application to be considered complete: 1. _Completed Application Form 2. Certified Property Owners List of owners within 150' (you must obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Govt Center 348-3271). 3. _Plat Map (obtained with property owners list). 4. Certificate of survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) to include hardcover calculations as required (provide one (1) copy 8%''xll" for reproduction). 5. Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing grade are proposed (provide one copy 8%"xll"). 6. Sketches or plans of floor & elevation views (provide 1 copy 8%"xll'*). 7. As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. 8. __^Additional items as may be requested by City staff. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that youz ’ variance application is not complete if the above information has not been included. APPLICANT’S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Adminxstrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment) and/or consultant expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and corract to the best^f his/her knowledge. Applicant's Signature / -Date OWNERS SIGNATURE , . The owner hereby ackowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents. Commission members, and Council members for purposes of investiga tion and verificatioa-^f this reqt^st Owner's Signature Date Applicant must have Jw submittals into the^ity offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Cammission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. t . RUW DATE 05/15/93 :. BATCH OOA• PROP ADDR 'J **v0KNER naheTAXPAYERKAHE/ADDR 5S 08-117-25 25 0005 01056 LOHA LINDA AVE DONALD D EKEBERG I HIFE DONALD D EKEBERG 1056 LOHA LINDA AVE HOUND MN 55564 HErt4EPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATIOrJ SYSTEM PROPERTY 0»^4ERS LIST38 08-117-23 25 000601058 LOHA LINDA AVE R F OORLOG S K J OORLOG RICHARD F S KAREN J OORLOG 1058 LOHA LINDA AVE MOUND MN 55364 REPORT NO. PI455401 PAGE 958 08-117-25 25 000701066 LOHA LINDA AVE R F RADUNZ ACM RADUNZ ROBERT F RADUNZ 5505 RIVER BLUFF CIR BLOOMINGTON MN 55457 . .* .•4. PROP ADDR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR i . V PROP ADDR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR 58 08-117-25 25 0008 01074 LOHA LINDA AVE R K MATTSON ETAL ROGER K MATTSON 1074 LOMA LINDA AVE HOUND MN 55364 58 08-117-25 25 0021 01119 LOMA LINDA AVE N J A C J POLLARD HILLIAN J A CAROL J POLLARD 1119 LOHA LINDA AVE HOUND m 55564 t ' ^ ' 58 08-117-25 25 0025‘ \ PROP ADDR 01040 LOHA LINDA AVE ONTRER NAME C 0 HOLCOMBE A H J HOLCOMBE TAXPAYER C DOUGLAS HOLCOI«Ect;, NAHE/ADDR 1D40 LOHA LINDA AVE • . HOUND HN S5SAA • .r %* t- » •» 1•i, *,A •4' ‘« •• . > ’ < ’• \ • • • L -.s • 1' * * •. , **. • . '/ ► 'f J . , • > *• ' «. • i :it' « 1 <•.• • 1 4 r / ♦ '• • .• 1 i ♦ . ■ * -.; * i •’■ .-''V % •J V '* 1 D • • / $• • • /•*• • 8 *;v • :1 1 *. • .1#• • •1 ♦• ;' •> '•J . • . ; •«• • Vc', ■V ’■ . i • • * ♦ . t ; /' ■■ f . J * (r-- • .-i. '- ■ \ . ■ . f . . # V4! . ’ *./ .. • V. . ^ ^ ■ V ' * ’ ' rut •' . : • 58 08-117-23 25 0009 01082 LOMA LINDA AVE J A H LASCHUK JOHN LASCHUK 1062 LOMA LINDA AV HOUND MT4 55364 38 08-117-25 23 0022 01045 LOMA LINDA AVE T G OSTERBERG/K J OSTERBERG TIMOTHY U'/CRISTI J OSTERBERG 1045 LOMA LINDA AVE HOUND m 55564 TOTAL BATCH 004 00010 38 08-117-23 23 0010 01090 LOMA LINDA AVE H H BOCKHAm A N L BOCKHAffI HILLIAM H BOCKMANN 1090 LOMA LINDA AVE MOUt4D MT4 55364 38 08-117-25 23 0024 01038 LOMA LINDA AVE R H SANDLER ETAL R H SANDLER 1038 LOMA LINDA LANE MOUND m 55364 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 JA)<ATION» TO TJI^ BEST OF HY K^40I4LEDGE AND BELIEF. DAT ♦ . • H'-' ■■ I , • 1^.. . jif'- ti ■ ? • ' •I '•;P' l^iv' “V ‘ ••'4* ’ ' ^ i , ■ * ^ VI• % • . • ’ :r . * ^ ' .• * ; 1. »i 'Sb'.w*-*.* • # \ \ J1 . N • • • 1 * ■ ► • • M. * • f ••- , . • **.• *. •• »-«J' ' ! .**. * I \ \ \ \ • - ••‘i> •* •- « ^ *■*•••%• ••<•» •, • . - V* *.*•*“»., • '■ • .' ■ ■ • . ■ • • # • •'^***:*’.■* ' * ..• V •. .. •• • •: .*'•- r^.'. • : * • • \ \ \ \ \ .........................................................................................^.................. \ ^ ^ .iW’ • ... .. ... , ..- .- __ V - • \ -- .*• fO (24) 8! "L/' .•••■‘•(^5)^<Fc<i»€nr io»s i.?.jn;.33; *>» 31.35 S P*«r OP viffsiPtED ^ .'CO f. \ ■•% tii^ ***S ’•'••.*• ■'I'""*' 'v<» -;-r• # •M .1 s lcma lino ave •'*'■•;’v"'•,^^ * '•■»*.•• L« y A-f .y .--r* V ./ .. fy S* / **. . • .3? - .. -.-w.; ?. .-J *■♦*•*■*• •»:.* * , •/ I ;-W:,vvxr:.:.r--52 r .- / ■ • ?-* 40 !)0 si -«••••' ^3.30 U3) 4(j ^ I- 5o; ’*r .'50 V m ^ ;i I9)<•(io) 1/^ : 1 W *n- 1 1 ig ?LCMA 40 50 C /. iO * * 5i9 •># #•* •/^ 185 17 ( !8)(J5) *2. 7\ S-irp \ UT> 1 .v'* '4 (?) «90 4 \S^\ ? \ a 5 t6)?■ »;io s?6 (7) ^I5 7 (8) ?I3 5^ 3 g (9) »••••••••••*••••• • • « • • ' »* ^ I . • • •' :* 4-^IUO OOC 191 (? ( N) *5 V -VvO'?' I (we) Adjacent Property Owners' Acknowledgeinont Form C D D u'r-f //' /. i/JiAlL [print name(s)](print address] • <-he olans for the procosed improvement or proposed use of the rp/rt; lot.fed referred to as Laad .sc pplication No._ _ _ 1 (we) understand that in executing this - I ^ „e) not ashed r;r/o:oLren?;\\Ts":d\\Vt^;LT/op-osed neighhofs project or use squires Council approval. % ■ \\ V ‘ooerty Owner \\ \ \ • ’J/■) T Date ‘operty Owner I (we) •■■->// (print ncune(s)](print address] 'roperty ^ niAns for the proDOsed imoroveme.nt or proposed use of the,ve reviewed the plans r^r tn p . , . , r^^fe’-red to as Land Use •operty located at /v/ . / -a; also refe.rec t plication No.______ I („e) understand that in executing this re) not aslced to declare^pproval or disapproval ;:r/p:i3^erenrp\"a ”^°nd\\%tiLr^^^^^^^ neighbor's project or use iquires Council approval. U: : / Date . N ^ ' 1 ■) -< •' ./ J A roperty Owner >« Date ■W' w-^ • ^ 1 in tilie irevxew If you have any information that may to the Building & s Land use Application, please date, ing Office at least 10 days prior to the scnecuiea I • % • • • f' 4 • IT Adjacent Property Owners' Acknowledgement Form U I (we) (print name(s)](print address] _ . . «ianc- for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the Bperty Tocated at S7V/;V»..v y< .--also referred to as Land Use plication No / ^ that in executing this acknowledgement, I (we) am I (we) or disapproval of the property or use e) not aske the City Council that I (we) am (are) aware oj. :rmrro^verenrp\\Ts^°nd\\Vt^rhe proposed nei,hhor-s project or use [Uires Council appro^l. perty owner it I (we) (print name(s)l f of // W /iA/k( A. (print address] V a the nlans for the proposed improvement or proposec use or the 8.reviewed the plans tor tne p p also >-»ferred to as Land Use pe'^«locat.ed at //.^/±, also -.^e. Li^ion No; ‘ • ' A' ♦•hat in executing this acknowledgement, I (we) am [*(we) understand that xn executi y *-yte» nrooertv or use &^iskediVoI (we) am (ate) aware of and that the proposed neighbor's project or use Councri^v’^ppro va 1. ■plpv f: ■ • a. a-vi c^ft-v in the review of If you have any your^comments to the Building & 1 Land Use Applxcatxon, please scheduled meeting date,ng Office at least 10 days prxor to the schecuxea m tJL-. Xir.-« —n., J» • . % Adjacent Property Owners' Acknowledgement Form 4 X (we) hu-ik rt !'■ -of //A: [print name(s)](print address ] -»-hP clans for the prooosed improvement or procosea use oc the lllJrVyToLlll = ^ pplication No . . Je»'r<;tand that in executing this acknowledgement/ I (we) am I (we) or disapproval of the property or use ire) not as e Council that I (we) am (are) aware or he "rp^oLment^fl^^^^^ and that the proposed neighbor's project or use squires Council approval. Date Property Owner ------- Date it******it*************************^^*** 1 (we) (print name(s)](print address] - • olans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of theLve reviewed the plans for tn p p also referred to as Lane Use roperty located at __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ __ (plication No-. V i (we) understand that in executing this ac)cnowledgement I (we)^a^ ce,/not ashedi^S^de^lare^ rouS^”::'! “(weri/uL) Lare of ltg?^cL«l^Hsf:nd\\at tL proposed neighi^or's project or use quires Council^app.^®^®^* ^ L.>. -fc/l’. .• j ■ r , . ---------------- •i.".J J .cl.■ • *,€^ i Date Property Owner Date • . ^ +• \f 1 n the review of If you have any information that may assis ^ Building & ^fng-^r- a\-i^^srirda^.s^—rrVh/scL=-LtLg date. ym IM lilWPlI ttoojtr LEGAL PLSCRIFTION tor jr, i-OMA LI/VfiAy cwurfj miffr/gfoTA. •>,98otsti. rr I =ZQ o 'Aag r^avAtp KIM A.REAUME REGISTEREO LAND SURVEYOR 612- 542-9'j59 BOOK le 1 PAGE ' 7 PROJECT NO. ^)0ALC- SHEET iRPA/iq I n ISJ I ; HFRFiri CERTIFY THAI TH:? T'.SVrV. PLAN, OR PEPORl WYS RRErARFC I'V ME OR UNDER MY DIRFCT SCPFRV I 5 I ON AND THAT I AM A DULY RFGISTFPFD NANO SURVEYOR UNDER THE LAWS OF THE cTATr r^c '1^omxi V A A*vMVr^. ' . ’■ o •■ 'if •o y QO • • ‘ iM,-«K^j'- .t^ > '-..■T« » . ■* »v.:ir45^^^ ••/i‘ Vv.Sbf^’ * 'V- ^ *’ • si .•:. .* ' ’ • * i^T 5- rk‘» i: ■ V _ • •»• ’ v'. ^ •••.%■ r-*:»': U>)f^ Oect;^ 5” S> t<i.«^»ot^ ^OCO uoA o««k f ;ci'6f.'A^ 9 ' i II ‘ I I ! I • I ! » flit I • ! ! I . » I » i i I Afe , Z ill I MM • Mi I • I I !t ! . I ( ; ‘y ' ■ iii ' ‘ 'eJtisV'^ H<xt^I • I ' / P €r A'se 7* .i . •» 7y a 4 4 7 /'/■'.V.i 5 U’«V- • flA l-« 'J<\K — •• • «•• • • — • • • J ' * ’ t ^ • -i. ijiy7-^_: • I ,.:::'i ■ ■' 'I !■ f « •.i ( « « |i. * • 1 I j 1 ^ I ■ iir J I • I f I I t i ' » » I I I t ! i ' • ' I M *• ■ I ! • : ; i :-| ! j I ' M ! i; i I I J t-t /! V I \ ••f I I I Li ♦ • ‘ « ! f • !• ♦ ‘ n t ^ 1 ♦ • \0 ; i ' I I I • ! I pVorA’ ' ‘ ) 1 '!-« i ! V rw's IA * V* i r i >- ^ ■ -w'-t H ‘ '^'v»': lijfi ^ 1. ^ • • • ,% 0 nl <V) Ml- l \ ^ - t ' \ \) /c^//cr?/ -1%* Ho (/- \> 0 a I ■^1 •\I Hs €p GAX2AGE: ■(0 b 'J / (y//JC(fW7^ Pf.offfi-^ Id i : : CJ^J A? ep G1 i w 4.HARD COVER IN ZONE TOTAl. PROPERTY IN ZONETHIS PROPOSED CHANGE (AS PICTURED BELOW)PRESENT CONDITION SET BACK ZONE 75' - P50 HARD COVER IN ZONE _ TOTAL PROPERTY IN ZONE !i • o n 3A50 SC), ft. 6990 sq. ft.49.47% 4865 sq. ft. 6990 sq. ft. 69.6% SLI UALK ZUNE 0-75’ HARD COVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY IN ZONETHIS PROPOSED CHANGE (AS PICTURED BELOW) ' PRESENT CONDITION SET BACK ZONE 0-75' HARD COVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY IN ZONE 4^ Ss 3750 sql1.12% 248 sq. ft. 3750 sq. ft. 6.61% CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY FOR ROBERT F. RADUNZ OF LOT 6, LOIIA LINDA HENNEPIN COIINIY. MimiESOTA C->' I i ^ i1 IijORONC^ 5747875 City of OROIVO RESOLUTION Of THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 2904 A RESOLUTION GRANTING AFTER-TEB-FACT VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.22, SUBDIVISION 1 & 2, AND SECTION 10.24, SUBDIVISION 5 (B) FILE 11584 WHEREAS, Robert Radunz (hereinafter "the applicant") is the owner of the orooertv located at 1066 Loma Linda Avenue within the City of ‘Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as follows; Lot 6, Loma Linda, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "the property'*); and WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City for after-the—fact variances to the Municipal Zoning Code to permit the construction of a deck, such deck encroaching past the average setback line where no encroachment is allowed per Section 10.22, Subdivision 1; such deck being 8.5’ from the side lot line where a 10' side setback is normally required per Section 10.24, Subdivision 5 (B); and such deck constituting hardcover in excess of the 25% hardcover normally allowed in the 75-250' zone per Section 10.22, Subdivision 2. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: FIKniNGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #1584. 2. The property is located in the LR-lB Single Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District. 3. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on October 15, 1990 and November 3 9, 1990, and recommended approval of the proposed variance based upon the following findings and conditions; A) The deck reconstruction increased hardcover in the 75-250' zone from 69.3% to 69.6%. Hardcover in the 0- 75' zone currently exists at 6.61%. TRANSKYI ENT5RK)oePT. Of FKnnw r« & fi*uc n FEB 6 199! Page 1 of 4 MiNN. rsI[ CITY I OF ^RONQ City of OROINO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 290_4__________ I B) The applicant has agreed to remove specific items of hardcover in both zones, resulting in a decrease in the 0-75' zone to 1.12%, and a decrease in the 75-250' zone down to 49.5%. The Planning Commission finds that these decreases are in keeping with the intent of the zoning code and appropriate given the current state of development of this property. C) The 1.5' side setback encroachment to accommodate a stairway on the south side of the new deck is approximately equivalent to the side setbacx encroachment of a stairway which previously existed on the north side of the deck and which has been removed. D) The lakeviews enjoyed by the neighboring property owner to the south are only minimally affected by the side setback and average setback encroachment, and such views are already partially screened by existing vegetation at the lot line. 4. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicant and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. 5. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variance would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable 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. CONCLDSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the findings noted above, the Orono City Council hereby grants a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivisions 1 and 2 and Section 10.24, Subdivision 5 (B) to permit the construction of a deck which QQQQches past the average lakeshore setback line where no encroachment is allowed, such deck being 8.5' from the side lot line where a 10' side setback is normally required, and such deck constituting hardcover in excess of the 25% hardcover normally allowed in the 75-250' zone, subject to the following conditions: Page 2 of 4 [■ ^ I CITY i OF iORONO City of OROrVO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO.2904 1. Hardcover in the 0-75' zone is approved at a level of 1.12%. Hardcover in the 75-250' zone is approved at a level of 49.5%. All existing and proposed hardcover approved with this variance approval is recorded in the calculation worksheet and diagram attached to this resolution as Exhibit A. The current property owner and all future owners of property are placed on notice that hardcover shall not be increased above the currently approved level and any proposed improvements of this property that will result in additional hardcover must be approved by the City. Such approval may result in a requirement for concurrent, equivalent or greater removals of existing hardcover. 2. All existing hardcover scheduled for removal as a condition of this resolution must be removed by June 1, 1991. 3. The applicant shall obtain the necessary after-the-fact building permit for the deck and shall make any changes deemed necessary by the building inspector to bring the deck into compliance with the building code. 4. Authorities granted by this resolution run with the property not with the applicant, but are permissive only ^nd must be exercised by application for a building permit within one year of the date of Council approval, or this V3iriance will expire on that date (December 10, 1991). 5^ Violation of or non-corrpliance with any of the terms and conditions of this variance shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall aucomatically 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. •..••Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesc^a-ab a regular meeting held on the 10th day of December, uU c. rot^thy Property Owner(s) allin," City ClerkR* Grabek^^ayor Page 3 of 4 A I CITY I I^RONQ City of OROINO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO.Q04 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) )ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 10th day of December, 1990, by James R. Grabek & Dorothy M. Hallin, Mayor 6 City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalt of the City. NO^^RV PUBI^ STATE OF MINNESOTA ) Notary Public ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this / Cy — a^y ui- ---- ----------------r — before me a Notary Public within and for said county, personally appeared P, —H^ ^^ ^h i-ho the same as his (their) free act and deed. /O'^day of 199 O TSr“u*c'r»'JJi?s®or. “TfENN^VN COUN^„ yy commission s^P*7/XiijULXXiX '(XCL^ NOTARY PUBLIC STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) ^ T U cX Y KJ JL ^ — — r Notary pSblTFlJithin and for said County, persoTTilly appM^red to be the person(s) described in and who executed the me to D_ p____ oHri#=d that he fthev) executed day of 199 before me a ?lre\°ofn®g ISltr^um^nT, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC Page 4 of 4 SET BACK ZONE 75' - 25U‘IIAHl) COVER IN ZONE 3458 sq. ft.TOTAL PROPERTY IN ZONE 6990 sq. ft.THIS PROPOSED CHANGE 49.47%(AS PICTURED BELOW)_.Li bm.K ZUHt U - /5 ‘HARD COVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY IN ZONETHIS PROPOSED CHANGE (AS PICTURED BELOW)42 S(|. ft. 3750 sq. ft.1.12%PRESENT CONDITION PRESENT CONDITION ? 0 1 SET BACK ZONE 75* - P50' HARD COVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY IN ZONE 4865 sq. ft. 6990 sq. ft. 69.6% SET BACK ZONE 0-75* HARD COVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY IN ZONE 248 sq. ft. 3750 sq. ft. 6.61% % CERT IrICATE OF SURVEY FOR ROBERT I . RADUtlZ OF LOT 6. I DMA LINDA • I •V To: From: Da’c: Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator July 9. 1993 COUNCIL lUIE^NG JUL 1 2 1993 CITY OF ORONO Subject: /Y1833 Laurence Elsen. 2879 Casco Point Road - Variances - Resolution Additional Exhibits L - Staff Sketch of Existing Hardcover M - Sketch of Hardcover Removal per Planning Commission Recommendation Brief Description of Request The applicant proposes a 26 ’ x 44 ’ garage/storage addition to the street side of the existing residence and 2-story 16 ’ x 26 ’ enclosed addition and replacement decks to the lakeside of the existing residence. The lower level addition would consist ot expanded bedrooms and the upper level a master bedroom and entenainment room expansions. The enclosed two-story structure will extend 2’ closer to lakeshore requiring an average lakeshore setback variance of 16’. The only impact will be on the residence to the southeast as residence on the northwest lot is separated and buffered by the unimproved right-of-way of Carman Avenue. The applicant recently received approval for an additional curb cut onto Casco Point Road in an attempt to improve the level of safety for exiting property. Applicant has also advised that with the new garage the looped road driveway layout will allow for a reduction in the backout apron area and the saving of several mature trees in street yard. Applicant was asked if structure could be reduced to minimize structural hardcover and bring lot coverage into conformance as improvement resulted in a 1 % increase. Mr. Elsen advised that his residence has no basement and that the additional storage area within the proposed addition and soon to be converted storage area within existing garage was much needed. The only storage area on the prooerty is the storage shed located in the 0-75 ’ setback area. The Planning Commission asked that the storage shed be removed and for applicant to consider the removal of landscaped areas underlain with plastic in an attempt to minimize the increase of 460 s.f. or 3.3% additional hardcover with the improvement plan. Members asked applicant if the existing access off of Carman Avenue could be removed. Applicant reviewed the layout of the circulation and location of garage doors and added that access to the site is more efficient via the existing curb cut. Elsen also noted that a minor hardcover reduction would result as only a small portion of the driveway is located within his property line (review E.xhibit K-1). He noted also the benefits to the users of the lake access at Carman Avenue for if the total driveway was removed and grass replanted, vehicular users of the accessway would have to back out onto Casco Point Road. Staff met with the applicant after the meeting to review the landscaped areas underlain with plastic suggested by Planning Commission for removal. Please review Exhibits J-3 and L. Zoning File #1833 July 9*; 1993 Page 2 Total landscape area at Area 6 is approximately 64 s.f. but one-third ol it is covered by upper level deck and access stair. Landscaped area (Area 7) to street side of house at approximately 94.5 s.f. was installed by applicant to prevent runoff entering lower bedrooms. Applicant asks that he be allowed to keep the plastic in this area to protect lower level from drainage problems as he reports they were very severe until the plastic was installed. Area 8 at 51.9 s.t. affects the bedrooms on the southeast side of residence as runotf from garage root drains directly into this area. A drainage problem of this type can be rectitied with installation of roof drains at time of new construction. Staff has prepared amended hardcover facts per the Planning Commission s recommendation. Staff has adjusted hardcover to reflect landscape areas unde.lain with plastic originally shown at a total 151 s.f. Staff has included only Areas 6 and 8 in the 75-250’ removals along with the 294 s.f. of the concrete pad and wood shed. 1. Section 10.22. Subd. 2 - Review of hardcover. 0-75 ’ setback area = 6.740 s.f. Allowed = 0 s.f. Existing = 184 s.f. or 2.7% Amended Proposal = 24 s.f. or .3% 75-250’ setback area = 14.219 sX Allowed = 3.554.7 s.f. or 25% Amended Existing = 5.224 s.f. or 36.7% Original Proposal = 5,646 s.f. or 39.7% Amended per Planning Commission Recommendation = 5,257.4 s.f. or 36.9% Additional Hardcover = 33.4 s.f. or .2% Original Hardcover Variance = 2.091.25 s.f. or 14.7% Amended Hardcover Variance = 1,702.7 s.t. or 11.9% 2. Section 10.03, Subd. 14 ( C) - Review of Lot Coverage. Allowed = 3.591.3 s.f. or 15% Existing = 2,746 s.f. or 11.4% Original Proposal = 3.834 s.f. or 16% Amended Proposal = 3.709 s.f. or 15.4% (reduction of 160 s.f. for shed in 0-75 ’ and addition of 35 s.f. for covered entryway on streetside of residence) The Planning Commission recommended unanimous approval of the multiple variance application subject m the removal of the 160 s.f. shed within the lakeshore protected area, removal of concrete pad at 294 s.f. and landscape areas underlain with plastic within the 75-250’ setback area and all other bituminous paving improvements as shown on applicant’s improvement plan The Planning Commission also encouraged applicant to consider minimizing driveway and turnaround apron 'improvements and to relocate any mature plantings disturbed as a re.suli of these improvements. The enclosed resolution ha*- been drafted per the Planning Commission’s recommendation. A RESOLUTION GRANTLNG VARIANCES TO MUNICIP.AL ZONING CODE SECTIONS 10.03, SUBDIVISION 14 (C), SECTION 10.22, SUBDIVISION 1 (B) .VND SUBDIVISION 2 FILE NO. 1833 WHEREAS, Laurence D. Elsen and Katherine E. Elsen (hereinafter "the applicants") are the owners of the property located at 2879 Casco Point Road within the City of Orono and legally described as follows: refer to Exhibit A, attached (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicants have applied to the City for variances to Municipal Zoning Code Sections 10.03, Subdivision 14 (C) to permit structural improvements that will result in 117.7 s.f. or .4% with total structural lot coverage ut 3.709 s.f. or 15.4% where only 15% is allowed and per Section 10.22. Subdivision 1 (B) and 2 seeks a 16 ’ average lakeshore setback variance for a two-storv enclosed addition where no such encroachment is allowed and hardcover variances within the 75-250 ’ setback area for structural replacement and new structural additions resulting in 5,257.4 s.t. or o6.9% hardcover where 5,224 s.f. or 36.7% exists and where 25% is allowed. Minnesota: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, FINDINGS 1. Tltis application was reviewed as Zoning File #1833. The property is located in the LR-IC Lakeshore Residential Zoning District requiring one-half acre or 21,780 s.f. in area. The property consists of 23,942 s.f. or .54 acres. 3.The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on June 21, 1993 and recommended approval of the multiple variance application as amended based upon the following findings: A. 26 ’ X 44 ’ garage addition will be placed over existing paved area. B. Hardcover within the 0-75’ setback area has been reduced by 2.4%. Final hardcover at 24 s.f. or .3%. Page 1 of 6 c.The proposed loop drive with limited backout apron will minimize tree removal within street yard. D.Installation of the new access drive will not result in an e.xcess of hardcover within the 250-500 ’ setback area and will result in 371 s.f. or 12.4% hardcover where 30% is allowed. E.All neighbors notified during this review have been shown the improvement plans and have voiced no objections. The City Council finds that the conditions e.xisting 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 tratfic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicants, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserv ’e a substantial property right of the applicants; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, repons by City staff, comments by the applicants and the effect of the proposed variances on the health, safety and welfare of the community. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the findings noted above, the Orono City Council hereby grants variances to Municipal Zoning Code Sections 10.03, Subdivision 14 (C) and Section 10.22, Subdivision 1 (B) and 2 to permit the construction of a 26 ’ x 44 ’ garage/storage addition to the street side of the residence and a two-story 16 ’ x 26 ’ addition at the lakeside and tlte reconstruction of upper and lower decks. This approval is subject to the following conditions: 1.All hardcover removals as shown on Page 5 of this resolution shall be completed prior to the footing inspection for the new construction . Any mature planting to be removed as a result of paving improvements shall be replanted within street yard. Page 2 of 6 3. Authorities granted by this resolution run with the property not with the applicants, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit within one year of the date of Council approval, or this variance will expire on that date (July 12, 1994). 4. Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this resolution shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 5. The undersigned applicants have read, understood and hereby agree to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of themselves, their heirs, successors and assigns, hereby acree to the recording of this resolution in the Chain of Title of the property. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held on the 12th day of July. 1993. ATTEST; Dorothy M. Hall in. City Cleric Edward J. Callahan, Jr., Mayor Property Owner (s) STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) u ni The forecoing instrument was acknowledged betore me on this 12th day ot July, 1993 by Edward J. Callahan. Jr. and Dorothy M. Hallin. Mayor and City Clerk of the City of Orono,* a Minnesota municipal coqioration and said instrument was executed on behalf ot the City. Notary Public Paee 3 of 6 WiKTCtt.uh-f, «v-a*nv r .;.;7 / *r»^ 'l ^ '' ■ /) 61.CK« r#IflUO^ ('‘»PfflK»<» PAHM. Vi ^ 'yj fy»VT»KlAr M^tK^ (III ) IIU^ • f 0 ^ j | (D o Hi -f- PgM7Tg.5 tffOKl MOKKih^fKiT '-o t ^ ^ f ?*: ^ V f U_J _ LCvCu HOUIg. ^Q*ytTtOrO Pu>^Ki •f O'tC *. l" • "icjl o* ^)iCi^'i7f*(S /v(LvJcove/t. *'ROt/*«£) ti£IfJ_^ fc_im* Aq o^n rog. iP MoRTMiftf-J fttortflLIT ^l»-liTS fan STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this dav of . 199 before me a Notary Public within and for said county, personally appeared known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this day of , 199__before me a Notary' Public within and for said county, personally appeared known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC Page 4 of 6 i. CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. Exhibit A Legal Description That part of Lot 110, Soring Park, lying Northwesterly of the Southeasterly 90 feet thereof, according to the recorded plat thereof, and situate in Hennepin County, Minnesota. Also, Lot 101, and the Northwesterly 1/2 of Lot 100, includ ing all land lying between the Northeast line of Lake Shore Avenue and Lake Minnetonka and bounded on the Southeast by the 'Southeast line of said Northwesterly 1/2 of Lot 100, extended to Lake Minnetonka and bounded on the Northwest by the Southeast line of Carman Avenue, and including the vacated portion of Lake Shore Avenue lying adjacent to prem ises, all in Spring Park, according to the recorded plat thereof, and situate in Hennepin County, Minnesota. Page 6 of 6 To: From: Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator Jeanne A. Mabusih, Building & Zoning Administrator Date:June 15. 1)93 Subject: #1833 Laurence Elsen. 2879 Casco Point Road - Variances - Public Hearing Zoning District: LR-IC, Lakeshore Residential Total area = 23.942 s.f. or .54 acres. The code requires 21.780 s.f. in area or .5 acres. The applicant proposes a three-car single story garage addition to the street side of the e.xisting residence and the reconstruction of the southeast half of lower deck and main level sun porch into a two-story enclosed addition. A new upper and lower deck will be constructed ot the other half. The former attached garage will now be used for storage, mud room and additional bath area. The new enclosed addition at the lakeside will e.xk .d 2’ closer to the lake. The house is set approximately 130’ from the lakeshore. Mr. Elsen recently received approval for an additional curb cut/driveway access to Casco Point Road in an attempt to improve the level of safety for access to and from property and to save manire plantings in street yard. E.xcess hardcover exists within the 0-75 ’ and 75-250’ setback area. The new driveway will result in 585 s.f. of paved area within the 75-250’ zone. The following ordinances are pertinent to the review: 1. Section 10.22, Subd. 2 - Review of hardcover. 0-75 ’ setback ar-a = 6,740 s.f. Allowed = 0 s.f. Existing =. 184 s.f. or 2.7% Proposed = 184 s.f. or 2.7% No changes proposed. 7S.250 ’ setback area = 14,219 s.f. Allowed = 3.554.7 s.f. or 25% Existing = 5,186 s.f, or 36.4% Proposed = 5,646 s.f. or 39.7% Additional hardcover = 460 s.f. or 3.3% Hardcover variance = 2,091.25 s.f. or 14.7% 250-500 ’ setback area = 2.973 s.f. Allowed = 891.9 s.f. or 30% Existing = 0 s.f. Proposed =371 s.f. or 12.4% Zoning File i<^1833 June 15, 1993 Page 2 2. Review of Total Hardcover Total lot area = 23,942 s.f. Existing = 5,370 s.f. or 22A% Proposed = 6,201 s.f. or 25.9% Section 10.03, Subd. 14 ( C) - Review of Lot Coverage Allowed = 3,591.3 s.f. or 15% Existing = 2,746 s.f. or 11.4% Proposed = 3,834 s.f. or 16% Variance = 242.7 s.f. or 1% List of E.xhibits A - Application B - Property Owners List C - Plat Map D - Property Owners Acknowledgement Forms (Total ot 9) E - Survey F - Elevations G - Sections H - Drainage Plan I - Existing/Proposed Floor Plans J-1-4 Existing Hardcover In 'entory/Site Plan K-1-5 Proposed Hardcover Inventory/Site Plan Review of Application The proposed three-stall garage shall be placed over existing paved hardcover. Applicant has marked garage addition on the existing pavement and shown the access to the new driveway. 16 ’ X 26’ of the e.xisting upper and lower level decks shall now be enclosed as part of the two- stoiy addition to the lakeside. The lower level addition will consist of two bedrooms and the upper level a master bedroom and entertainment room. The increase in hardcover within the 75-250’ setback area results from the expanded drive and new backout area for three-stall garage. The enclosed two-story lakeside addition will extend 2’ closer to the lakeside. The existing second tloor three-season porch is enclosed on southeast side. It will be necessary to grant an average lakeshore setback for the enclosed two-story lakeside addition diat will extend 16 ’ in front of the adjacent residence struemre. The residence on west side is separated by unimproved right-of-way of Carman Avenue. Upon your site inspection you will note the residence to west constructed sometime in 1984 is located closer to lakeshore but has minimal impact on views of subject property and property to east. Zoning File ^1833 June 15. 1993 Page 3 As applicant’s information notes, the Public Works Department has approved a new curb cut for the property. The Public Works Director has advised that this will provide safer access to and from property, ingress at the northeast curb cut and egress at the northwest curb cut. Applicant also notes that this will minimize tree removal although it would appear that the majority of the lawn area with trees is located in an unimproved right-of-way of Casco Point Road and adjacent Carman Avenue. If curb cut was not approved, e.xpansion of paved area for backout apron and drive would require the removal of trees both on property and in right-of-way. Members should be advised that the City does not require permits for the installation of new drive areas, expanded drives or blacktopping of existing gravel drives. If hardcover excesses result from proposed driveway improvements, the e.xcesses would be addressed at the time of the issuance ot a building permit application or review of a land use application. It would be impossible for City statf to police and enforce every driveway improvement within the hardcover areas of the City which now include 1,000 ’ from the rural lakes. If permits were required, such permits would require surveys and hardcover inventories for the entire property. Description of Hardships Please refer to Exhibit A. Applicant’s hardships are reviewed as follows In noting the interpretation of hardcover ordinance, staff would assume that applicant is referring to total hardcover facts which would find existing hardcover at 22.4fo hardcover and proposed at 6,201 s.f. or 25.9%. The three-stall garage addition at approximately 33’ x 44’ shall be installed over existing hardcover. Note total structural coverage now will be 1% over the allowed 15%. The looped driveway layout will not require the removal of the mature trees located within the street yard and unapproved right-of-ways. Applicant claims the loop drive has caused an increase in hardcover. Hardcover has been increased in the 75-250 ’ setback area to accomodate needs of new three-stall garage. There is no hardcover excess in 250-500 ’ setback area. Issues for Consideration 1.There was limited storage capacity in the existing residence tliat lacked an unfinished basement. Now with the additional storage areas provided in the former garage area and in the 9’ x 20 ’ surplus storage area in the garage, can the 8’ x 20 ’ storage shed in the lakeshore yard be removed? This would reduce lot coverage by .06% and reduce hardcover in the 0-75 ’ setback zone. Zoning File #1833 June 15, 1993 Page 4 2. 3. What other hardcover improvements within the 75-250 ’ setback area can be removed? Refer to Exhibit J-1, Item 5 - concrete pad at 294 s.f. (2.06%), Item 6 - landscape area underlain with plastic at 151 s.f. (1.06%). - Other areas? Can the garage addition be reduced? A standard three-stall garage width is approximately 32 ’ to 33’. Total proposed width of addition is 44’. L f 7 y CITY OP ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICAT ibiS • I ^3 Initial Application Fee $175.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $100.00 (no chance from original application) Variance for non conforming use $200.00 After-the-Fact Fees (Double application r r “ f‘ / • r “ *• r ^; f* W « f • L’f C’ V A f' ^ r * c * * * t r aiirriTu k. u*» # a uu ’ 4 - I r '* It w wi 1 w w‘ V' c V V V* n*va rru L.I 71 I i. f -- n.‘» i I w* 0 VV' f #v- ^ f 0 vv* ee ) . C ”l* *u'V»“ ' f 11 .ntfM I i/u “•*•/* T T? 7* . » wf » U’ V C VV 1 M V a I 1 • * '*7 . Vw" PROPERTY INFORMATION Site Address tin- Property Identif. Number (P.I.D.)-^- --- - --- -- - Attach legal description to application i.. not included on required survey. rmon-h/v^a-) Date Prooerty Acquired_ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ _ ? 1 (doHdo noc) also own the othe^Cspecify)_______ Present use of properry: Zoning District:_ _ _ ___ applicant __ _ _ _ _Ncune ' ' Address X ,P~. 'ij 9 (T*. h'Z Cc t c.' fA/r Ci ty: Phone (home) 97/- - _ _ Phone (work) ^ 5 Zip: 39 //?- OWNER (if different than applicant)Phone (home) Name Phone (work) ddress:_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ _ City:Zip: Estimated Construction Cost $DESCRIPTION OP REQUEST 4Er^i^-r..VCa Describe request in deta VARIANCES REQUIRED _ _ Lot Area Setback: Lot Width Front _ __ Side X'Hardcover Lot Coverage Rear Average Lakeshore Other (specify) HARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OP UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS O OV 1. . v\ .1 ■ ■’ - ' ' >•J '-4iUVV^ addi't'iona]Tsheets if necessary)(attach addi'tUoi REOOIRED SUBMITTALS ^ -i • *. - All of the following information must be submitted by —the—applx^txon deadline date in order for your application to be considered completej_ 1. Conpleted Application Fonn ^ w*. • 2. Certified Property Owners List of owners within 150 (you must obtaxn this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Govt Center 348-3271). 3. Plat Map (obtained with property owners list). • i j 4. certificate of survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) xnclude hardcover calculations as required (provide one (1) copy 8Ji xll for reproduction). . 5. ToDographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any cnanges in existing grade are proposed (provide one copy BV-xll ). 6. Sketches or plans of floor & elevation views (provxde 1 copy 8^5 xll J. 7. As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate Ix^t any other persons you wish notified of this application. 8. _Additional items as may be requested by City staff. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your variance application is not complete if—- - -ove infn^*™^txon has not been included. APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information requxred or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay addxtxonal fees (start time not covered by original fee payment) and/or consultant expenses incurred in review of this application, an^ certifies that the xn.ormatxon supplied is true and correct to thfi__best__Qf his/her knowledge. Applicant's Signafu?B"T Date tion and verification of this reqpe^^^ , V ' / Owner's Sionatiite---- f<-- - Date review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make “""^ements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building s zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. cQ.RUN DATE 05/XS/95 hewepinBATCH OOSPROP AODR OmER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR PROP AOOR OEtlER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR PROP AODR 0I«4ER NAHE TA)0>AYER NAHE/ADDR PROP ADOR OIRIER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/AOdR SB 20-117-25 51 0020 02B7A CASCO POIHT RO T H KNAPPER A 0 G LYON TODD RNAPPER A DEBORAH LYON 2B7A CASCO POINT RO HAYZATA MM 55591 SB 20-117-25 51 0051 02915 CASCO POINT RO R C KAIL ACL- KAIL RICHARD C KAIL A CAROL KAIL 2915 CASCO POINT ROAD HAYZATA MN 55591 SB 20-117-25 51 0059 02B79 CASCO POINT RO L DA K E ELSEN LAHRENCE D A KATHERINE ELSEN 2B79 CASCO POINT ROAD HAYZATA MN 55591 SB 20-117-25 51 00A7 02BAB CASCO POINT RO CHARLES F NELSON A HITE CHARLES A LUCY NELSON 2BAB CASCO POINT RO HAYZATA MN 55591 COUNTY PROPERTY INTORMATION SYSTEM property OitrtRS LIST58 20-117-25 51 002500058 ADDRESS UNASSIGNEO T H KNAPPER A 0 G LYOtJ TODD KNAPPER A DEBORAH LYON 2879 CASCO POINT RD HAYZATA W 555RI 58 ’ 20-117-25 51 0052 02*>05 CASCO POINT RO JAMES KEWIETH BONERS JAMES K BOtlERS 2905 CASCO POINT RD HAYZATA 55591 58 20-117-25 51 0055 02917 CASCO POINT RO H N MAXHELL JR ETAL HAYNE MAX»TELL JR 2917 CASCO POINT RO HAYZATA m 55591 TOTAL BATCH 005 00010 REPORT NO. PI955901 PAGE a . i58 20-117-25 51 002602900 CASCO POINT RO 0 SIGAFOOS ETAL DONALD SIGAFOOS 2900 CASCO PT RO HAYZATA TtT 55591 58 20-117-25 51 0055 02695 CASCO POINT RO RICHARD G HELSTROM ETAL RICHARD G HELSTROM 2895 CASCO POINT RO HAYZATA MN 55591 58 20-117-25 31 0056 02871 CASCO POINT RO J P A R HOLFE J PATRICK HOLFE 2871 CASCO POINT RO HAYZATA MN 55591 eo A14 « $ •3 •'.J..J. • V J' • % .ir.vi) 6, 1^ I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AW "UE OF MY KNOHLEOGE AND BELIEF. ' i.- ^ V ' ‘ ‘ 1. ■ • ».* t * ■: IM Y- 'A' ^ • I (we) Adjacent Property Owners ~\3 (print name(s)] t)Acjcnowledgement Form ^ of ^ — (print address] ^piO-liW a**—w ^ , Application No. acknowledgement, I (we) am 1 (we) understand that in j^sapproval of the property or use (are) not asked to declare ” cncil^^^ I (“«> but merely to confirm proposed neighbor ’s proDect or use the improvement plans and that the pr requires Council approval. sA Date propenty Property Owner *****#»♦•*••*********** Date irUii**********'*'* I (we) (print name(s)]ipr;.nt iiaiucv-zj b.ve reviewed the plans for the proposed i»P™rr%?L"r:rto As“\\n1 u\: Property located at —----- Application NO. --------. • 3,,„,„iedgement. I (we) am I („e) understand that in aap^oval of thi property or use (are) not asked Council that I (we) am ^re) aware of but merely to confirm proposed neighbor’s project he improvement plans and that the p P _ requires Council approval. , / /. ^ ^ » O ^1 property Date Owner property Owner • review of Xf you have any yrut^ccfmL^'Ao the Buiiaing a foL'n^oAice atA«?t irda% prior to the scheduled meeting date. Adjacent Property C^ern- Ac)cnowledg^e^^r». / ) / /. ^. of ^a.^co i^T rqL^ [print name (s)] [print address ] have reviewed the Plans^f^r^t^e Ose property located at L—(» ir«Nf (* * t * Application No.--------• ...'nrr j-h 1 s ackHOW 16 dQeiueHt/ I (we) am 1 („e) understand or disapproval of the property or use (are) not asked to declare PP council that I (we) am but merely to confirm 'I;® ^proposed neighbor's project or the improvement plans and that tne p requires Courcil approval. Date / Owner ********************* Date Property I (we) ^ ^ i, ^ A* w - - -- — * - have reviewed the plans for the proposed as “ L^anl use property located at ' ——^ ' Application No. --------• ..•rirr ^hts acknowledgement# I (we) am I (we) understand that in ^^^pproval of the property or use (are) not asked ^ ^"^"lro\^^sebut merely to confirm proposed neighbor's project or the improvement plans and that the prop requires Council approval. ^ ^ / -ii_^\ property Owner Date Date . the review of If you have any information that My the Building t on\"n “o"ffic “ :t"^“as “irda"ys%%Tor to the scheduled meeting date. Adjacent Property Owners' Acknowledgenent Font 7 4- CkSdo TT I (we) [print name (s)1 D [print address] I pwi. W - - -— ... have reviewed the plan ner fp°‘°aYs^o ref erred' to as Land Use Application No.CaUiUli ---------— J i-u V in f»xecut'ng this acknowledgement, I (we) am I (we) understand that exe or* disaooroval of the property or use (are) not asked to declare app council that I (we) am (are) aware of but merely to confirm °^oposed neighbor's project or use the improvement plans and that tne . f requires Council approval* / 0 67/5-, Prope^y Owner^(W. Date Property Owner itiritii **************** Date ^^^*************** I (we) [print name(s)] have reviewed the plans for the proposed to as Land Use property located at - -- -—- - - - -^ Application NoUClUJ-Wi* _ _ _ _ _■ I — X ,«e. understand that in (are) not aslced *=° Council that I (we) am but merely to confirm proposed neighbor's project or use the improvement plans and that the prop requires Council approval. ^ ^ z\crrr : I Date Property Owner Data Property Owner I£ you have any information that may " ),\^''Buirdin^ ^Sn\^ro"fV"i; a\-l^^/t^lraa^y^%%-t“t: tL-s“cheduled meeting date. I (we) Adjacent Property Owners- Ac3cnowledgement Port.\j 'P7~ [print address] (print name(s)] have reviewed the £^°|^;^Vra°a'lTo "reLrred^ to as Land Use property located at Application No.- - - r. a.u ♦. < n #»5cecuting this acknowledgenent , I (we) am 1 (we) understand that i" disapp-oval of the property or use (are) not as)ced to declare app Council that I (we) am (are) aware of Lt merely to confirm City Council the improvement plans and that the pr p recjulres Council approval# /d~- ^3 ------------ Date Property Owner *•*■*«***####•#*****'•** Date ****##*##******** I (we)(print address] have reviewed the plans for the proposed Jse property located at--------------— -------—— Application No. _____— I (we) understand that in ®^®‘='^^^*^?g^pproval^ property or use (are) not as)ced to Council that I (we) am (are) aware of but merely to confxrm ^ ^ proposed neighbor's project or the improvement plans and that the propo requires Council approval. .i •V • • ^ ____ > Date Property Owner Date Property Owner • ... ♦->,« Cl tv in the review of If you have ^y i'\^°™“\":2srsuhrit y^^ comments » the Building S fonrng^offile a?'’le"asVlO 4a^s prior to the scheduled meeting date. T) ■ • ' Adjacent Property ^ers- Ac3caowledgeaent Port. /-^ \ll of ^/V^c, - --I (y4) _f - -\,V \^-JL [print address] [print name(s)J , .K= r,rnoosed improvement or proposed use of the have reviewed the / also referred to as Land Use property located at ^-ft.Wlr-r^^- Application No.-------- I tv^understand that in ^f^'pprotal"^”^the property or use (ax^l not asiced p^^/cYty Council that I am but merely to confirm pL proposed neighbor's project or use the improvement plans and that the pr p requires Council approval. Property Owner Date *it*itiiii**iHr**** I (we)(print address] [print naine(s)] have reviewed the plans for the proposed o*ts“ L^nf Use property located at - --- - - - --- -- —— Application No._ _ _• I (we) understand that in ^pprotal’^of^th^ ^"ut^L^rely to confirm project or use the improvement plans and that the prop requires Council approval. % • /rr sC 1 N .y property Owner ' '-A>32) Date Date Property Owner Xf you have ^y ,^\rit y“t'Lmm:n»"^to "thl'BurrdH, s Zonfn,'%"ffr=“ at'^least 10 days prior to the scheduled meeting date. b Adjacent Property Owners' Acknowl«.'dgoraent Form I (we) Cl/rJCr / /. cPfyS 7^^ -^Z'AiO (print naiT.e(s)I (print address] have reviewed the plans for the proposed inprovement or proposed use on t’ne property located at also referred to as Land Use Application No.______. I (we) understand that in executing this aokncwledgoment/ I (we) ai;» (are) not asked to declare approval or disapproval of the property or use but merely to confirm for the City Council that I (we) am (are) aware of the improvement plans and that the proposed neighbor's project or use requires Council approval. Property Own<or Date Property Owner Date I (we) (print name(si)(print address) iiave reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the property located at ______________________ also referred to as Land Use Application Ho. ______. I (we) understand that in executing this acknowledgement, I (we) am (are) not asked to declare “approval or disapproval of the property or use but merely to confirm for the City Council that I (we) am (are) aware of the improvemont ninn^ Anri rfcha.-flimnosed neiuhbor*^3'. DCO ioct or use requires Council to contxrm tor tne city council tnac i iwe; am tare; emont plans and tJjat^thej^roposed neighbor'^S'.projoc .ncil app^ovax. ^ | ^ ^ ^ Property Owner Data If you have any information that may assist the City in the review of this Land Use Application, please submit your comments to the Building o ;;!oning Office at least 10 days prior to the schedule-! meeting date. Adjacent Property Owners* Ackncwlc'dgeraent Form I (wo) \a ^/^Y Ng f^f\)C\‘JELL of r2^//7 CASCO p , , (print na.T.e(s)](print address] have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of tiui property located at ^f\'>toFT. PC>fiO also referred to as Land Use Application Mo. ______. I (wo) undorscand that in executing this aoJenowlo.dgemont/ I (wo) aci (are) not asked to declare approval or disapproval of the property or use but merely to confirm for t)ie City Council that I (v/e) am (ax*ej aware of the improvement plans and that the proposed neighbor's project or use requires Council approval. Property “Tv /? > 7^ ;ertv Kwner Property Owner Date I (we) (print name(s)](print address I liave reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the property located at____________________________also referred to as Land Use Application No, ______. I (we) understand that in executing this acknowledgement, I (we) am (are) not asked to declare“approval or disapproval of the property or use but merely to confirm for the City Council that I (we) am (are) aware of the improvement plans and t)»at the proposed neighbor's project or use requires Council aporoVval. « - fr t\ >N - ' v .r Property Owner Date If you have any information that may assist the City in the review of this Land Use Application, please submit your comments to the Building u "oning Office at least 10 days prior to the schedule'.) meeting date.• • Adjacent Property Owners' Ackncwlodgoment Form I (we) Vl’-*-.*) I it V* ^'vj,_ of Ou-*jc,cN (VcJi (print naxe(s)J (print address] the proposed improvement or proposed use of t'ne also referred to as Land Use have reviewed the plans for property located at Application Mo. j I (we) understand that in executing this ackncwl odgement/ I (we) am (are) not asked to declare approval or disapproval or the property or use but merely r.c confirm for the City Council that I (we) am (are) aware of the improvement plans and that the proposed neighbor's project or use requires Council approval. ____y K>c_|So«^ Property <>wner Date Property Owner **•«****•*«* Date * * 1* « * * I (we) C.Vr. V-1 ^ ] ,',r ^ of jkd [pri.nc name(s)](print address] liave reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the property located at c Vi" also referred to as Land Use Application Mo. ______. I (we) understand that in executing this ackncwledgement, I (we) am (are) not asked to declare “approval or disapproval of the property or use but merely to confirm for the City Council that I (we) am (are) aware of the improvement plans and that the proposed neighbor's project or use requires Council approval. f ^ Proper t yawner 1 ^0 •s Date Property Owner Date If you have any information that may assist the City in the review of this Land Use Application# please submit your comments to the Buildrng u Zoning Office at least 10 days prior to the scheduled meeting date. SURVEY FORMR. LARRY ELSEN/ >Y-v CASCO h’OINT ROAD Tr I:V, ‘4 » R.’UIOO’ ^ a i9*')4 '.)0 L'1>o6 . ^roO—----rr:__< _____________ ^ \ > - ' c / / / / / 9 I r"|• I |4r VI > ||i| lt>«« ilitt |!«lt * I'*! til*. *'«•», It'M^ H'M If •# Mr .Ml.M<« •.!••’f '*«> trfi t»>r»rof, I^« irtOfiM flat l»4r«c il, ••<1 >•« fonfclf. 4I*. I. IM H»l, *»i| l»i** Hot If \l7 o» lot too, IM llitf* all lat I ifio^ iri.rrtv the HMii^^a-l liM Ilf ia«» SMrt itonoa »nj lair a aoil boiHtifriS n** IM Vo«IM4tl bf \o.|tMa\t ••♦•a uf \ai«f Hi.i Mi^\lai If I/? of lot 100, a*|<ni1al In tala ffitmal'wi*a a»»4 Niw*Nfa4 am IM •e#IM#%l I f Mr *.fiA«f»>ra4l ••t**' of I a••an 4.rn.» . «M Ut lo4l"^ IM fl «la<l fftlii n i f I a«« *.M*a Jif»nwa lv*OH a4t»*Ml lo b***« l%r». all »•* 4 . a*i»’ti«at ** IM »ri o* 4a J #•#! |t.«ir..f. •»«! %i|.t»l# »^«»>rin InxAli. P»r*a%ola tor iMi*l« latitff ll>«l l»«l% 1% • |4i.a totnf t t|i« * ' ant al 40M ■•! • $t IM H .^la»*a» nl l»»r la»'l aM #a »|i>'*»hr l a*»<l of 1^^ In allow bf all b.«il4i»i|%. If anf, ftiw •« am %$tS la*4 |»*lal IM% /»rl 4if *f flriiMa* , MM. • ,.s i I •Hh ‘.»*ai tlVi, IH' .A f •••til H. . I I frf Hi. mi* • !••• It \ I* I '•! • Li ** ila % It i-n •• • .»M»*t I r<*»* I Bm€. • r-«•»«• tMa r '•1‘1/»V ^ f jL2jins»s< fM fA* ?/• .—t 1 ^ U^. —■|lj!-^i. 1 t ^•aWK- % V V N 1 \ 1 '!1 irgau • 1 \1 « M %r« (vn A. I I 1 ------- I------- MW f^»T ^r?uTM ^utjy^fan-KrhJ (w^* ^ve) %4^vt. • •*li» • « »• $U'€»- »4«cl t * ----------------- ...............................\ _—..J ii 1«nZ gth h||* Sii*x:**ou I UJ Si 0)1ui» oc s. ui* I • «•<Ci'^*1]TTT t •I rr —____^___Pl fUc-^UTH v^‘Tir-»K.A V*-^ 4 » •/ • , r» IM •««• ORAWINO mOEX I At Slla Plan A ttatlli El««alla« AX OamaHtlan rtans • tawa# A Matei iaaafa AX Laarar Laval Plan A Aact^na A 4 Main Laval Plan AS iaylh Elavatlan At laal A Waal Ilavatlana AT Aactlana A Dalalla At tacllana At Parllal ilia Plan • Inlatfat teala I n 1 to Zo Ssli - 5-w 6u i I m I i UJ it col UjKcc z f/) I-I 8 UJ O V ji t C l£.s/ ^‘1' r-> .^ #• <fcV# < /% ale* I ♦ Tim nizc! 1—itz:^0^0 M««J ff^Vt |Ci.€-V^^' m u:i 1 f“ i ! * Mi i «««f* •••w **.' /T 0»»m€ 4 »« • . «■ li?VI </)z --I!S;i| Dili WO o u ! I I lU II II s! d* I I A6 . 9 O t !zo Q$il hIJs C4 «S8 Cirz*iou I A8 I i ■ ..X . ii^ •• «• <^»4 !•••« •• ■y" V FXitTiAa-. I I • |•>n•TTv «4W_—« t*»f 4r| ri* n ir I I I lUo uo i (A Iui Soc zUJ • -J 111 V\T?M: I i1 li IS 0 IJ II II II II M ^ J»««% • i* • • -a,r ZHL}1. _ •• IT »-i.. • 1 §»,¥r ‘^m T» m% • »l II II II . ] td \ lr »-> %» *• ♦♦•.r‘^(Ti>'*i t%^-w*» *--i > ^ % p»dn%y fIVk.t - *—* --------------- cr-js.if-jM'jr ^ fn »-1 ■* * l‘*< V'%) —"_l '•'1 I-.-- • t • « ^ / y Vi -J»'^ II • c: i* fir \ \ I ^ f • Mi*, ;» Ci 4 •*> h> •'./••ijd «• %V «»• ® *• • • ( w V tt--=^-j - 1,- lf^“ ;;r*:^>vr }{I! >1 . - II I ^ . s V. .-5.-m*» •» M V __ Eit —f .1 —-. riC *’»*-* ||-- li I ' ........5 l•ll. J 4,-r •II ;> ii ii •t ii ii •i *TT • - I K 1^- N’- (I *»*k Ll- *x ■ ^ a ;| I II ti <11 iM ,11 y •'I •ll ■H M M •I !t| M •»| PI « fr: ll ll II II tr 2 4|^.. I« '• !i.'^ U/-*» i^-fU ;•! •• rtM«« '* ••*------------ \ 11 n Mil j! - - 0 -a i‘ - 3 I - .*- R . - IL::* • ■ I*. iiT*l ,;• ■i :• I 'l "•I ' *• j*» I—■! i| • t •• • i>4 • r»« • »;' • •. w Ji / \ Clfc. • A ' * • •' r*4^A i^ - • • ••• V ^ C i_ ii-M V)zo (o UJ qS s ? H Ci4 2C8sir- ou i!I I w UfJ I ^ ?) - ' r r>t wrr.’t.v? t /*n ?•• r^L *f I. ? _*— i-i’f—’'* "^•k4 • r% •• m i! «M1ifizo ^ x| q5!I H ^ 3 _ O U 1 1 I 111 §1 cniuji 2r!3§ Ul 1 I - 9 r •• • • •*r. i«b*o IU*C»' &1.&0 «*V<7 gH»VTl>s»^ M*-<>J C#vCu. »i TO WC*~<A>«s) e^lvrihjfc ^.^i.ijotJ'-itcr.e 4. ivBa I /(Wu**- ,1^0 ' \yr\ r^p(?i»jg> fAn^ I'l}^ 1/ ---------- P^.i-ft-J(» |f«M. viWi I P-L P.t. ^wga. v.€v Cu I MOv^f€, A.O'^ITiOr-J |0»^ eyfg <ii»CTi VM PfiUC, i TO ifi> fCr-vTNjCo PUiXKl I*»o* *f* p<^JcyT<^5 if»CN> M0»KjM<Mr c?” tJgti^ ; if* T. A*^ llPiAifC^jp -yTT?. fJotLTr < SH^ "rSirt^LI T \ £ cpf* ^- HARDCOVER CALCULATIQNJJ0RK3HEET ScT3AC:< ZONE: (circle one )Q^-7^ 75-250 250-500' 500-1000' Existing Hardcover in Zone "a. 3. Garage c. Driveway D. Sidewalk E. Patio/ Deck p.Landscape AREAS UNDERLAIN BY » . PLASTIC SHEETING G. Other WIDTH _ X _ _ X _ X X X X _ikS_s.F. 0 -2-V S • r • S.F. S • r • _ S.F. S • r • S.F a;,-. , 0 ; S.F. V ‘V / S.F. S.r. I A.J S.F S.F. _ S.F. S.F. S.F __S.F Total Hardcover in Zone -S.F Total Property A rea in Zone S.F A i ill 3 X 100 2.1 .•2.e H j j. S idewalk X c. Patio / Deck ' S$ r 0 S.r. S • r • ? • ii£ r • I'T- __2. 4- ^5<5> 7.4V .F. @ •F. (D 4-S S S.F. 1 f* ■' 'ty • ■I o X 3^->®(3 G. OtHE.4 2iS_s S.f.^ t9 -1^'^ Total Hahocoveh in Zone Total PacPEj^rf Ai^ea in Zone - S#F* ______________ S.r. S.F. A I B ^ I -L 3 X ICO =_3^r -/o • • •. ei-'O (T»oOr . - —■ »y ->-# - ' > L .....J'S c ..''s .St •(■ .‘TZi’P^v. _________________1$ rT-^O 5.F=- l.H, S.r -'Loj^io^ S.p. /•' H -Cv * '• 4a ;» • • • •••/ • •- • t •s-n cec'£rA-\_.....jr^,r 7.5 ’ ________ns-*!^ _lS‘f S.F. —5..LS>Qg IZSTS^IP « • W V . '^ ‘ • Z \-rrr . ..... . '. • ..A </»•* . JW». '• *► f •.’ t *r ••• r« .. ^ »r« t* .- . .■» V «•.. i'. • • . 4... - . *^7 % I V. .r • • A •»■'*• • ■T ^•r • ICCL^ - I' '*• ____- - '■ K'—‘-•' "r UtilS -jCOies^iiiiiai—UilTtt^^ - 7 ^ t—^6^?JUSE ________ -■enerTC-r—r— .*■ -rs r ^ 'i • I ^ 3f ft?I 3.7.00 'T.ot-Iiz .............“S^/nfe I lU' cc^seHz-___ :.., \&H ___ JJ. - 7? X f') ----------------------------------------------------^ A ,>tio<p_,s___rz ^7.%- - ^ •'7.^0 ♦' ;ti -^‘ f- - :;< »♦? Ttt- I • l4 5^16 - In'S U—'5^-LL •-»• 1 ... • * • ,, . . • •. (a) ...... *" "*:*«•«. C1 • ^’A « - •• • , • • * *•.' ‘ ^-V . V - • • • * % •« * .* • •1.^ . * **\'—^» ‘.'^'41 «'-“*• ♦.< •• • • _ . _.. •*» # . •. • * - •„ */• ‘ -/^v*t..’ • '•. ** * .. • .'i •*» A SO i. . * *9 O<o\ a Ir _ -S8 SjSK^og^i^' ■ .'ll* •*»' ■ -• ■ ^i^^.•' * ..■'v . -..r • •.■ V• 4t- •• • • • v-?-u'. V-,<^ ••-- tTFr I Im •>;t: !i! .— - «c IfiQ.yo l! .?'■5___Mg:V>u " Prpn-p^ - . .‘*,^> i • -^ • . • •*’ «p* • • •».#’ ' ^ ■ ' i' - ■- • .It I f r _ VJ t-W. <?o •g^ovjBra. Ttg ‘T^owig. —• • . •! •■%'•• •- - « • .,! <^'■2-.. c.t’% fS-' c- ^ HP.RDCGVER aLCULATIQN WORKSH£-i Existing Harccove -i in Zone A. House 3> Garage c. Driveway D.. Sidewalk E. Patio / Deck F. Landscape AREAS UNDERU^IN BY PLASTIC SHEETING G. Other LENGTH WIDTH X__ X - X III Total Hardcover in Zone T otal Property Area in Zone S.F. S • r • S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. ' S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F S.F. S.F. -2..W S.F. f. A i 31 \__X 100 ^ I r _____J75-250 .f -ISO -2.553 - 'Soo ~z.fi.73 5.F. »r U’T •2-S; 3H2-_S.F, I • — j’^A^oL_,_^.-ns - *-_ _____________n’aj^SO «_ ___^ _ -2.SO- ^OO " 1&.H _S,f- «»• • II -• < • . • . ' •, Y-:*-** ' r . f> 1. n- % ^~ -- iTy"^.’'*«> ••^ - .•• ,;*^v *.v . »«• • •««t5C C»,'2.0\ -J- ^ :to-)w<-_/®^. ■^0(H-i, -y. * • •• r *4 I “ ' - V*. ' , • • v'W* ••_--„-r. * \ ...< • ?.■ c-y >V - :*:■ .C * // AT . . > V . ^ ' * : :.• i ! fr II I k«. I I . 4- i f i i ur-t b^.C<0 w rARx. >w^ ir q@__l; Apoif Hg^iC Utir li^sr* fjf wJ l^WgM. _^ym__J tAJkJKl tCy^uMouf^. 2C.olc>" *f* 1^MJT€.» if»c»; mck>um<mt »-!__>*? I* •it 7 lOfcLliti-oH. lOM^ P u^xkI : I"• ^c?io*tj£Ig_L:^,^^HT» A«*^ foifc p»>(triA.t^ Hh>tA.^i,iLo ^Ti. r\^»>r~sr MofcTr<t^ r»gr\g.iT v.i»«Aits P<^« I £ €ff’ ^- fc r; UK>t. *3»*3**1V 15-0- ■ ' ,') 'D) M.e»o JVL //// k^l(poA U'vt lit/CV'' 1 hr(^\h><0 fA^K. (II vO ILtJ^ IQ we»^<o. ptr-ArjjC i't-^O ' C#»itT ih>tr %.j| ^Otj ^ic.-T,e l! *v /HrfM. ttir* R*>T' ‘ Sfi rx. I Jl: J-5y.f V_J MA jk J tivCu liovilf. A v 0'7ITI0»O O-e? 5<CTtC »?‘V>J < r*t*-*M TO jc ~f Emcm CO 5oolt? I* [;<HC7Tt.» ltlQK> HO»A»MtMT Pu ^k I ( TfLbpostil ^V:us'/r«G /\A.vJ t:!^^Jl- Cov/f.H. l"* (^ V'® TO: FROM: DATE: Mayor Callahan and Orono Council Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator Jeanne A. Mabiisth. Building & Zoning Administrator July 6. 1993 COUNCIL MEETluU ,1UL 1 2 '995 CITY OF ORONO SUBJECT: ;!^1834 Mar>' McCany, 245 Tonka Avenue/Variance - Resolution Zoning District - LR-IA, Lakeshore Residential Brief Review of Application Applicant has applied for lot area and lot width variances for Lots 5 and 6, Block 3 located in the Stubbs Bay sewer district approved for sanitary sewer service (review Exhibit G. Resolution #3167). Council members may remember that Lots 3 and 4 to the immediate north were not approved for sewer as the current owner plans to let the properties go tax forfeit (review Exhibit F. Resolution #3166). The applicant must proceed with the variance application as proposed as a condition of the sale of the property. It is the full intent of Ms. McCany to acquire the properties at the time of the release at the public sale. Lots 3 and 4 shall be released for sale to only adjacent property owners for combination purposes. The owner to the immediate north has advised that they are not interested in acquiring the property. It is not clear as to the intent of the property owner to the immediate west. The County advises Ms. McCarty that she will not be advised of the release of the properties for sale unless she is listed as the owner of parcels 5 and 6. Applicant is aware that the limited building envelope will necessitate the need for a setback variance at a later date with the development of the site. Review Exhibit D, applicant is not able to provide a comprehensive development plan for the site until the area and width of the property is finally resolved. It is staffs understanding that the properties will be released for sale to adjacent land owners some time in September. It was difficult for Planning Commission members to approve the variance application knowing full well that applicant will be filing a future variance application for setback variances. The Planning Commission chose to act on the variance application in consideration of the fact that the applicant is obliged to follow through with the variance to complete the conditions of sale and that pending resolve of tax forfeit lands, applicant cannot provide a development plan. The Planning Commission recommended unanimous approval of the lot area and lot width variances based on the findings and hardships set forth in applicant s hardship statement and staff memo. The enclosed resolution has been drafted per the findings and conditions set forth in the Plannine Commission recommendation. A RESOLUTION GRANTING A VARIANCE TO MLTVJICIPAL ZONLNG CODE SECTION 10.23, SUBDIVISION 6 (B) FILE #1834 WHEREAS, Mary K. McCarty (hereinafter "the applicant") has an interest in the property located at 245 Tonka Avenue within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as follows: Lots 5 and 6, Block 3, "Bayside Addition to Lake Minnetonka", Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "the property"): and WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City for variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.23, Subdivision 6 (B) to permit construction of a new residence on a property that consists of 12,500 s.f. or .286 acres where 87,120 s.f. or 2 acres is required and a lot width variance as lot is 100’ at the rear of tlie 50’ street setback where a 200’ width is required. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: 1. 2. 3. FINDINGS This application was reviewed as Zoning File #1834. The property is located in tiie LR-IA, Lakeshore Residential Zoning District. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on June 21, 1993, and recommended unanimous approval of the proposed variances based upon the following findings and hard.ships: A. The property is 12,500 s.f. in area ard is subject to 2-acre zoning standards. Pace 1 of 5 B. C. D. E. F. The lot was platted prior to present zoning standards. As a condition of the sale of the property, applicant has had to prematurely apply for variances prior to the resolve of the ownership of the soon to be tax forfeit properties to the immediate north. Applicant is unable to finalize comprehensive development plan for property and is fully aware that based on the limitations of lot depth that she will need to file a rear/front setback variance application prior to construction. Developme.r. •. r ihe lot would be consistent with the pattern of development within the immediate Bayside Addition to Lake Minnetonka Plat. The City readopts the findings set forth in Orono Resolution approving sanitary sewer service to the property. 4. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this propeny are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variance would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable 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. 5. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicant and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. 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 Sections 10.23, Subdivision 6 (B) to pennit Pace 2 of 5 construction of a new residence at the property located at 245 Tonka Avenue, subject to the following conditions: 1. 3. 4. 5. 6. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, applicant shall have applied for the legal combination of the lots that will make up the final building site. Applicant shall apply for an access permit from the Public Works Department prior to installing an access at Tonka Avenue. The property is located within 500-1,000’ of Lak- Minnetonka and shall be allowed 35% of hardcover improvements at the time of development. Authorities granted by this variance run with the propeny not with the applicant, but are permissive only and must be e.xercisec by application for a building permit within one year of the date of Council approval, or this variance will e.xpire on that date (July 12, 1994). Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditior^ 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. The undersigned applicant has read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of herself, her heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Page 3 of 5 k Adopted by the Orono City Council on li 12th day of July, 1993 ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk Edward J. Callahan. Jr., Mayor Property Owner(s) STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) ss. The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 12th day of July, 1993, by Edward J. Callahan, Jr. & Dorothy M. Hallin, Mayor & City Clerk of the City of Orono. a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf oi the City. Notary Public Paue 4 of 5 r STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this day of , 199 before me a Notary Public within and for said county, personally appeared known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and’acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this day of , 199 before me a Notary Public within and for said county, personally appeared known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC Page 5 of 5 J To: L. Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator From:Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator Date:June 16, 1993 Subject: #1834 Mary McCarty, 245 Tonka Avenue/Variances - Public Hearing 2 ning District: LR-IA, Lakeshore Residential Applicant has applied for a lot area and lot width variance for a substandard property located in the Smbbs Bay sewer district. Two commonly owned substandard lots located to the immediate north are soon to be placed on the tax forfeit list and will be available for sale to the public. Substandard lots that appear on tax forfeit rolls are required by the City to be available to sale only to adjacent property owners. It is the purpose of the applicant to receive variance approvals so that the sale of the property can be completed. Mrs. McCany has been advised by the County that when parcels are released for sale if she is not the current owner that she will not receive written notice of their availability. The current application does not involve setback variances as it is really applicant ’s desire to wait until parcels to the north are combined with subject property before designing a future residence. The following ordinances are pertinent to the review: 1, Section 10.23, Subd. 6 (B). A. Area variance Required = 87,120 s.f. or 2 acres Existing = 12.500 s.f. or .286 acres Variance = 31,060 s.f. or .71 acres B.Lot width Required = Existing = Variance = 200 ’ 100 ’ 100 ’ or 50% List of E.xhibits A B C D E F G Application Property Owners List Plat Map Survey Lot Inventory of Bayside Addition to Lakeside Minnetonka Lots Resolution No. 3166 Resolution No. 3167 Zoning File ^1834 June 16, 1993 Page 2 Review of Application Refer to Exhibits D, F and G. Resolutions 3166 and 3167 were approved by the City on Aucust 10, 1992. Lots 3 and 4 to the immediate north of the subject property were not approved for sewer as it was the intent of the property owner to continue not paying real estate taxes and to allow them to gn tax forfeit. Upon tax forfeiture, the lots would be released to adjacent property owners. Per Resolution No. 3167, it would appear the intent of the City was to allow the future developer of Lots 5 and 6 to acquire the parcels in order to increase lot area and bring lot width into conformance. The applicant has advised that the property owner to the immediate north of Lots 3 and 4 is not interested in acquiring the properties. The only other property owner that may have a right to purchase the properties would be the propeny owner to the immediate west. Review Exhibit D. 125’ of lot depth and the 100’ total setback area (50’ front and rear) limits the depth of the building envelope to 25’. No matter how much additional area the applicant acquires, it may be necessary for applicant to apply for a front or street setback variance. Mrs. McCarty has to proceed with the current application in order to meet the conditions of the purchase agreement and to ensure that she receives official notice from the County when the tax forfeiture properties are available for sale. Review Exhibit E. Staff has completed an area and width inventory of sewered properties within the Bayside Addition to Lake Minnetonka plat. Of the 29 parcels, ^10 or 34% are 50’ or less in width, 8 or 29% are 51’-100’ similar to subject lot, and 11 or 38% are at 101’-200 + ’. As for lot area, 10 or 34.4% are less than 12,500 s.f., 9 or 31% are equal to the subject property and 10 or 34.4% are greater than 12,500 s.f. but less than 32,000 s.f. Hardship Statement Refer to E.xhibit A. The lot is 12,500 s.f. and subject to 2 acre zoning standards. The lot was platted prior to present zoning standards. Applicant must app y for variance application as a condition of sale and prior to final resolve of the tax forfeiture properties to the irmnediate north. Development of the lot would be consistent with the pattern of development widiin the immediate neighborhood. Staff would also suggest that the findings set forth i^esolution No^ 3167 are also^appropriate in consideration of the area and width variance. The substandard parcel is now sewered Issues for Consideration 1. Although not required to have a conceptual development plan tor the property, what concerns should be raised for applicant if it is necessaiy to resubmit for a setback variance with the final development stages of the property.^ Zoning File #1834 June 16, 1993 Page 3 o <*i« •If a setback variance is needed, what setback variance is preferable - front or rear? Note heavy buffer of natural screening to rear of property. v Any condition of approval must include the condition that applicant must apply for an access permit from the Public Works Department to approve access location on Tonka Avenue. Applicant is located within the 500-1,000’ setback area from Lake Minnetonka and will be allowed 35% hardcover. u y y CITY OP ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION ’tt -i''-'’ ... V y y ==:2^ Initial Application Fee $175.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) V'a^ian^ Fee $100.00 ^ (no change from original application) Variance for non conforming use $200.00 After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) PROPERTY INFORMATION Site Address 245 Tonka Ave.------------------------------------ I* "TV f“C 1 t t \m’t C’MWMU* Z,' 7 • i ' f“ C f‘CT * * T f Ait'^rtwc. I A w w*V*. WW'V f TT ,V Jk I k.* • w f T“ 1 I %J0V. Property Identif. Number (P.I.D.) Q5-117-23 13 002o/00^7 Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. Date Property Acquired pending _ _ _ _ _ _ _(month/year) f (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. rrJJ V -> » U f li.VM (r:cTC ’i*T«rU/n;r vrw# lytiZAi • tuu 4"T4^*‘i»o r'wM Onf TiJY>rr*. I w wwA MVl #v. /‘|C* / TT Present use"bf property: Zoning District: residential other(specify)vacant APPLICANT Name Mary K. McCarty Phone (home) 477-5532 479-4343 6250 Highway 12 W. Address:City: Phone (work) Maple Plain 55359 Zio: OWNER (if different than applicant) Esther M. Addison Phone (home) 473-/19Q Name 3382 Bayside Rd rit-vAddress: _________________________ city. Phone (work) Orono _Z ip 55356 DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $, Describe request in detail: Pernission fo r home construction on existing Jot smaller than 2 acres VARIANCES REQUIRED X Lot Area Lot Width Setback:Front Side Hardcover Rear Lot Coverage Average Lakeshore Other (specify) HARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS 4 I 0 C IU5 that jacen rdb1ems in meetmy sec back reouirements the City of Orono will rnnsider it increase (attach additiona?. sheets if necessary) r MOIRED ----------- be submitted by the .application ,1 1 of the .n„llcation to be considUed cegnletel deadline l.j/completed List of owners within ISO- (you must obtain ' — th' s ust fr^Hennepin County Department of Finance A-6C3 Govt Center 348-3271) . 1-4.1 3.^Plat Hap (obtai-a wUn property owners IrsU^.^ ,„,.eyor) to include l°uirUoL ” 5 T%"o\l“phic"lGrv?y (existing and proposed = —i„^\isting grade a« proposed (provr^ fs%'f“d^ndL to this application, please attach a separate list of ■- -any other persons you wish notified of this application. 8._ _Additional items as may be requested by City staff. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign thi_s_application^.^^ Please remember that vouir variance application is not complete_jJ- - - - - information has not been included. ^ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Tire^n^t ^ov^r^d^Ty-lrig^nal fee pay^^^^^^^ Sfel fs rr:t-nfco^r:ct^^^o^\r-\^o"/.^^^^^^^^ knowledge. Applicant's Signature .//(cU^Date OWNERS SIGNATURE aoDlication and further The owner hereby aclcowledges an City staff, consultants, authorises reasonable entry investiga- agents. Commission members, and Council members tor purp tion and verification of this request. Owner's Signature Date Applicant must have all submittals '^*’®,g^Lon°Meetings^ are" held on the Planning Commission Meeting. all scheduled third Monday of each month. Applicants Council. If an applicant is unlbr" “o*a?t?nd°\’'schedu “rmeeting!%lease mak^^^ authorized agent attend in your place and to advise r Office of this change prior to the meeting. RUN om 05'25/95BATCH 001PROP ADDR OHNER NAME TAXPAYER <' NAHE/ADDR .N ^ ♦ ' r ' ^ • I’ROP ADDR V ONNER NAMC TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR ••Vtr*’- V* PROP ADDR ONNER NAME ; TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR ' # * J V ' I PROP ADDR OHNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR \ »»/ •.'» c PROP ADOR OliCR NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR (I ■J V-V’ ■•T 'v '1 •; *,:s* • ■ f •' • J • HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY O^tiERS LIST58 05-117-25 15 001205A20 BAYSIDE RDRAH ANDERSONROBERT F I HENDY S ANDERSON5^20 BAYSIDE RDLONG LAKE HN 55356 58 05-117-23 13 0024 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED STATE LAND DEPT STATE LAND DEPT ADJ OmERS SALE PENDING CITY RES NO 3232 58 05-117-23 13 0027 00245 TONKA AVE ESTHER H ADDISON ESTHER H ADDISON 3382 BAYSIDE RD LONG LAKE HN 55356 58 05-117-23 14 0026 00280 TONKA AVE P A K SKOOG PHILIP A A KAREN S SKOOG 280 TONKA AVE LONG LAKE HN 55356 38 05-117-23 14 002T 00230 TOTACA AVE JAMES K FULKERSON A NIFE JAMES K FULKERSON 230 TONKA AVE LONG LAKE HN 55356 \ • M * * * 38 05-117-23 13 001303^40 BAYSIDE RO T M ZIESHER AMT ZIESMFR TODD H A MARIE T ZIESMER 3440 BAYSIDE RD LONG LAKE HN 55356 38 05-117-23 13 0025 00036 ADDRESS UMSSIGT^ED STATE LAND DEPT STATE LAND DEPT ADJ OHNERS SALE PENDING CITY RES NO 3232 36 05-117-23 13 0028 00295 TONKA AVE H A R SCHMITZ HENRY A ROSIE SCHMITZ 295 TONKA AVE LONG LAKE HN 55356 38 05-117-23 14 0027 • 00280 TOTACA AVE P A K SKOOG PHILIP A A KAREN S SKOOG 260 TOTA^A. AVE LONG LAKE MT4 55356 38 05-117-23 14 0042 00300 TOTJKA AVE JAMES L PATRIN JAMES L PATRIN 73 H GEORGE ST PAUL HN 55107 REPORT NO. PI435401 PAGE I • Ir.58 05-117-25 15 002500225 TONKA AVE CAROLE J HALSH CAROLE J HALSH 225 TONKA AVE LONG LAKE rtJ 55556 "V.• ytc.1 ‘I • / 58 05-117-25 15 0026 00265 TONKA AVE ESTHER H ADDISON ESTHER H ADDISON 5582 BAYSIDE RO L0t4G LAKE HN 55556 • .* ^ 9 *. • i , ^ » p A : ‘ ■••A • • 58 05-117-25 15 0029 00058 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED ESTHER H ADDISON ESTHER H ADDISON 5582 BAYSIDE RO LONG LAKE HN 55556 •» I ■» 4* ; » 58 05-117-25 16 0028 00250 TONKA AVE GERALD L BRIGGS GERALD L BRIGGS 250 TONKA AV LONG LAKE rtl 55556 TOTAL BATCH 001 00016 .... I • ¥ ‘.A’) • i. I V*. - 9 ;v V" ' ’ »• 1 . r* t ‘ ^ '. I, *. ■ > J V- . V : RUN OATf OS/tS/n HE»»«PIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORHATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OFWERS LIST REPORT HO. PIA55A01 PACE 2* 001Vl . .-V/. V-. • •; i,:- '.'' • I' • ‘ !*.'X :tr. A ; \ •. i ' * ' J ♦, ' ; ■ .l- r Jr!?v.v»• V >4'•' r- ' '•f • ' • 'i A# ■ ‘ * »' , .''V ' •. ■' ■■ ■ I * A . . .. r '................... ^ H‘ • : A, .•: » V • , y • 'ii • f; * ’ •*,,. . Ai'.‘ ■ • * ' I* r A ♦ » A • ■i. *4 .* f ■.V ■ /• •■ • • ••'■■■;.'• • • • ■ ■•t' • ' . f r*‘ . ^ .r , (T' * ■ ' ! • •' . ■■ • ’ . * '■■ ■ ^*.1 . ' ■ '-f . ’»'3* « •• ’ ■ r . * ’ I•■‘S..' ■'t ••.'i' •• R0^;;*• '.i ■ t “ . .*1'^ r ‘ ‘ ‘ •■ ■,•■< 4 ’.^'< • ■'.■•■' ••.•;. V.I ■;.••''^V-'r i;v , I. • ••. . - ■ ■-.r: »* • .1 m • ;•r T rroTTFV THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE1Se5r«eK at 1!S jy in Sr Sa Vion as it appears this date on thmwwos OF MY KNOHLEOGE AND i r t. • i ^ ‘■t, ^ DATE : - ,► r, u ■ ■• ' “.i ; ■.•• •■ ■■ ■;'Uq ;• ; ,i- \4 1-' \ , ..r r L' 1. '. ‘ ' ‘tVV .1 1 • « ■ ; s:-'^ ”•>: t :;v f • /’f n •i» ■.|K::3 i.->^A III) • ?o ».chA1 35( 10)^.vSV^T n4.5 ICO 3M.33 ;33 •. (5) ;I * A6» 5?,^(ii)(9)t •?x i:o U)33! J5KV '35 ( 17) '!». 133 ' •? V •* f y.(i: '-) (16) (f. >/ p.o* ' /• '«9. 5 ‘•331. I (I?) / fco---RD^^n O- i UJs_»s? ^ S (25)!s Q 5 ” (26)» Q 6 (?r)J • (28) ?, \ e ? f' > ■ ■ - ^^sas (29) 34 3 s q 3 • ■ (30):Ip a'''V ?Si^ ”S 2 ; P0(I9)M i^pTi* (?o) S'P , 'J ^ ^(») “ 5J c (22) • S' II.'W 6 ^ (23) ^ ^ (27)j (20 S’ 1 e »(?5)p k.135 35 •?1 4*^ •tr-(WEVEL0^fi^-?T / , 53 76 -V 49-V 4 (471 ^ laa SB 1 . (47'1 \ \ 135^ <5 .36.35 35 I ^ 3 '' 1^ Q (42) ^^ R(30) S’ g 16 q ^ (41) 5^;W 3 .lA g s' y» (31)? ^ Ss .......... ^ 5 •m _ ^F 13 S -) 6 (3:) r p (52) ouuo: '•■' •7f?!’'r'»‘p. • t V tr* • ‘ . •.• *♦ ■• • iyy • \\ ■ •* • •’ ■ ..>. ,; <*.' I ■ - .'vu I : j 30 : 50 : 50 ; 30 i(39);(3e):(40i:(36) >c> ^ $ • ©4 *1 X ■ I 44 ! 5c ‘i \ P5V(32)i, '-O ’ VX :5V 6 ^ ■ * - • ‘ ‘/vf •V v-^ • ^ s 6 M« It s 1 Cct (58) lA)fS£iS ^... 4 I •••V t ^c* •^AvcT r\c „ nn /,crv :> ■•• ■ ■ <: A .■■ '/ ■ ■< •'; J * ' « : • \ I. • • 1^ ' **»• I. • t . t i I j:- .'i°'' ”|- 33//,•..■•■. ,!; .'3 , J . ^9 > '# • * V ' I • t • , i ‘ •• * . « I ..* .* •. t ; < » 4 U r. •■■*.•' . • I . 4 ,*<•• ' ‘.. .i\ • . *■'/ ^.1. /2S.2S i X X A/99 '4C 'h/ f3S. 25 '' r // Legnl Description Lots 5 and 6, Block 3, "Baysidc Addition to Lake Minnetonka" This survey shows the location of tho boundaries of the above described property. It does not purport to show any improvements or encroachments. o; Iron marker Bearings shown are based on an assumed datum. CoriiN & Gronbfrc , In I hefcby cerlify th.il this survoy w.is prepared by me or under my direct super* I viidnun__I .\m m Ptiyil Fnoini»£>r I DAIF J- fj Jr,- w* - i r CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 3156 A RESOLDTION DETERMINING THAT SANITARY SEWER SERVICE WILL NOT BE PROVIDED TO VACANT PROPERTY LOCATED AT "235" TONKA AVENUE KNOWN AS LOTS 3 AND 4, BLOCK 3, BAYSIDE ADDITION TO LAKE MINNETONKA WHEREAS, the City of Orono is a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, the Stubbs Bay Sewer Project was initiated by the City to solve existing on-site sewage treatment problems in the Stubbs Bay area, within which Lots 3 and 4, Block 3, Baysxde Addition to Lake Minnetonka, are located; and WHEREAS, the aforementioned Lots 3 and 4 are separate adjacent tax parcels owned in common by a single owner, being described for tax record purposes as PINS number 05-117-23 13 0024 and 05-117-23 13 0025, respectively; and WHEREAS, the adjacent Lots 5 and 6, Block 3, Bayside Addition to Lake Minnetonka, are vacant lots which are intended to be served by municipal sewer; and WHEREAS, the total dry land area of Lots 3 and 4 is approximately 0.29 acres, as compared to the existing zoning regulations reguiring 2.0 acres per buildable site; and WHEREAS, said parcel is not buildable without one or more variances from the existing zoning code; and WHEREAS, the owner of said Lots 3 and 4 has declared to Hennepin County that Lots 3 and 4 will be allowed to go tax forfeit; and WHEREAS, said tax forfeiture would give the City the opportunity to allow said Lots. 3 and 4 to be sold to an adjacent property owner to increase the area of the adjacent property; and WHEREAS, two of the three properties abutting Lots 3 and 4 are substandard in area and would become more conforming in area by incorporating said lots with their existing holdings; and Page 1 of 2 CITYof ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 3166_________ WHEREAS, by allowing said properties to go tax forteit, the property owner gives up any substantial property rignts or use of raid property, and therefore the City’s refusal sanitary sewer service to said Lots 3 and 4 would not y property owner of a substantial property right; and WHEREAS, the pa cel is unbuildable unless sewer is provided or the property is attached to adjacent vacant parce because of insufficient room to provide for house, well, and primary and future septic system drainfields. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota that sewer service will not be provided to Lots 3 and 4, Block 3, Bayside Addition to Lake Mi.metonka, because the property is substandard intended by its owner to be allowed ._o go tax forfe ' . , adjacent uo other vacant land which will be provided with municipal sewer service and to which this still attached to create a single buildable si^e that, while sti substandard, would more closely meet the 2 acre requirement for a buildable lot than would the properties taken individually. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota on this 10th day of .August, 1992. ATTEST: A _ _ _ _ DorothyHa11in. City Clerk Barbara A. Pete*rson, Mayor STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ss. The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before “e o" inth da. of August, 1992. by Barbara A. Peterson t Dorothy M. Hallin, Mayor h City Clerk of the City of Orono, ® municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. CAROLE A. HASEMAN NOTMir pmuc HENNEP'N COUNTY , MY CCMUr'JCW CXPlRtS 9^^ / Notary Public Page 2 of 2 CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 3157_ _ _ __ A RESOLUTION DETERMINING THAT SANITARY SEWER ^VICT^ WILL BE PROVIDED TO PROPERTY LOCATED AT "245 TONKA AVENUE KNOWN AS LOTS 5 AND 6, BLOCK 3 BAYSIDE ADDITION TO LAKE MINNETONKA WHEREAS, the City of Orono is a municipal organised and existing under the laws of the State or .linneso , and WHEREAS, the Stubbs Bay Sewer Project was initiated by the Citv to solve existing on-site sewage treatment problems xn the Stubbs Bay area, within which Lots 5 ^nd 6, Block , aysx Addition to Lake Minnetonka, are located; and WHEREAS, the aforementioned Lots 5 and 6 are separate adjacent tax parcexs owned in common by a sxngle bexng described for tax record purposes as PINS number 05-117 2 0026 and 05-117-23 13 0027, respectively; and WHEREAS, two adjacent abutting parcels of Lots 5 and 6, namely Lots 3 and 4, Block 3, Baysxde Addxtxo to Lake Minnetonka, are currently vacant and ^aid of Lots 3 and 4 has indicated to Hennepxn County that saxd 1 will be allowed to go tax forfeit; and WHPREAS the total dry land area of Lots 5 and 6 is approximately 0 29 acres, as regulations requiring 2.0 acres per buildable sxte, and WHEREAS, said parcel is not buildable without one or more variances from the existing zoning code; and WHEREAS, the potential future availability of adjacent vacant lan?co“d'increlse the total dry land area of the parcel to approximately 0.58 acres; and WHEREAS, construction of a single family residence on Management Plan; and Page 1 of 2 CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. _________ WHERBASf failure to provide sewer service would make the parcel unbuildable because of insufficient room to provide for house, well, and primary and future septic system drainfields; and WEEREAS, the sewer will be available in the street or right-of-way adjacent to the property upon completion o e Stubbs Bay Sewer Projec*-• NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota that it is reasonable to provide sewer service to the property so as to which variances if applied for shall be reviewed on their own merits and circumstances at that time. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota on this 10th day of August, 1992. Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged this 10th day of August, 1992, by Barbara A. Peterson & Dorothy M. Hallin, Mayor & City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Mxnn^esota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. CAROLE A. HASEMAN NOTAPr PU«JC-4lt#<flOTA HENNEPIN COUNTY MV CCUUiSSCN WfRfS §>2yi» ■ /I Notary Public Page 2 of 2 TO: FROM: DATE: / Mayor Callahan and Orono Council Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator July 6, 1993 COUNCIL MEETING JlJl 1 2 CITY OF ORONO SUBJECT: /?1835 David and Ellen Phelps, 1950 Fox Ridge Road - Variance - Resolution Additional Exhibits J - Letters from Property Owners in Support of Applicants ’ Proposal Brief Review of Application Applicants propose a 13.2x22.6 addition to the northeast/street side of the existing residence. The expansion will provide additional room for an expanded family room and a two stall garage. The residence is already located within a substandard street setback. The new addition will encroach approximately 11’ closer to the street lot line (existing is 35.5 ’, proposed is 24.4’). Please review Exhibits H and I, note property is located out of the shoreland area of the protected tributary. The Planning Commission adopted the applicants ’ hardships and approved the variance request as proposed without conditions. The enclosed approval resolution has been drafted per the findings and hardships set forth by both Planning Commission and applicants. Applicants noted the following hardships: 1. 2. Septic drainfield and tanks are located to the immediate west side of residence. • • The house is located 24.4’ from the east lot line limiting expansion. 3. House is already located within a substandard street setback at 35.5 ’. 4. At the rear of the property, topography slopes to the wedand. 5. 6. 7. Most improvements do not involve bedroom additions resulting in potential impact on existing septic system. The addition will be placed over an existing driveway bed that would have been useless for future septic expansion. Fox Ridge Plat has an average lot area of 1 + acres and is subject to 2 acres zoning standard. Please review the enclosed staff memo and minutes of the meeting for more backgroimd on the discussion. A RESOLUTION GRANTING A VARIANCE TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.28, SUBDIVISION 5 (B) FILE /j?1835 WHEREAS, David S. Phelps and Ellen D. Phelps (hereinafter "the applicants") are owners of the property located at 1950 Fox Ridge Road within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as follows: Lot 6, Block 1, Fox Ridge, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicants have applied to the City for a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.28, Subdivision 5 (B) to permit a 13.2x22.6 addition to the street side of the existing residence. It will be located 24.4’ from the front/street setback line where the existing structure is 35.5 ’ and where the code requries a 50 ’ setback. Minnesota: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #1835. 2. The property is located in the RR-IB, Rural Residential Zoning District requiring 2 acres in area. The property consists of approximately 1 acre. 3.The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on June 21, 1993, and recommended approval of the proposed variance based upon the following hardships and findings: Page 1 of 5 A. The proposed improvements do not involve bedroom additions resulting in potential impact on existing septic system. B. The addition will be placed over an existing driveway bed that would not be suitable for future septic expansion. C. Septic drainfield and tanks are located to the immediate west side of residence. D. The house is located 24.4’ from east lot line. E. F. G. Tlie house is already located within a substandard street setback at 35.5’. At the rear of the propeny, the topography slopes to the wetland. The walkout design to the rear of the residence makes it difficult for a family room expansion and an upward expansion is impractical based on the interior layout of residence and the overall architectual design of strucnire. 4. 5. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variance would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serv'e as a convenience to the applicants, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable 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. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicants and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. Page 2 of 5 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 10.28, Subdivisions 5 (B) to permit the construction of an addition to the street side of the residence to the property located at 1950 Fox Ridge Road, subject to the following conditions: 1.Authorities granted by this variance run with the property not with the applicants, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit within one year of the date of Council approval, or this variance will expire on that date (July 12, 1994). 4.Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this resolution shall constimte a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 5.The undersigned applicants have read, understood and hereby agree to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of themselves, theirs heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agree to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title ot the property. Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 12th day of July, 1993. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin. City Clerk Edward J. Callahan, Jr., Mayor Property Owner(s) Page 3 of 5 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) ss. The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 12th day of July, 1993, by Edward J. Callahan, Jr. & Dorothy M. Haliin, Mayor & City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was e.xecuted on behalf of the City. Notary Public Page 4 of 5 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this day of , 199 before me a Notary Public within and for said county, personally appeared known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBUC STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this day of , 199 before me a Notary Public within and for said county, personally appeared known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBUC Page 5 of 5 ah i: % TO: FROM: DATE: 7. Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator June 16. 1993 SUBJECT: /I^1835 David and Ellen Phelps, 1950 Fox Ridge Road - Variance - Public Hearing Applicants propose an addition to the northeast/street side of the existing residence. The addition will consist of a garage and a family room addition where the current 2-stall garage exists. The residence is already located within a substandard street setback and the new addition will encroach further into the substandard street setback area. The following ordinances are peninent for this review: Section 10.28, Subdivision 5 (B) - Current/street setback Required = 50’ Existing = 35.5’ Proposed = 24.4’ Variance = 25.6’ or 51.2% Please review E.xhibits H and I. The adjacent protected tributary. Long Lake Creek, is shown on both maps. The property is located outside of the tributary protected area (300’). Applicants ’ property is not subject to the new Shoreland Regulations requiring hardcover reviews nor the required septic inspection to determine if the septic system is conforming (meeting 3 required separation from bottom of trench to seasonal water table). List of Exhibits A - Application B - Plat Map C - Property Owners List D - Applicants ’ Site Plan E - Photograph of Existing Structure F - Septic Map G - Survey H - Topographic Map 1" is = 100’ I - Plat Map 1" is = 200’ Zoning File ^1835 June 16, 1993 Pace 2 Description of Request The applicants seek to expand living space by using part of attached existing garage addition for an expanded family room and the remainder of the existing garage with the 13.2’x22.6* addition will provide area for the new 2-stall garage. Review Exhibit E. the garage addition will be constructed with the same roof design and pitch as extension on east side. Upon your site inspection, note the garage addition will extend no further streetward than the free standing lamp post. Statement of Hardship Please review Exhibit A, applicants note the following hardships: the septic drainfield and tanks are located to the immediate west side of residence (review Exhibits D and F). The house is located 24.4’ from the east lot line limiting expansion to the east side. The house is already located within a .substandard setback at 35.5’. At the rear of property the topography slopes to the wetland at the rear. Review Exhibit H. Staff would add the following: the 7-lot Fox Ridge plat has an average lot area of slightly 1 + acres and subject to 2-acre zoning standards. The proposed improvements do not involve bedroom additions resulting in potential impact on existing septic system. Many of the lots within the Fox Ridge plat do not have additional areas for alternate or future septic system. The addition will be placed over an existing driveway bed that would have been useless for ftjture septic expansion. Issues for deration A. v» ill the proposed addition be consistent with the type of development within the Fox Ridce neighborhood? B. What other options are available for expansion? The walkout design makes it difficult for a family room expansion to rear and an upward expansion is impractical. C. Is there a need for turnaround now that garage is moved within 24’ of road? A backout apron would have to be installed within the east side of the driveway and may require the removal of the mature landscape plantings. Should applicants seek a loop driveway similar to the one installed on property to immediate west? Staff will ask City Engineer to comment. . • I0"’' H CITY OP ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION _// ^ Initial Application Fee $175.00 X# '»> [J Q -- .y ($50.00 per each additional variance) - a., • CIjT'Cf'C/lQ^sQ^ Renewal Variance Fee $100.00 ; (no change from original application) ^'5*^i'£v 175.00 Variance for non conforming use $200.00 .-.r-v 00 After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Ivv'A -r PROPERTY INFORMATION Site Address Cfry •_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Property Identif. Number (P. I. D.) fO ^ 11 ^ i i^tv | L- Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. Date Property Acquired ~^l^\ _ _ _ _ _(month/year) I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. Present use of property; residential _ _ _other(specify) Zoning District; U.R-\rS _ _ _ _ _ _ APPLICANT Phone (home) ^ ^ Name Wjudlfl K ^ L^JUu\ ^VjJJ^^__________ Phone (work) Address; City; V,Cv\M^Ck-lCi Zip; OWNER (if different than applicant) Phone (home)_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ Name ^CxJT^ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Phone (work) _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Address; _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ City;_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _Zip;- - - - DESCRIPTION OP REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $ --------- Describe request in detail; KAA QA Qi6H;V\ . P ^ACLC^L A\a\y W.kW-.- - --— VARIANCES REQUIRED ___ Lot Area ___ Lot Width ___ Hardcover ___Lot Coverage n/ Setback; n/ Front Side _ _ Rear _ _ Average Lakeshore-p- _ _Other (specify). . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . .______ - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --- - - - --- - - - -- I HARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OP UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS ^ Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty and unusual pi^perty (attach additional sheets if necessary) REQUIRED SUBMITTAI.S All of the following information must be submitted by the application deadline date in order for your application to be considered complete; '^l,_ _Completed Application Form l/j'2._ _Certified Property Owners List of owners within 150' (you must obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Govt Center 348-3271). c3,_ _Plat Map (obtained with property owners list). _ _Certificate of survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) to include hardcover calculations as required.(provide one (1) copy 8%"xll" for reproduction). Jt' 5._ _Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing grade are proposed (provide one copy 8%"xll"). 6. _Slcetches or plans of floor & elevation views (provide 1 copy 8J5"xll"). 7. _As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of H any other persons you wish notified of this application. 8. _Additional items as may be requested by City staff. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your variamce application is not complete if the above information has not been included. APPLICANT’S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment) and/or consultant 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 t'lA Date T/ Vf 3 OWNERS SIGNATURE The owner hereby ac)cowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents. Commission members, and Council members for purposes of investiga tion and verification of this request. Owner's Signature Ct Date <'A ? Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building S Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. i RUN DATE 04/22/9S HCNTJEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INTORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OVfflERS LISTBATCH 009VPROP ADOROI#4ER NAME TAXPAYER Ai.fr/A00R 58 05-117-25 15 000100550 BROI#4 RD S H F FARLEY A K G FARLEY NILLIAM S KATHLEEN FARLEY 550 BROHN RD S LONG LAKE m 55556 PROP ADDR OHNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR 58 05-117-25 15 0006 019^5 FOX RIDGE RD D E KIRKMAN A J M KIRKMAN DAVID E A JOANNE M KIRKMAN 19<^5 FOX RIOGE RD LONG LAKE m 55556 PROP ADDR OHNER NAME rj TAXPAYER *« NAME/ADDRy > * 58 05-117-25 15 0009 01900 FOX RIDGE RD J A J FERRIS JEREMY J A JUNE K FERRIS 1900 FOX RIDGE ROAD LONG LAKE m 55556 PROP AOOR OILIER NAlfE TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR TOTAL BATCH 909 0000<> n ••2 7 V. '3- a , ^» ^ * • •.. G ft 'V..• s -• REPORT W. PAGE50 05-117-25 15 000200500 BROUN RO S JOHN C DOUTIUT ETAL JOHN C DOUTIUT 500 S BR0WT4 RO LONG LAKE MT4 55556 58 05-117-25 15 000501995 FOX RIDGE RD R A B HACK RAYMOND H HACK 1995 FOX RIDGE RO LONG LAKE MT4 55556 56 05-117-25 15 0007 01895 FOX RIOGE RD D B COSGROVE AAA COSGROVE DODD B A ANN A COSGROVE 1895 FOX RIDGE RD L0T4G LAKE MN 55556 50 05-117-25 15 0000 01650 FOX RIDGE RO M C HEADRICK A L S HEADRICK H C HEADRICK A L S HEADRICK 1050 FOX RIOGE RD LONG LAKE MN 55556 50 05-117-25 15 0010 01950 FOX RIDGE RD D S PHELPS A E D PHELPS DAVID S A ELLEN 0 PHELPS 1950 FOX RIDGE RD LONG LAKE MT4 55556 50 05-117-25 15 0011 01960 FOX RIOGE RO LUCIA T MORISON LUCIA T MORISON 1960 FOX RincF n LONG LAKE IA4 I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE 0T4 THE RECORDS OF THE IIEIAiEPIN COUNTY CEPARlflENT OF PROPERTY TAXAT1044t TO THE BEST OF MY KNOMLEOGE AND BELIEF. PI655A0120 : •• !' >' * I f.' .« . f / * I * « . ^ -.1 ,1 •• f ‘• .S. •v> * *' * ■ » •»V. f'-: ’•• % *• * •* . • • 4 '• ' '•V ^• V 'ij ■'W . * I wmJ^- - v** V. _-r—rr-"‘’<:-^.-r-. fy r. wv/ J‘ - 1 r \ ‘ 1.1 V *v i’. '-. iU-' Iijr. LT;.-^ ■ *--^**; ■-.- *••.,' •-•:. fjf .^. *. tf'.. .; • r-’- .._ ■. .j*v. ■.••j^v;i y• ' # I - ^ - *■; - address CODE ___ CITYOFORONO Cjte Conf’pcted to SEPTIC SYSTEM INVENTORY CARD Vun e wi s^^r __Propeav I D.Address j ^O f'py ■________ jSTStandard trench □ Mound ' LJ / A System type Description nZZ.fO ~ (esGOQ ____ II2^ _____Date of DeffTiii ^ ~ —'5> ~ ^ JS* Installer®?rmit No. __ No. Bedroomi Euilciing type /tg^iCV=-/SjC_fe or G?D 3~V &tg_ Uundry Dishwasher Garta?* OisDotal SEPTIC TANKS. Material CI«P v>c 2^^,^ ______Baffles Caoacirv 1) / OCCj 21 n^5TC> e re^ c><. Proper outlet and inlet •r^sT-c^cii Liquid cepth to RO fcv^l ______________- Height of tank bottom above water table Distance to nearest building - I c w E o c'>r ORAINPIELD: Total length of lines /^ S'_________.Numoer oMines ________Trenc.h widt.h _f£i, Total treatment area (so. ft.) ~7 VO Height of dramfield above water :aoie IS li:_________________ Type of filter material 0.eC-x— soil type —r.ar^"' r u" pVC,.<‘-Cc>‘*e' Distance from nearest bldg. .IS O___Tile size i „,**dtL!---------------Perc rate --------- Depth of fill over drainfield l2--fo Depth of rock over tile _2=---------------- T.*' -i mm/In _’jnder tile f ^ u a » (jc WELL DATA CL vi 3 > Cle 5a. CT 3 o S o u $ 9 </5 o > E d c dl au 3 laMIc: O O \Ai -3 u I • •*. ••• •• * .. •* . - *•. - .w ••• . • . a. • . ' • t .• *.• - ai-^ . . -t. '•'/ :.. • * •• •• '■* .*■“ * ^1, • L.4., .•* ^.•*a^*- • C- •* • . . •• I • ^• * e^ inspection record ______ COMPLIANCE DATE -------------- ■ — *7-y9.;75l /sj^Cr^HET)------<4^------- * ' ' • r' yjo l.^erA^/AjCt -------------L ^*33 n<r>; ^ <,.rAnt3 - nvr>^ — 7-:I?S-^3- r)Q <ivif4tfCiKi ^____i pumpout record 7yo-?/ /szg- c-coNFon^mo s - sijbstanoabd n - nonconfobming location SKETCH DATE GALLONS 1-11' 7?/k*ftO /o_/<i-7e /err:? A ro 7'ZT-f^ /cf^O 51?3 ,^oo i^ao> ' O !• H fot glQ<rC. ^3 Include II Well location 2) Distance from house to septic tanks, dist. bo*, and dramfield 31 North arrow and road TTOF LOT 6. BLOCK 1, FOX RIDGE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA O' N SI- 56' V7— >76.11pkt \76S5 Legal Description Lot 6, Block 1, Fox Ridge Tliis survey shows the location of an existing house, driveway, wetland and proposed addition in relation to the boundaries of the above described property. It does not purport to show any other improvements or encroachments. o: iron marker Bearings shown are based on an assumed datum. \ RQ- . V • m . * V.J *^».**« r - •* • V • “• *• V *. - •• . - .A.^* V* .•.•• - ,* ^.*•/;*• ;••••••.•/./. ’ • T ' *• ’ 1 ‘ .* ; • * # •’ ^*** *. W-. *.v . r.v ^ ^ —• — •**.**. .- - *V. .•. • • %*.* . •. . ».'.••* .V* r*' ■ •/ ' ‘ ^ r • • . '. • • v ' 7 :. . ' “ • * “-» ;.• 'V* Tv •'*.• • -Vf - • >» *’“• % • • *-»•.• • • . • •• • : *• • • • -• * • ^ ^ .• • • • . • ••♦• •. • > f * • •«« '^ *••••* I ll • •’ •*•*'• '!’* I?'’ . • *^. * ' ‘ •’ Tv* i *"' *.;. ‘ *T* •T• • •. V.* * * .i 4 ^ • -.'*** » . *' . V •* - .• V<-. . •». ' * - • ^' ••*<■.*'** •*rr. • 4 « ^ . . * »- r ^ ^ r. , • • .•tiV V .. > .•• . > *.- • V * w ... . * V. »i • ^ . • * •. ■ - : - • • .* ' . • . * •.. - • •-. % • * .4• ' • • • . • V- ■■ *. •• ••.;■• ; ■ ■ ,Xj-m •• '-:Cu4 ^ C. • »■' ' • 'r** * '-* J , * -V* ** ’***1'^ • . A* • - • *’ .y '•’ *» l**.Vr • ' >** L-* -p • ^ ■ • V * ^ , I.- ^ . • —. * .•• >V « •' ^':;v f .'*•'*’ 1 * ' •’ ’ f !i* . * >• ‘‘4* - • *w** V.* •• ^• • . • XJ*^ ;. - . * •■ ■• / ^■^ *''.''* *'f'V‘^’•-V''.-”" •i--' ■ ■'£ * • . .* • -^ * « • ’ -"Ife v4^' . ^ , t. • -f'''3i ^.x^ i m K,, ^ -—-:= .• • • •*■ -’'‘■'.r ^W • -X DAVID E. AND JOANNE KIRKMAN 1945 FOX RIDGE ROAD ORONO, MINNESOTA 55356 June 21, 1993 TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN/CITY OF ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION: We live at 1945 Fox Ridge Road in Orono, immediately across the street from Mr. and Mrs. David Phelps at 1950 Fox Ridge Road. This will confirm that we have no objection to the Phelps' receiving approval of the requested variance for the addition to their home. Joanne M. Kirkman TO: FROM: DATE: Mayor Callahan and Orono Council Members Ron Moorsc, City Administrator Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator July 8, 1993 COUNCIL i/i UL! 1 7 CnY OF ORONO SUBJECT: /)fl837 Cindy Fredrickson. 1516 Long Lake Blvd. • Variances - Resolution Additional Exhibits J • Existing Hardcover - Amended from Original K - Proposed Hardcover - Amended ^rom Original L • Existing Site Plan M • Proposed Site Plan Brief Description of Request Applicant proposes construction of a 24’x32’ detached garage and the removal of the existing garage. The existing garage structure is located IW from the east lot line and 3* from the north line. The proposed structure will be 2’ from the east lot line and 6* from the rear lot line at me northeast comer of structure. With the relocation of the detached garage further south on the property, proposed garage will no longer meet the required 10’ separation from the principal structure. Applicant proposes a 6 ’ separation. The garage at 768 s.f. must meet a 15’ setback from all lot lines. Proposed improvement will result in an increase of 4.2% strucmral coverage (15.7% exists). During the Planning Commission review, it was noted that applicant’s original hardcover proposed showed an increase of 5.4%. Applicant agreed to remove certain hardcover improvements and has filed an amended hardcover proposal. Review Exhibits J, K, L and M. Hardcover inventory is now recorded as follows: Section 10.22, Subd. 2 - 250-500’ setback area = 8,580 s.f. Allowed * 2,574 s.f. or 30% Existing * 4.164.9 s.f. or 48.5% (staff amended to include area of 12’xl4’ shed) Amended proposal = 3,894.52 s.f. or 45.39% The 12’xl4’ unfinished shed shall be removed upon completion of new stiuctu :. Applicant also advises that the retaining wall along the east lot line will be replaced within a year. Staff has been contacted by Troy Anderson, the neighbor to the east, and he has advised that he would be willing to provide a written statement to City allowing applicant to install tie backs for future retaining wall. The applicant has submitted acknowledgment forms from all adjacent neighboring property owners. The City has received no negative comments from any of the neighbors notified for this review. Zoning File 4^1837 July 8. 1993 Page 2 The Planning Commission voiced concern with the size of the smicmre and the fact that the required separation setback between structures would no longer be maintained. Members questioned whether the structure could be reduced in length and moved further north so that the 10* separation could be met. Applicant advised that she would be willing to make any additional fireproofing improvements to strucnire as long as the struemre could remain at the proposed size because of an immediate need for storage. Review Exhibits L and M. Applicant proposes the removal of all excess sidewalk areas adjacent to home on south and east side and to reduce current driveway to a maximum width of 15’ which includes a retaining wall along the west side because of the need to fill in existing higher elevations with removal of driveway. Applicant has asked to keep a 13 x 18 ’ patio to the northwest of the existing residence. Planning Commission Recommendation The Planning Commission recommended approval of the application as proposed subject to applicant providing confirmation of hardcover removals showing decreases from existing. Approval was conditioned on the following: 1. At applicant ’s request the storage shed on block shall remain in use until final inspection for detached struemre. 2. Detailed foundation and grad ’i% plans for foundation walls of proposed garage. The minority opinion felt the garage should be reduced in area and that an attempt should be made to make struemre meet required separation setback of 10 . Please review the enclosed staff memo and minutes of the Planmng Commiss ’on meeting for more detail on the review. The enclosed resolution has been drafted per the Plaiuung Commission ’s approval recommend'..tion adopting the findings and hardships noted bv applicant and others cited by Planning Commission members. A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTIONS 10.03, SUBDIVISION 9 (E); 10.03, SUBDIVISION 12; 10.22, SUBDIVISION 2; AND 10.03, SUBDIVISION 14 (C) FILE #1837 WHEREAS, Cindy J. Fredrickson (hereinafter "the applicant") is owner of the property located at 1516 Long Lake Blvd. within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as follows; Lot 5. Albee’s Long Lake, Hennepin County. Minnesota, (hereinafter "the property";: and WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City for variances to Municipal Zoning Code Sections 10.03, Subdivision 9 (E); 10.03, Subdivision 12: 10.03, Subdivision 14 (C); and 10.22, Subdivision 2 to permit construction of a 24’x32’ detached garage within the rear yard of the property to be located 2’ from the east lot line and 6’ from the rear lot line where a 15 ’ setback is required. The structure will be located 6’ from the principal structure instead of the required 10’. The addition of 768 s.f. of additional structure will result in an excess of total lot coverage of 4.2%. Total structural coverage is at 19.9% where 15.7% exists and where 15% is allowed and existing and proposed hardcover improvements on the property result in 3,894.52 s.f. or 45.39% hardcover within the 250-500’ setback area where only 2,574 s.f. or 30% is allowed and where 4,164.9 s.f. or 48.5% exists. Minnesota: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono. FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #1837 Page 1 of 5 2. 3. The property is located in the LR-IA, Zoning District requiring 87.120 s.f. or 2 acres’. The property consists of 9,727 s.f. or .223 acres. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on June 21. 1993, and recommended approval of the variances as proposed based upon the following findings and hardships: A. The lot is less than a quarter of an acre in acre and subject to 2 acre zoning standards. B. The property located within the shortiland area of the City has a septic system that conforms to the 3 ’ required separation from seasonal water table to bottom of trench. C. The proposed garage although located within a substandard setback will be located further away from the side and r'*'*.r lot lines than the existing structure. D. The City has received nc negative comments from the neighbors notified of the proposed improvement. E. The overall improvements will result in a decrease in hardcover of 270.4 s.f. or 3.1%. F. Visual impact of the 12 Vi’ high structure will be minimized because of the location of a 6-7’ high privacy fence and the fact that structure will be cut into the higher elevations of the rear yard. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variance would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicant; and would be in keeping with the spirit and uitent of the Page 2 of 5 5. Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of ihe City. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicant and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants variances to Municipal Zoning Code Sections noted above to permit the construction of a 24’x32 ’ detached garage located 2’ from the east lot line and requiring a 13* or 87% variance, structure will be placed 6 ’ from north line requiring a 9* or 60% variance, strucnire will be placed 6 ’ from principal structure requiring a 4* or 40% variance. The addition of 768 s.f. of structural coverage results in a 4.9 lot coverage variance and the installation of the detached garage results in hardcover variance within the 250-500* setback area of 15.3%. Approval is subject to the following conditions: 1 Existing storage shed on blocks in rear yard shall be removed prior to the final inspection for the new detached garage. 2. All other hardcover improvements scheduled for removal must be completed prior to the footing inspection for the new construction. 3. Based on the substandard setbacks proposed for garage, spe'»al firewall construction shall be required along the east, south and north de of the structure. 3 Authorities granted by this variance run with the property not with the applicant, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit within one year of the date of Council approval, or this variance will expire on tha-: date (July 12. 1994). Page 3 of 5 5. Violation of or non-compliance with any of the tenr and conditions of this resolution shall constitute a violation of the zoning -jode. shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. The undersigned applicant has read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of herself, her heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 12th day of July, 1993. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Cleric Edward J. Callahan. Jr.. Mayor Property Owner(s) STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) COUNTS OF HENNEPIN ) ss. The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 12th day of July. 1993, by Edward J. Callahan, Jr. & Dorothy M. Hallin, Mayor & City Clerk of tlie City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public Page 4 of 5 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this day of . 199 before me a Notary Public within and for said county. p>ersonal ly appeared_______________________________ known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the lOiCgcinj instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBUC STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this day of , 199 before me a Notary Public w ithin and for said county, personally appeared____________^^---------------------- _________________known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed tf’tf foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBUC Page 5 of 5 TO: FROM: DATE: Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator June 17, 1993 SUBJECT: #1837 Cindy Fredrickson. 1516 Long Lake Blvd. - Variances - Public Hearing Applicant proposes the installation of a detached garage at 24 ’x32' within the rear yard of property. The proposed garage will replace an existing garage. Both the existing and proposal garages will be located within substandard setbacks. The following ordinances are pertinent to this review: Zoning District LR-IA Total lot area = 9.727 s.f. or .223 acres (required = 87,120 s.f. or 2 acres) Section 10.03, Subdivision 9 (E) - accessory structures in excess of 750 s.f. require special setback requirements. Required ~ 15' A.Rear Existing = 5’3" Proposed = 6' Variance = 9 ’ or 60% B Side Existing Proposed Variance = 1.5’ 2' 13’ or 87% Section 10.03, Subdivision 12 * crowding principal. Accessory structure must be 10’ from principal structure. Required = 10’ Existing = 11’ Proposed = 6’ Variance = 4 ’ or 40% Zoning File #1837 June 17, 1993 Page 2 Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 - hardcover inventory. 75-250’ setback area = 2.240 s.f. Existing = 432 s.f. or 19.28% 250-500’ setback area = 7,486.5 s.f. Allowed = 2,245.95 s.f. or 30% Existing = 3,132 s.f. or 41.83% Proposed = 3.536 s.f. or 47.2% Variance = 1,290.05 s.f. or 17.2% Section 10.03, Subdivision 14 (C) Total lot arei = 9,727 s.f. 1,459 s.f. or 15% is allowed 1.533 s.f. or 15.7% exists 1,937.7 s.f. or 19.9% is proposed List of E.xhibits A - Application B - Property Owners List C - Plat Map D - Neighbor’s Acknowledgment Forms E - Survey/Existing F - Survey/Proposed G - Floor Plan H - Elevation I - Section Description of Request Applicant proposes the installation of a 24’x32’ detached garage v ithin the rear ) rd. Current structure is located 1*/^’ from east lot line and 5.3 frojn north lot line. Proposed structure will be 2’ from the east lot line and 6’ from the rear at the northeast comer of the structure. The accessory structure will be located only 6’ from the principal structure where the code requires a minimum 10’ separation. The proposed garage is 768 s.f. and must be located 15’ from all lot lines. A structure less ih? i 750 s.f. can be placed 10 from tear and side lot lines. An excess of structural coverage exists on the property. Ihe improvement will result in an increase of 4.2% structural coverage. Hardcover has been increased 5.4%. Applicant has shown no compensatory hardcover removals. At your site inspection determine if fhere will be any impact on the property to the immediate north. The structure will be at a maximum height of 12'/i . There appears to be a Zoning File/Jfl837 June 17, 1993 Page 3 6-7’ high solid privacy fence along the rear of the property. Along the east side there is open grassed yard. The retaining wall along the lot line seems to be in a serious state of disrepair. Applicant should advise as to die status of the structure. Is it to remain or is to be rebuilt? The 24 ’ wide garage will require a 10 ’ wide cut into the existing 4’ bank. Applicant must provide grading and drainage detail with building permit. The maximum 12 ’/^' high structure will be placed into the hill and may have limited visual impact on the property to the north. Staff has received no comments from the neighbors notified of the improvement. Issues for Consideration 1. There is an accessory storage shed on blocks located on the higher elevations to the rear of the property. There is no record of this structure on the sur^e\ nor does the hardcover inventory include the area. The structure must be removed before r. building permit is issued for the new detached garage. 2. What other hardcover improvements can be removed to offset increase of 5.4% hardcover - 239.2 s.f. or 3.1% of patio deck. 158.72 s.f. or 2.1% of pavement, others? 3. The accessory structure will be placed Ic.*;' than 5 ’ from the lot line and will require special firewall construction based on building code requirements. 4. There is no turnaround on the site. Based on the limited use of roadway a>«d location of property near the end of cul-de-sac, staff would recommend against a turnaround on the property. The lot is already severely impacted by existing hardover improvements. 5. Will there will b; a visual impact for the property owners to the north and east and if so, how would you minimize impact? Any recommendation of approval must include the following: 1. Removal of storage shed on blocks in rear yard prior to the City issuing a building permit for new construction. 2. Detailed foundation/grading plans for foundation walls of garage. 3.Hardcover removals are to be required. These removals must be completed pnor to the footing inspection for the detached garage. -fl CITY OP ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATIOH ■ Initial Application Fee $175.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $100.00 (no change from original application) Variance for non conforming use $200.00 After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) PROPERTY INFORMATION Site Address \^\Vp A fi rrrv oz ••vOAiOvail c'f uMiw'vtwprrrrr 0t •-wT'i c, t ^ rr^ ?.^c AA V a 1^1 1 KK. li /»A . » V V * ai ti- w*•. tVrVOT. Tw^a»V r * 'V*# CAf••fc. »wvv*a »%va t A*/*v f /’"0 /C Vi*‘ ' 4.*^/ / m 4Droperty Identif. Number (P. I.D.) S"3^ Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. Date Property Acquired_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _(month/yoar) I (do)^C^o no^p also own the adjacent parcels of land. PresentTrsN"^ property: . S/ residential other(specify)Present use of prope^y: Zoning District APPLICANT N£une CL' Phone (home) Phone (wor)c) ^ Address: l*SVU Lor^Lg^kp ^\vxt:. City: Zip:__S2^^ ONNBR (if different than applicant) Name Phone (home) Phone (wor)c) Address t City:Zip: DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $ f^CCO'^ Describe request in detail: , 9 VARIANCES REQUIRED _ _ Lot Area ^ Setbac)c: Lot Width Hardcover Lot Coverage Front V Side Rear Average Lakeshore Other (specify)_ HARDSHIP/DBSCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty and unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code requirements: ^ lo4-_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ J)-' ‘I 'S 'fJC (attach additional sheets if necessary) REQUIRED SUBMITTALS All of the following infonnation must be submitted by the application dead line date in order for your application to be considered conpletet 1. _Completed Application Form 2. _Certified Property Owners List of owners within ISO* (you must obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Govt Center 348-3271). 3. _Plat Map (obtained with property owners list). 4. _Certificate of survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) to include hardcover calculations as required (provide one (1) copy 8%"xll" for reproduction). 5. _ _^Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing grade are proposed (provide one copy S^^xll"). 6. _SJcetches or plans of floor & elevation views (provide 1 copy 8H"xll"). 7. _As an addendum to this applicationr please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. 8. __Additional items as may be requested by City staff. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application, remember that your variance application is not conplete if the information has not been included. Please above APPLICAMT'S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment) and/or consultant expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the infonriation supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her )cnowledge.15 ^rue ana co^reci: zo cne oesT: or n Applicant's Signature i/•Date ONMBRS SIGNATURE The owner hereby ac)cowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents. Commission members, ard Council members for purposes of investiga tion and verification of this request. Owner's Signature Date Applicant must have all shl^ittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please raalce arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise che Building £ Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. MM BATI 0«/01/U MTCN MS .MM MM ONNM NIHI TAMSAVtS NAMI/AOM It IS «0Ol014M LONB LAKt tl.VD J N SAMNCII A A L 6AA0MM ANXTA L MADNtit &4M lONO lAKS »LVO LONS UM tfft BSSSt IIE»t<PIN COUNTY PKOPCRTV INPORMATION SYSTEN PRMCRTY OMCRS USTIt 2A-llt-» IS 0002 OlttC lONB lARE tLVO T 0 ANDERSON • C A ANOERSON TROY A CATHERINE A»A)ERS0N 1A90 LONG LAKE DIVO LONB LAKE N4 55SSA REPMT NO. PXtSSADl PAGE XISt 2«>ilt-2S IS M04 0151A LONB LARI DLVO C2N0V J FREMICKSON CINDY FREDRICKSON C/0 STATE BAM OF LONB LAKE eOK Alt LONB LARE Ml StSSt I'r / OM«K NANI TA19AVEII NAME/AOM It tt-Ut>fS IS ODDS tlSM LONB LARI tLVO 0 J tNITM A R S JONDALL 0 J BNITN A R S JONDALL IBM LONB LARt OLVO LOHB LARI Ml BBSS* SB SA-llt-ES IS 000* OIBSO LONB LARE BLVO BRANT D EBGEMERO BRANT 0 EGBEHBERG 1550 LONB LARE BLVD LONB LARE Ml 5555* St XA'llt'ES SS 0007 015*0 LONB LARE tLVD ■tOtIN E CRAMFORO t.gtlN E CRAHfOiiB 15*0 LONB LARE BLVO LONB LARE Ml BBSS* OMKR NANI TAXPAYER NAME/AOM M f*-llt*tS SS MU tlS*B LONB LARE BLVO J E tlOHAN A C A tlBNAH JAMES • CVNTNIA tlCNAH SB*B LONB LARE BLVO LONB LARE Ml BBSS* PROP ADM BOOM TAXPAYER NAMI/ABM t*-nt-» SS MEl DAKOTA AVE t A C NOOONARO OAVIO A CVNTNIA Mt OAROTA AVE LONB LARE Ml BBSS* SB t*<iia-2S SS 001* 015SS LONB LAKE BLVO BERNICI aJMNISCN BERNICE ZUMUSCH 15SS LONB LAKE BLVO LONB LAKE Ml 5555* SB 2B-110-2S SS 0022 OOfOB DAKOTA AVE S R KNUTSON A J « KNUTSON SCOTT R I JULIE A KNUTSON *08 DAKOTA AVP. N LONG LAKE MN 5555* FS P*-l't-AS SS MAO coat* DAKOTA AVE J N OEMIAV A R J BASNER JANET N BEMIAY BB* OAROTA AVE ORONO MN 5555* SB S5>1IB-2S AA DMA OISAS LONB LAKE BLVO L N CAPRON ETAL N/L EST L N CAPRON 17505 OLD ROCKFORD RO PLYMOUTH Ml 55*** I I TAXPAYER MMI/AOM SB SB*llt-SS AA MOS tut* LONB LAKE BLVO JAMES I COPltN A NIFE JAMES I COPIXN 1B09 LONT I BLVO LONB LAK* BBSS* TOTAL BATCH 005 OOOIS I 1 ‘'V.r ••RUN DATC OA/01/95 BATCH 005V... V v>. « * I• < V. ' I k>f •'I*. < I • • “ • /•VJ ' * >•:' ;* }’r f . j ! » s'; t ’ I • A ■ • ' •. ‘s J'.i'.’ ''4 V b » ‘ t • i . 'T' . . ■ ' ^*(f. ./ 'i’-• .... .'■••'■.•. r i. r‘ ' . I , * • ■ \ - ' •p . »*. ■« • . . .* I t HEt»«PlN COlAfTY PROPERTY INEORMATIOH SYSTEM PROPERTY OI«IERS LIST REPORT NO. PI4S5401 PAGE 2A t «*- ' A' • ♦. I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AM> TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HENNEPIN COWITY OEPARTTttNT OF PROPERTY TAXATION, TO THE BEST OF HY KTTOHLEOGE AND BELIEF. DATE' . Sf*. •ot ^\ir ■:.v '* \ i ♦ * '.4:* ». »JV i > ** •' .> f ... i • ‘ - ‘ * ' i." I•• t . ^ ,9 9 ’ ? (51 .7- . ? ?r • "0 — 1 •' • > .4 »> ^ ::'^ s r- ''DEtL -• t » . I ^ ^ -; A ?5 r*t^ a* i a; --.-:rV'''y -'-SlV.T'' • :-r ft»:r y*‘i 'J* ?* lOT • aj CD rr T lOT } ft /. < 'P) JfDH53§T'0ifj'S ^ C- (ID • i' ,/') ■» u 3) oA f . ' I ^4 98 'AILSSE' $ ^RlARRAWSEMEMn 9 v/ « 24)*/ u'3; .,, 21^ 59 LOKIS M2'. ? O ,s •w ^■' :J •f'4>I. ^ ' ■ ' I ' AVE • 4.! w^ 58 ( M A« LOT * . J) - 1 lO’ \*------------.T •-^T s • ,•« Adjacent Property Ovmers* Acknowledgement Form I (we! ^ a;£25 oO- -of I cr<,(r.Vg 'PAvd . (print addreks](print name(s)l A «-ho nlans for the proDOsed improvement or proposed use of the L.X.V, ^ also referred to as land Use Application No. ______.• I (we) . Ll. .W4a. (print name(s) ](print address] Kave reviewed the plans for the oroppsed 0^: property located at j ^ IL- \SVat------- Application No . . ^ a. ^ ♦.Krat. in ^»xecutinq this ac)cnowledgement, I (we) amI <we) understand that xn executing orooerty or use (are) jor'^hc'cTty Co^ I <"«> “■" <®p®’ tL r.rroLrenr/la:s*a°nd that tL proposed neighbor's project or use requires Council aporoval. /■/yj^ttcy Prop^ty Owner o o 7<3 ^ «#1 Property Owner Date If you have any your®Lmmen«''^to''"th'i' Building t L^\^roffi« scheduled meeting date. Adjacent Property Owners’ Acknowledgement Form A *-ho nlans for the proDOsed improvement or proposed use of the p^pem Tccafed \^lU LM also referred to as Land Use Application No I (we) understand that in executing this (are) not as)ced L (are) aware of requires Council approval. Property Date b - >7- Property Cwner I (we) (print name(s) ](print address] >posed improvement or proposed use of the 4^5o referred to as Land Usehave reviewed the plans^gt^ property located Application No._ _ _ I (we) understand that in executing this (are) not asked to declare-approval am (a«) aware of ^hn:rt=:e-n-;^)^Ts^°nd\\Vt^rheTt^^^^^^^^ P^o.ect or use requires Council approval. Property Owner V / / H0 J ! Property Owner Date•> A Date A .1 j If you have any y ”i"commen‘;“"to "th\''"Bufrding°s L^nrng^^i” a\^^Va?t ‘irdays%”*or “to th/ scheduled meeting date. Adjacent Property Owners' Acknowledgement Form I (we)(I L{ /] ii\ I ()r-r d (jCi _ _ _ _ _ _ (prrnt name(s)] have reviewed the plans for the proposed i.nprovenent or proposed use of the property located at __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ also referred to as Land Use Application No. of '>J (princ address] I (we) understand that in executing this acknowledgement, I (we) am r L-:iy-t^f crnf^ f- t^°c:;U C^uS-fl Jwet:/u?:rLare;o the improvement plans and that the proposed neighbor s pro:ect requires Council approval. ''JjUrjiiuj. Tyuiicl Property Owner Date Property Owner Date I (we) 4^ ^ ********************************^***** (print name(s) ](print address] have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement property located at -- - - - -- - - - - --- - - also Application No. _ _ _• or proposed use of the sfsTTsd to L3.nd Us0 I (we) understand that in executing this (ar«) not asked to declare “approval or disapproval of the p P 7 ^^t-LeTely to confirm for the City Council t^ 5 A//j lac. Property Owner Date If you have any information that may assist the this Land use Aoplication, please submit your Zoning Office at least 10 days prior to the scheduled meeting • ■ t)Adjacent Property Owners' Acknowledgement Form V--' 7u onV\ iS.C _ _of — ' ‘ ’ TFrint naM. (s) ] (prin. address 1) - oiAHc; fo- the orocosed imorovement or proposed use of the have reviewea the p^a . ‘ * \ V * 0\ X al*^o -e-e’-rac to as Land Use property located at Application No._ _ __• I (we) understand that in executing this fVrtVo^ (are) not asked to declare t (we") am' (are) aware of hut merely to oonfrrm ror tne C..y Counc 1 ...n the improvement plans and t.hat. «.ne p-opu requires Council approval. ^Ink3 DateProperty'^Cwner' Property Owner Hit***** ************* Date ****************** I (we) of (print name(s)(print address] have reviewed the pl^h= f Us® property located at /S/Cr ^--cj^rnS" ------ Application No. _____ j a.v,e.+. in f*vecuting this acknowledgement, I (we) am I (we) understand that - o-* d'sacoroval of the property or use (are) not asked Council'that I (we) am (are) aware of but merely to confirm oroocsed neighbor's project or use the improvement plans and ^ha. tne p . requires Council approval. Property Owner #igH7 Date property Owner ^ ^i ty in the review of If you have any y^r'ccmments to the Building s this Land Use Application* P . _ tf.e scheduled meeting date, zoning office at least 10 days prior to * 1"%.. Existing [.egg I Poser ipt ion Lot 5, Albee's Long Lake This survey shows the location of a house and garage in relation to the bouiuLiries of the above described property. It does not purport to show any other improvements or encroach ments •: Iron marker found o; Iron marker set / 't (; "V- r . £ L< Tl g- a! t. m' « o f ' 'i I •• ); * ^ Ot}. Existing Legal Description Lot 5, Albce's Long Lake This survey shows the location of a house and garage in relation to the boundaries of the above described property, it does not purport to show any other improvements or encroach ments . •; Iron marker found o; Iron marker set f. } ' .0 )i / HARDCOVER CALCULATIG.r'.-WRKSHE SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE CNE) 0-75.' Existing Hardcover in Zone o o 50') 25G-5GG' 5C0-1CC0' A I nuuoc LENGTH ____ A X WIDTH X . X _ X 3.Garage X C.Driveway X X _ D.S idewalk X ( X < X < E.’atio / )eck X sa .J F.Landscape - X 5 1 i I « W t mm ^ areas UNDERLAIN BY X s PLASTIC SHEETING X S X mrnm S G. Other X s• S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. . S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. Total Hardcover in Zone Total Properf/ Area in Zone S.F. ’_ S.F. .-n V B X 100 * IS { M HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET S£T3AC:< zone : (circle one ) 0-75' 75-250'^250-300' Existing H ardcover in Zone 5C0-IGC0' >At nuuoc » LENGTH 'f' (0-1 X 0 / WIDTH . n.4 = ^ 14 s.F "7,S X: >= • 1) ^ s.F. ■ 3 . '=1 X • = W* S.P. . X =* S.F. 3. 1 ^ UAnAGc ^X <4 s 'A 1% * ’^U-% S.P. C.Driveway X /L'= /.QCC s.?. X « = S.F. 0. • S idewalk ^X /«- M = 3- 35?. 72^ S.F. X = S.P. ) a X = /^»)' -35)^ S.F. E.Jatio / 3ec :< X - » • s.F. • f.Undscape X . » S.F. AREAS UNDERLAIN 3Y , _X * S.F. PLASTIC SHEETING X • = . S.F. X = S.F. G. Other X » S.F. % Total Hardcover Total Property Area # IN Zone IN Zone 3 1 S.F. n^^L-. s G.F. fli 4 3 Xiao- ^/. B 2<**0* VIDE ALL DEPTW OPTIONS ONE POllPLC POOP REAR ELEVA2A'-0* VIPIA/12 ROOr I TYPICAL RICM1 2A**0' VIDE A/12 ROOr PIT. C«*DtI TYPICAL LEI 1 TYPICAL PRONT ELCVATION SCALE: 1/4" = r-0"FOR CORNER 24'k' VIDE ALL DEPTH OPTIONS 4/12 ROOr PITCH ONE POUDLE CARA6E POOR ERONT I 24*-0‘ 4/12 R. RAFTER LOAD TABLE MINIMUM RAFTER SIZE AND SPACING LIVE DEAD 24’ WIDTH LOAD LOAD (12’ RAFLER SPAN) 20 7 2 X 6 © 16* O.C.p. 30 7 2x8© 16* O.C. 30 15 2x0©16*O.C. 40 7 2x8© 16' O.C. 40 15 2 X 10 ©24* O.C. SEE FRONT FRAMING ELEVATIONS FOR EXACT DOOR CONFIGURATIONS.0 lo; y roi 2T* • •*< r I HARDCOVER CALCiJLATIO!l WORKSHEET SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75' 75-250' 250-5C0' 500-10C0' Existing Hardcover in Zone A. House LENGTH __• ; a. 3. Garage c. Driveway ’,V3 > D. Sidewalk ~5 E, Patio/ Deck I Ic ■-5 F.Landscape•V e . AREAS UNDERLAIN BY- - PLAST I C- SHEET TN.G 3 n G. Other S.F. WIDTH \” -i S.F. ( « S.F. X -1.3 = \q-:* o S.F. X S.F. X • o ••»S.F. ♦ o S.F.n-: ''.V S.F. X S.F. . r X S.F. f X.] > "1 S.F. I v.?'( .l|S.F. ‘I S.F. I *' \o qI • t .r S.F. Oct • S.F. ' \ t ^ ^ ^ — • O'—.-S.F. S.F. Total Hardcover in Zone - S.F. Total Property A.''.ea in Zone / / X 100 y'—J r , » ^ -( — HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE CNS) 0-75' 75-250' ^&xI0T^tw Hardcover in Zone 250-500' 500-1CC0' A. House 3i Garage c. Driveway D. Sidewalk E. Patio/ Deck F.Landscape areas UNDERLAIN BY PLASTIC SHEETING G. Other 11/-• }11X ■^\C v/‘S.F. LENGTH 9 X WIDTH 1 . r • -1^S.F. \ .q X O • \ -'ua: ■S.F. .20 .1 X q.q 1°0.S.F. X 4mm S.F. X - . 2 S.F. ^ 1 .j X IS ^ « S.F. J X I ^ S.F. 4 i- 4 ' « W:? ( r ,\ X o . 1 = — </ S.F. V,X 'T •S.F. 1-1.1 X 1 r :' T A ' - , S.F. X S.F. • X S.F. i X S.F. X ss S.F. X S.F. S.F Total Hardcover in ^one S.F. Total Property Area in Zone c —S.F.B A ^ ^ *2 ^ ^ iiii^ ~ 3 ' ; - X10 r\• 7. --7 £ h }j ^ Doner i pL j o ,, I-ot 5, Alhco'r, l.oncj hnko llus nurvoy r.liowa Uio locnUion oC n housp nii.l <jatngo in rolntion to tho l.ouml,u-i ps „r'tl,p abovo ilnncribod (uopocty. n. dm.-:! not inniiort m°nts°“ CMci oacI,- •: Iron marker round o; Iron marker eel: / ui;'' \ **- B • \ K',1 I*. \mtnfLJkip i iicrcby cctiify Ih.il ihis stirvpv w.i<; mt»n.irp.t hi. i: « • • * •- U\ \) "\ .••’A'? 'V/ ‘ • CK «1 :?3 vj V' ■Ifl S A s% N ExisUiiuj I.cq.il Dor.cri[)tion Lot 5, Albcc'n Loiuj Lnko This survey shows the locnl. ion oT a liouso and garago in relation to tlic l)ouiulaiies ol! the above ilnscribod property, it does not puiport to sliow any other iinprovompnts or encroach ments . »: Iron marker found o: Iron marker set / \ . V •'••••' '■■ ) t''v ,1ViV^J’ a:.:AL \ ^ I 7/ To: From: Date: Subject: Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator July 8, 1993 //1839 Robert H. Owens. 1700 Bohn's Point Road Variance - Resolution COUNCIL MEETiriG JUL ] 2 1"^'' CITY OF CRP?^0 Zoning District: LR-IB Total area = 33.010 s.f. or .76 acres The applicant seeks approval of a hardcover variance within the 75-250 setback area tor proposed additions to the existing residence that will result in an overall reduction ot hardcover within the setback area. Please review Exhibits H and I. The improvements consist ot a third stall to the existing attached garage, a 52.6 s.f. expansion of the kitchen and a 23 s.f. step leading from new main level patio doors. On June 28th. Council completed the review of the conditional use permit part of the comprehensive application dealing with the repair ot the lakeshore bank. Hardcover within the 0-75’ was finalized as follows: 0-75' setback area = 10,8(X) s.f. Existing = 804 s.f. or 7.44% Proposed = 888.6 s.f. or 8.2% At the Planning Commission meeting staff was asked to inspect a catch basin/drainage facility in the street yard of the subject property. The Building Official met with the applicant and found that the catch basin drained via underground tile along the north side of the house to the lakeshore yard into a drainfield area with no outlet to the surface. The facility appeared to be functioning without any problem. Staff can confirm that the drainage received from the bituminous parking area in the street yard does not drain directly into the lake. Hardcover improvements are proposed at 32.3% where existing hardcover improvements are at 32.9%. The Planning Commission recommended approval of the variance application as proposed by applicant subject to hardcover removals as s'nown on improvement site plan (Exhibit H). The enclosed approval resolution has been drafted per the findings and conditions of the recommendation of the Planning Commission. A RESOLUTION GRANTLNG A VARIANCE TO MUNICIPAL ZONLNG CODE SECTION 10.22, SUBDIVISION 2 FILE NO. 1839 WHEREAS, Robert H. Owens (hereinafter "the applicant") is the owner of the property located at 1700 Bohn’s Point Road within the City of Orono and legally described as follows: refer to Exhibit A attached (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City for a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22. Subdivision 2 to permit the construction of a third stall to the existinc attached garage, a 52.6 s.f. addition to the kitchen and a 23 s.l. stair leading from main level patio doors. These improvements will result in 7.187.6 s.t. or 32.3% hardcover in the 75- 250’ setback area where 7.308 s.f. or 32.9% exists and where only 25% is allowed. Minnesota: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, FUNDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File ^1839. 2. 3. The property is located in the LR-IB Lakeshore Residential Zoning District requiring one acre in area. This property consists of 33.010 s.f. or .76 acres. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on June 21, 1993 and recommended approval of the proposed variance based upon the following findings: A. The residence was installed prior to current zoning standards and lakeshore setback requirements. B. The removal of some 448 s.f. of a bimminous drive will minimize negative impact of extensive paved drive in street yard. Page 1 of 5 C. Proposed improvements will not result in additional hardcover within the 75-250’ setback area and will be maintained at 32.3%. D. The comprehensive improvement of the property will be consistent with the improvements of e.xisting residences within the neighborhood. The comprehensive improvements will not require any other variances. 4. Tlie 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 alfect traffic conditions, light, 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 to alleviate a demonstrable 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. 5. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicant and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the findings noted above, the Orono City Council hereby grants a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 to permit the construction of additions to the existing residence as noted above. Approval of the hardcover variance within the 75-250’ setback area is subject to the following conditions: 1.All hardcover improvements scheduled for removal shall be completed prior to the footing inspection for the new construction. Hardcover removals shall be completed as shown on Page 5 of this resolution. Authorities granted by this variance run with the property not with the applicant, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit within one year of the date of Council approval, or this variance will e.xpire on that date (July 12, 1994). Page 2 of 5 3.Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this resolution shall consiimte a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 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 ot the property. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minne.sota at a regular meeting held on the 12th day of July. 1993. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin. City Clerk Edward J. Callahan, Jr., Mayor Property Owner (s) STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 12th day ot July, 1993 by Edward J. Callahan. Jr. and Dorothy M. Hallin. Mayor and City Clerk of the City of Orono. a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was e.xecuted on behalf of the City. Notary Public Page 3 of 5 J STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this day of , 199 before me a Notary Public Wiaiin and for said county. in who e.xe^ the foregoing instrument, aSdlcknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. notary public STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this dav of 199 before me a Notary Public within and for said county, personally appeared ---------------------^^^------------ known to me to be the person(s) described m and who executed the foregoing instrument, andTcknowledged that he (tliey) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBUC Page 4 of 5 (11 yQ Q O Hi ^ i*e ^uA*^ 1 T0^Tl/l&e s^a- -»i ......— -rr- I ,•.’X $ # * I * * * * * * of lha SouU<es«ttrly llno^jf Lol No'* ** Coimr>*nctno at U« point of InUraeellon •long tho .iMdlno lino b,tw,„, ..iVloU 7. U « h" ‘''‘f'"® ••*'» «..nco Sou»„..Urly tv.fan Lou a and 3 In aald aubdlvlalon; O.cnco Wcatarly alol^ o>a OMulno lu . H. * h’? ! o* ** *“ '*** ‘*'^‘'*"0 “«• »»•- continubig Waattrly In a atralcil'* Ibw to Um ach»l r-,in» i i Iloa t<tv.#an aald Lota 2 arkl 3 to Uia angla point In laat aald dlvtdlng ttnai ttivica dividing Tuio bttweon aald I ou 3 a,^ 4. r ? if.. W.al.rly 20 f.at tU^«>f. aald 20 r.at balng m«av;rad at rtght angl.^ to lil - County! " «« «'• P‘»‘ “'O'^of on fUa or of racord In tha ofTIca of Oi. naglalrar of TltJaa In and for «ld M.rv^pln NorUlooaloi ly of a Una dolcHbad^aa ?ou!«a* "uVlmU^^t^ bdtl^*'i»ini*o? col7/'****''’^ °f I!** ^ *«aralnabova firat daacribyd and U>a dividing llna batf^aan tild Lota 3 arxl 4 It4 05 faat in tf^o anri i . * »»ciKcirujnt of Ui# bad of laiid l^aralnabova daacrIbaJ} U^anca SoullNaaaUHy a1u>g:.... - - - ':-r-“.;.:^rs:r«r .rv^rr Lou Thr,. (3) and Four (4) to Ui. anola In ma d!^^n?i.»/i !r •““Lot Tnra. (3) from t»^ angla point In tha dividing Una b.tww, County, MInnatoU", aald deacribad 20 fo^rlol.t of way boli!i 20 ftrl'^'^ri’ ° * O) »n aald "Audltur'a SubdMtlon Numbar 340, Herv^apln a a ■ I • .a • *1 • a ' g • •• • a • • . • . a*'.« • .a •,. .•\ v> . " . * ••{Vy * •*. *4 •• a . f ? X I- H a • a •« a . • • . .• >. • • • • I* * r //. To:Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, Cit>' Administrator From:Jeanne A. Mabusth, Buildins & Zonins Administrator Date:June 17. 1993 Subject:;J^1839 Robert H. Owens, 1700 Bohn ’s Point Road Variances - Public Hearing Zoning District: LR-IB Total area = 33.010 s.f. or .76 acres (required = 43,560 s.f. or 1 acre) The applicant proposes minor addit.,>ns to the existing residence that will result in an overall reduction of hardcover within the 75-250’ setback area. The additions involve a third stall to the existing attached garage and a 52.6 s.f. expansion of the kitchen and 23 s.f. of .step area leading fronT new main level patio doors. As of this writing the secoq^l phase of Mr. Owen’s applications, land alteration of lakeshore bank, has yet to be finalized. Staff cannot provide final hardcover facts within 0-75’ setback area but these tacts may be completed tor inclusion in your final packets to be delivered on the 18ih or at your Monday night meeting. Staff has made some minor changes in the hardcover facts based on the location of the 75’ setback line detennined at the rip rap line of the property. The following ordinances are pertinent to this review: 1. Section 10.03, Subd. 14 (C) - Review of lot coverage. Total lot area = 33,010 s.f. Allowed = 4,951.5 s f. or 15% Existing = 3,882 s.f. or 11.7% Proposed = 4.132.6 s.f. or 12.5% 2. Section 10.22, Subd. 2. 0-75’ setback area = 10.800 s f. Existing = 804 s.f. or 7.44% Proposed hardcover to be determined upon completion of land alteration permit. Application #1838 75-250’ setback area = 22,210 s.fi Allowed ~ 5,552.5 s.f. or 25% Existing = 7,308 s.f. or 32.9% Proposed = 7.187.6 s.f. or 32.3%'' Zoning Hie #1839 June 17, 1993 Page 2 Final Hardcover Reduction of 120.4 s.f. * Add 52.6 s.f. kitchen addition, 23 s.f. steps, 198 s.f. garage stall, 54 s.f. bituminous drive e.xpansion - Removal 448 s.f. of bituminous paving in street yard. List of Exhibits A - Application B - Applicant ’s Addendum C - Property Owners List D - Plat Map E-1-2 Hardcover Facts F - Survey G - Hardcover Site Plan H - Plan of Improvements I - Floor Plan J - North Elevation K - South Elevation L - Proposed Landscape Area M - Existing Hindscape Area Description of Request The proposed improvements are located all out of the 0-75’ setback area. All additions meet the required 10’ side setback (garage at 50' and kitchen at 28’). Grade-level steps are considered non-encroachments as long as structure meets the 10’ side setback. Statement of Hardship Please review Exhibits A and B. Hardships are reviewed as follows: House was installed prior to current zoning standards and lakeshore setback requirements. The removal of some 448 s.f. of bituminous drive will minimize negative impact of extensive pave.^ drive in street yard. The comprehensive improvement of the property will be consistent with die improvement^ of existing residences within the neighborhood. Issues for Consideration If Planning Commission members wish to consider existing hardcover improvements for removal, it may be necessary to wait to determine what final hardcover is in the 0-75’ setback area. In reviewing the site plan. Exhibit G. the majority of hardcover improvements within the 75-250’ setback zone are either the residence structure or the bituminous drive. Staff would not recommend additional removals of the drive needed to provide adequate turnaround area and off- street parking. Isv Jl CITY OP ORONO - VARIA^iCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee $175.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $100.00 (no change from original application) i» Variance for non conforming use $200.00 After~the~Fact Fees (Double application fee) PROPERTY INFORMATION noo feoMsj-S ^oiMT O, O V-; Site Address rrrv 1 t t CMC ItU* L r^rcTrz t st*nnK. i. U'f f 1 c u ' * - r.‘- »» f »f^» I X - wVi- W'V'W'V' i“i ^ rr»i »“*” . ».* yA ^ L'i.* • ‘LCrii' i 7^ »V»U. I 'CUM t I. 1 f w* • W*V' • • •• 9 w «• mm mm - .- «••• . *w* (.'U ' „ I C I — C V* M f'ecu If f tftT!Mf\ I CU ,7i.V» •.v.“iT TmO* f "fWw'V^ UA'VA MVl IVC» '*1*.' /A f - VC/ V^/ ooc‘3>Property Identif. Number (P.I.D.) J“'2.'p_ Attach legal description to application if not included cn required survey. Date Projicj;^ Acquired N1o*>^* VHo'2. (month/year) I luc) no^ also own the adjacent parcels of land. Present use of property: X residential - - -other(spec- y) Zoning District:__ _ _^ ^ ^ - - - - Phone (home) I ^ ^ HCC> Phone (work) ^ APPLICANT Name ^ ___ noO fee-WMS V^.M-T- tZoHOCity; --- Zip; OWNER (if different than applicant)Phone (home) Ncime Phone (work) Address:City Zip : DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $ Q C--. <DOO AOOS Describe request in detail; Ctf^rZ^-UCU OF 2.? VARIANCES REQUIRED _ _ Lot Area Setback: _ Lot Width >C Hardcover Front Side _ _ Rear _ Lot Coverage Average Lakeshore Other (specify) HARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OP UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty and unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code requirements:^- - - - - (attach additional sheets if necessary) REQUIRED SUBMITTALS All of the following information must be submit:t:ed by the application deadline date in order for your application to be considered complete: 1. Completed Application Form 2. Certified Property Owners List of owners within 150' (you must obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Govt Center 348-3271). 3. »^Plat Map (obtained with property owners list). 4. Certificate of survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) to include hardcover calculations as required (provide one (l) copy 8J<"xll" fcr reproduction). 5. _ _Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing grade are proposed (provide one copy 8^"xll"). 6. Sketches or plans of floor & elevation views (provide 1 copy 8%"xll"). 7. _As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. 8. Additional items as may be requested by City staff. • • • The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your variance application is not complete if the above information has not been included. APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment) and/or consultant expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the of his/'her knowledge. Wa-I i<}3Applicant's Signature Date OWNERS SIGNATURE The owner hereby ackowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents. Commission members, and Council members for purposes of investiga tion and verification of this, reqpest. S'/3-7 Lh 3Owner's Signature Date Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled j^eview meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. / •» ROBERT H. OWENS 1700 Bohns Point Road Wayzata, MN 55391 May 27, 1993 •r*-" 3 s ' Zoning Department City of Orono P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay. Minnesota 55323 SUBJECT: VARIANCE APPLICATION Ladies/Gentlemen: This letter will provide additional information concerning our Variance Application dated May 27, 1993. We purchased our present home in November 1982 and occupied it in the spring of 1983. Our plan at the time was to modernize and improve the house. We were preparing the improvement plans when we were hit with the "100 year rainstorm in 1987. Subsequent storm damage repair in 1988 cost S70.000 not covered by insurance. This set our improvement timing back. We have now completed plans and are prepared to do the modernization and improve ment work planned years before. The planned improvements will give us the home we contemplated at the time of our original purchase. The surrounding property values will certainly be enhanced by these changes which will have our home more closely match the character and value of homes in the neighborhood. An important part of improving the appearance of our property will be removing 448 square feet of hardcover "parking lot" at the entry to our property and creating a landscaped driveway. The enclosed drawings, sketches and photographs illustrate this The requested variance will not alter the character of the neighborhood. In fact, tne variance will result in a significant improvement for neighbors who are constantly exposed to our "parking lot". The home modernization and improvements add 327.6 square feet to our house. With the removal of 448 square feet of bituminous surface and replacing it with grass, we will have a net reduction in hardcover of 120.4 square feet. The hardcover reduction exceeds the addition by 137%. We respectfully request approval of this variance application. Sincerely. RUN DATE 05/1A/9S BATCH 001 HEM^^EPIN COUNTY PROPERTY ir4FORMATIO»4 SYSTEM PROPERTY 0H4ERS LIST REPORT NO. PI935^0X PAGE 1PROP AODR OHNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR 58 16-117-25 22 000101600 BOHNS POINT RD JOSEPH C THOMASON A NIFE CONNIE R SHEEN 1600 BOHNS POINT RD HAYZATA HN 55591 58 16-117-25 22 000201660 BOHNS POINT RO 0 A 0 DUNLAPDAVID J A DIANE J DUNLAP 1660 B0HT4S POINT RD HAYZATA m 55591 58 16-117-25 22 000501700 00I04S poirrr roRAC 04^Er4S ROBERT H OMENS 1700 B0Mr4S POINT ROAD HAYZATA m 55591 { %4 PROP ADOR OHNER NAME TAXPAYER ^ NAHE/ADDR PROP ADOR •OHNER NAME • TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR 1 ■ PROP ADOP OFtlER NATE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR I 58 16-117-25 22 0006 01720 BOHNS POINT RO DAS ANDERSON ET AL DAS ANDERSON 1720 BOHNS POINT ROAD HAYZATA HN 55591 58 17-117-25 11 0002 01655 BOHNS POINT RD G K NEHHAN JR A H H C NEHHAN GRAYDON K NEHHAN JR HICHEUE H C NEHHAN 1655 BOHNS POINT RD ORONO HN 55591 58 17-117-25 11 0009 00058 ADDRESS Ur4ASSIGNED G K NEHHAN JR A H H C NEHHAN GRAYDON K NEFtiAN JR HICHEUE H C NEFtlAN 1655 BOHNS POINT RD ORONO HN 55591 58 16-117-25 22 0005 01725 BOHNS POINT RO TAJ FELDMArtI TERRY A JULIE FELDHA4I4 1725 BOHNS POINT ROAD HAYZATA m 55591 58 17-117-25 il 0006 00058 ADDRESS U4ASSICr4ED DAS ANDERSON ET AL DAVID A HARGENE FOX 1665 BOHNS PT RD HAYZATA HN 55591 TOTAL BATCH 001 00010 56 f7-117-25 11 0001 01665 BOmiS POINT RO 1ST INTERSTATE BK-SO TRSTEE T DErt4Y SANFORD 1605 BOHNS POINT RO HAYZATA rt4 55591 58 17-117-25 11 0008 00058 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED G K NE»#1AN JR A H H C NEI4HAN GRAYD0T4 K NEHHAN JR MICHELLE H C NEFtiAN 1655 BOHNS POINT RD ORONO MT4 55591 •.* r’ A’ - •. 1 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 OEPARTT^ENT OF PROPERTY JAXATION, T0<7HE BEST OF HY KNOHLEOGE AND BELIEF. DATE f//m . • ^ • t. « * * A . • •• .'■f ■ • • . * ‘..il# • # s , ■■ ■■•■ rfK. Existing HA=rccvH?. i:i icme «<n •House V#% LENGTH »✓ X X 5'1 .. :v X Hi GaSAGs •/ .N \I c. Driveway X X D. SlOEWALX X T—i •/ =ffc E. P atio / Deck 4 r.Landscape ___________- x AREAS UNDERLAIN 3Y , . PLASTIC SHEETING SW5 G. O ther /X 5-2tu' z:L-:tO' !:tC-J.L'j I WIDTH ^2-4. © S • r • S • • S.r. S • r • c r ^«t I S.r# S • r # S • r . S.r. SI F • S.r# / . r., J. S.F. S • /* • S.F. S.F. S t r • S*.“ # Total Hardcover in Zcne Total pRCPERrr Area in Zone 34^S.F /O^^OO 5 ^4,0 /O.feoo X 100 % / 4 \ / C--"' - w ^ ‘ . ^ iir < -II HARDCOVER CALCULATIGM WORKSHEET SETBACK zcNE: (CIRCLE cne ) G-75' (tS^25^ 250-500' 5G0-1GC0' E xisting Karcccver in Zone = 52.030A. House /o<r LENGTK X 2- WIDTH S.r, / (A / / S.r. X S.F. X S.F. 3. Garage 2-4- X X 0-2^ S • f* ( s.r • c. Driveway _ X S t F • D. Sidewalk V/ 2 S.F, S • r I E. Patio/ Deck F.Landscape AREAS UNDERLAIN BY •- , PLASTIC SHEETING •2. S /O X X / ^ 6 ^ 44 S.F. 4^ S.F. 3.^^' 4 40 S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. .JJ- S.F. G. O ther Total Hardcover in Zone Total Property Area in Zone S.F. 4r-s.p. q^.q/Os.p. .Lpri 2.2 g./O Y inn » 3^ J% - .7 -5- 1. V ’ r’^l ■^ii'V* « Vt u . • ^ 4^i'«::-%«ii' J fOMT \ ------------------% t •• $//aesi/A/£ ^ja£ ('triPKSTZ^ Aft'S) ^ g* o 19 ii o a? u rJ » * « I* > D t -1 Ss (nr TJ 5 ' 3* s. II % «l» Hn 0r > I \ I f m i > I -I C T> I n«n L *n 1 On» s c -\ T «ns. < > A' I _l L i c * i i % mm # n im 4* F jfit 1 S9 I > < I ! 0z I ? }l { Jr2 H I > • f I i': ' ^ V / / To: From: Date: Subject: Mayor Callahan and Orono Councilmeinbers Ron Moorse. City Administrator July 8. 1993 / / COUNCIL ‘ I ‘J ll ern OF ORONO Rov Rasmussen Request for Review of Septic System Nonconformity I have attached a letter from the attorney representing Roy Rasmussen of 2700 White Oaks Circle. Mr. Rasmussen is requesting that the Council review the finding of the Septic Inspector that the existing septic system on the property is nonconforming and needs to be replaced within one year. The Rasmussens are questioning the Septic Inspector’s finding that the svstem is less than 3 feet from the water table. It is staffs recommendation that if the property owner believes the Septic Inspector’s findings are incorrect, the property ov ner should hire a certified septic testing consultant to conduct the testing. If the consultant ’s findings agree with the Septic Inspector’s findings, it is staff’s recommendation that the system be identified as nonconforming and that the system be brought into conformance within one year. Mr. Rasmussen has proposed that the Council grant a variance for his system. It is staffs belief that this system is similar to numerous other systems that have been or will be found in nonconformance with the septic code. All of these non-conforming systems will be required to be brought into conformance. If the Council grants a variance in this instance, it will be opening the doors to a very large number of similar variance requests. I have attached a memo from Mike Gaffron outlining the issues related to this item. CrtAV^3ERLA!S SCOT” A jOHSSON TODD M JOHNSON PATRICK]. SEATON "ODD I KENYON Oi CouniiCi CHAViBERUIN, NEATON & JOH.NSON Attorney? et Law 4U5 La'<e. Sl :c 303 Wa\rata. sii.'^r-iesota jSSO’ 6ll-ir3-e--J4 • Tax 6:1473.3501 July 7, 1993 VIA FAX 473-0510 Mr. Ron Moorse City Administrator City of Orono Orono city Hall RE: Roy Rasmussen/2700 White Oaks Circle Dear Mr. Moors©: As a follow-up to our telephone conversation of July 6, 1993, please be advised that our office is representing Mr, and Mrs. Roy Rasmussen of 2700 White Oaks circle, with respect to issues arising from Orono*8 Kay 28, 1993 "On-Site Sewage Treatment Inspection Report." In accordance with our discussion of July 6, 1993, I am hereby requesting, on beha.lf of Mr. and Mrs. Roy Rasmussen, that the issue of the Rasmussens' septic system be placed upon the City council's agenda for consideration at the council's meeting on July 12, 1993. By way of background, the Rasmussens' obtained permit no. 5286 from the City of Orono for construction of their septic system on August 17, 1970 in connection with the construction of their home. At that time, it was noted by your staff on the "Septic System Inventory Card" (copy enclosed for your reference) that the "Height of drainf ield above water table" was + or - 3'. The system was installed as a "conforming" system. The Rasmussens' septic system was inspected on July 30, 1979, August 14, 1984, June 16, 1988, and July 25, 1991, and was rated by your staff on each of those four occasions as a "Code System," which I understand is defined as: A system which meets 711 the location, design, and construction standards of the current City Codes, and which is operating satisfactorily by treating and disposing of the entire current sewage input without discharging any pollutants into ground or surface waters. Mr. Ron Moorse July 7, 1993 Page -2- Mr. Rasiauasen has recently encountered eome nedical problens, and the RasmusBons have therefore found it necessary to sell their hone at 2700 White Oaks Circle. The Rasmussens entered into a Purchase Agreement to sell the home on April 27, 1993. Based upon the information that they had with respect to the septic system, there was no provision made in the Purchase Agreement for any repairs or improvements to be dona to the septic system. The closing on the Rasmussen's sale is scheduled for*July 15, 1993. After the Rasmussens had signed the Purchase Agreement to sell their home, they received a letter from the City's officers entitled "Stricter Enforcement of septic Systems Mandated," and their sepVic system was inspected by Mr. Steve Weekman on May 28, 1993. At that time, Mr. weekman rated their system as being a "non-conforming system" and listed the "potential for system failure" as being "high." This, however, is the same septic system that the City's staff had Inspected four separate times, after installation—and rated as meeting all of the City's code requirements and "operating satisfactorily." Mr. Weekman, in his Kay 28, 1993 inspection report, is apparently taking exception with the drainfield to the Rasmussens* septic system, indicating that he has identified the water table at 37" to 40", and requiring tnat "drainfield repairs must be completed within one year." I understand that what Mr. Weekman is proposing as "drainfield repairs" is actually installation of a "mound" septic system, which will cost at least $a,ooo. The Rasmussens' septic system has been functioning satisfactorily since it was installed. The Rasmussens cannot understand why a septic system that was installed in 1970 in conformity with the City's code is now considered to be "nonconforming." If this "nonconforming" status is based upon the city's assumption that the system is within 1,000 feet of French Lake, the Rasmussens take issue with that position, because they do not bellevi that the distance has been accurately measured. If the "nonconformance" is a result of what Mr. weekman feels is a change of water table level from August 17, 1978, the Rasmussens also take issue with that, because they do not believe that Mr. Weekman's observations of "mottled" soil are sufficient to establish the actual water table level. We therefore request that the Rasmussens bo permitted to present their position to the City Council at the City Council's July 12, 1993 meeting, and obtain a cancellation of Mr. wec)onan'a order for repairs to the system, or in the alternative, obtain a variance for the system. Mr. Ron Moorse July 7, 1993 Pag® -3- Please confirm to me that the RaanuBsens will be included on the City Council's agenda for July 12, 1993, and, if possible, provide me with a copy of the agenda so that I can advise them a» to the approximate time that they will be scheduled. If you have any questions with regard to any of the foregoing, or have any other information that you feel the Rasmussens should have before the July 12, 1993 city Council meeting, please contact me. Yours very truly, PJN:ln end. . Neaton cc: Roy Rasmussen CCCiH m m J j 'jsnmc SYSTUM inventory card «1 S4wtr -------------------------------------- -_______________ Addriii 2J70CP □ Mound Syittnfl fypf □ othir Ptrnnii No. PfODffty I D. Gf^^U'T^z’% Uz CnT^i XS'*'’d.fd t-.nch -f ^Atr // --------------------------------------Ltgii Diicfipilon *7-3/7V Dili ol p»rmlt _Bt~n-7e \nt\»Wtr ^trsTT, A iJii^ auilding tvP* No. Bedroofni or QPO _ Y KR. Liundrv V Plthy#iih€f 3< CarbK* DItpoul X r S5PTIC TANK:I: Mittrlil 0CLtAjn Cfleieitw n p./^^s dNt: / r^ AteO ---------- ^ Pfopif outfit Ind Inlit Q/£,---------Baffin Uquld dapth »o RO livtl ± / Haicht of tanic bottom abova v^tir tibia -AJ^AR^Diitanca to naariit bui'dlng Tranch width ^ tibia V" Js ORAINPifeLD. Total langth of llnai Nt/mhar AMin»a ___j Total traatmant araa (iq. ft.) /pj/^(D Haight of dralnflaid abova watar Typ* of flllir miUrlil ar/£ gPCiC Joli typ* . fi4>OC g*Z>fy . SOnxg < f Olitiiw* from ntcrvit bldg. ^0 ^ Til. ||(t ^ ujHtfg _______ 3 ^ ** Otpth of fill ov.r drainfl.ld lZ-~2.^ ** n.mh of roek ov«r tMo 'P.-'V'' m. ** rrin/1n 6 «• jrf S ■# e5 WE Ut DATA I Q t5 I ^ ^ IO I I c iI .s M •>:. »K. M s inspection hp coro QATg 9-tz^^73 /A>drAt^T/OM 7*^2i:23L V? CQMPLiANCe ,_i_ / _ ^MPOUT RECOHO date GAULONS c - cONPont.MNa s - substandard n - nonconforming location SKETCH /N y#-, f'"'- \*• V n /n ^ ^ / '/'^ 'A O' 'A, ^ InVuda: II WalHocitlon 2) OUtinca f^om hmjta U taptic tank!, dilt. box. “ 3^1^and dralnflald 5 North at row ahil f Old LlKt^ TO: FROM: Mavor Callahan and Orono Council Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator Michael P. Gaffron. Asst. Planning & Zoning Administrator DATE:July 7. 1993 SUBJECT: 2700 White Oak Circle - Septic System List of E.xhibits A - Inspection Report and Soil Boring Log 5/28/93 B - Septic System Inventory Card C - Inspection Repons 7/25/91. 6/16/88. 8/14/84. 7/30/79. 8/22/78 D - System Design Report 1976/78 E - Letter to Owner Jason Becker 1/28/79 Summary of Procedure/Conditions Encountered This system was inspected May 28th apparently at the request of the intended buyer or his lender who required a septic certification. Steve Weckman indicates that whether or not the inspection had been requested, this property would have been inspected later this summer as part of the regular program. Weckman ’s boring found that the e.xisting trench system has a seasonal water table separation ranging 1" to 3" as identified by soil mottling and gleying. as well as noting an actual free water surface T below the trenches on the day of the boring. The system is clearly nonconforming by the definition adopted as part of our septic code revision in February 1992. The soil boring log indicates that borings were taken at the uphill side of the system, which would likely yield the most lavorable conditions at the site. It would not be surprising to find no separation between the most downhill trench and the seasonal water table. In my opinion. Weckman correctly defined this system as noncontorming, and the inspection report indicated that the system must be upgraded within one year, as required by City ordinance for all nonconforming systems since 1978. Addressing Specific Points Made by Rxsmussen’s Attorney • System installed under 1978 code standards This svsiem was installed in 1978 by Westonka Plumbing. Actual soil testing for this site had been completed for VanEeckhout Building Corporation by Soil Testing Services of Minnesota in Decembe*- 1976 as part of the subdivision to create White Oak Circle. The design was done by Mr. VanEeckhout and approved by the Ciry in April 1978. The system was installed in Autrust 1978. Ntemo - 2700 White Oak Circle July 7, 1993 Page 2 All of this was occurring during a transition with the City septic ordinances. In early 1978 the City hired a full time septic system inspector and adopted a new septic system ordinance and design manual. The design manual (Resolution i^^894. Section 2. Item ID) indicated that "for proper functioning of (a trench) system the minimum depth of the ground water or seasonally saturated conditions shall be more than 5*." Section 6 (B-1) indicated that "the bottom of fenches and beds shall be at least 4’ above the water table or bed rock". The procedure for soil borings (Section 3) indicated that "soil borings at least 8' deep (5* below the bottom of proposed drainfield trench) shall be taken to determine soil types and water table information ..." The system installed in 1978 based on information submitted by the builder and accepted bv the Citv, met the code standards for a system built in 1978. • 1979 Code Revision in Januar>' 1979 the soil boring section of the design manual was amended to include :he wording "soil borings shall identify depth at which soil is mottled, indicating the depth of seasonal water table." Funher. the required separation between the bottom of the filter rock and the seasonal high water table was reduced to 3’, :o match the State recommended standards at that time. It was not the intent of the 1979 code changes to require that all existing systems not meeting the 3’ separation be upgraded. Although all new systems were required to meet the 3 separation, no attempt was mad^c to determine whether existing systems met the 3’ separation. • 1992 Code Revision This policy changed in February 1992 when the City adopted the new MPCA Chapter 7080 standards which specifically defined existing systems not meeting the 3 separation, as nonconforming. MPCA took this position on the oasis that effective sewage treatment stops when the effluent reaches a saturated zone, and 3' of unsaturated soil is required ♦or adequate treatment. We adopted those standards because Met Council required it as pan of our sewer plan update, and because DNR required it as pan of the Shoreland Regulations. As Council is aware, staff did not stan doing soil borings to determine conformity ot existing systems until spring of 1993. • Mound not necessarily required Neaton indicates that "Weekman is proposing" installation of a mound system. Weekman is merely advising the property owner that the drainfield repairs likely will involve consintction of a mound, but that the pro|Kny owner must hire a site evaluator to design and construct a system that meets the code requirements. The City does not -propose” specific repairs but Memo - 2700 White Oak Circle July 7. 1993 Page 3 ,1-wreviews those repairs proposed by the property owner and his agent for compliance with cod requirements. If a site suitable for a standard trench drainfield exists on the site, trenches would be allowed. • Defining ''unsatisfactory'* operation According to State standards which the City adopted in February’ 1992, the Rasmussen’s system is not functioning satisfactorily. This change in definition of wh?r is ’satisfactory ’’ is having a significant impact state-wide, especially in shoreland areas where the DNR has made adoption of the standard mandatory. There is a move underway by various entities to make the Chapter 7080 standarus mandatory state-wide, not just in the shoreland areas. • Establishing water table elevation Neaton ’s letter suggests that Weekman’s observations of mottled soil aie insufficient to establish the ’’actual” water table level. As we all know, water table level fluctuates from year- to-year. from .season-to-season. and the perched water tables in the upper layers of soil fiuenjate on a daily basis. The "nonconformance " of the system at 2700 White Oak Circle is not only related to the actual free water surface obseiwed in a boring hole on a given day. but the indication by soil mottling and other indicators as to the highest seasonal water table that may exist from time-to-time. If die property owners wish to hire a certified site evaluator to review he site, they are welcome to do so. If the conclusion of their consultant is in disag’cement with that of Weekman. then we would recommend that a soil scientist from the MPt^A be brought in to make a final determination. Options for Council .Action This septic svstem is nonconforming by definition and that status is not something that can be changed by Council action without changing the definition of nonconforming. The City added the MPCA’s 3’ separation requirement to its conformity definitions based on DNR and Mel Counc'l requirements. Council does have the option of extending the deadline for repairs or replacement. Staff has been in contact with DNR. MPCA and Met Council to discuss their positions on an extended time frame. DNR would not oppose a diree to five year grace period for upgrade of shoreland systems which are nonconforming solely due to lack of required separation. Met Council indicates while they have no specific approval jurisdiction tor such a revision they like our one- vear limit and would suggest not extending past three years. MPCA indica.-.. they have no time 0 W V- Memo - 2700 White Oak Julv 7. 1993 Page 4 frame constraints, and that enforcement is at our discretion. The MPCA 7080 standards were developed as a technical guideline, and their policy is to let local governments deal with enforcement. For the specific case of 2700 Whit- Oak Circle. Council may wish to hold in abeyance any decision for extending the time frame until a general policy for the entire City can be concluded. We would presumably be prepared with a recommendation to be acted o»? as a septic ordinance revision at your July 28th or August 9th meetings. ch CITY OF ORONO Municipal Offices Post Office Box 66 Crystal Bay, HH 55323-0066 OM-SITE SETWACE TREATMENT INSPECTION REPORT Owner . Pny ■^mtjsssrs ■. 4yX,r4 Dak C,y- “ors: ^ C■*7'^t Address Permit J’a: .Dates; iZ------------Contract ----------------- checked below. (This is p^an existing system t ) new construct ion) O' rCNFCBMITY (1-3>: ^ 2 ..ccm“fci?HINg‘^SYSTEM^ do« n7 c'odV*Vn°"e'f ftcV o'?’ th7^tiw%V''i^nstri any pollutants into ground or surface waters. i„rit«i within a designated ICO-year floodplain; any ••HOH-CONFORMIMG SYSTEH--A itcaticiT design and constructistandards of the current Ci^ DRAIMFIEID CCMOITICN jj OpM^field inspection indicates; (ly Orainfield is dry, no surfacing evident. 7z o‘^rin7 ’e?;'fs1aru;lre;"V^^^^^^ -inwediatelv. Repairs rust be conpleted w'thin 90 day . 14 Orainfield extent and condition urxnown. Contact the City Inspector LimriwG SITF FACTORS (sIcpe.setbacts.e^c^: POTEHTIAI. FQg SYSTEM FAI'.UBP ^depends an soils, water table,etC.J: COMMENTSTSy^ Ar ^■>■1 ho-ri'/'^ Date hft Ci^9>r^€h Inspection ^ fh# reouirerwnts for a .Tiortgoqe or other .rans/ei* of Note: In the event that this inspection report ^ g* fy that V\ existing system will cuntinue to fteKtlW prn-:.ty. be advised that this report of me system ender current conditions based on the available properly, but is merely an opinion of tne aacduavy intormation. This report rust be kept on the premises with the system location and poiping records. YELLOW COPY Mom*0¥*n«f WHITE COPY inspectors File r—llUiHlffUflUiUinbh ^7^ Q'rai J / / C,/ Z r L j 7 ///« a 177 )/,cszL ~~ (^/ - ^'o.y 'SP ^1}'/uJc^ -T' aj' z? Q -S7 or s7 7 l//'aZr!aJ Tr?r-^h. \:Z pj^ro^fmcruy.\ I // __—7 7 Or rjckfs li'sleJ.s^SI—^7,__ _< •> / / ^ Z- //)C^J^7^/ TAc ^ychrr^:: Z^f^.ra^or-- ^rjrr^ ,.^^,'Z'ff' ‘S'ki //I : rrr\- Co)-rrCH^Tri]f\(X aooress COPE ___ CITYOFORONO ContvecTtd to SEPTIC SYSTEM INVEI^ORY CARD Mon< p.i Addffti ^^STstandard tranch □ Mound Syittm ryp# □ Ot^er ________ ___________________ PffmiT No. ______ No. Badroomt Buifding TVPa or GPP ^ ^ Laundry X Oith»^>a>f>af ;< Propartv ».0. /9H^-//7-23 rc 'f tAfGT // _ L^9«* D#icript»on Data of permit ^ *~ / 7 ^"T^ a ^^iC^u A ________ Gar page Dnootal SEPTIC TANKS. Mawritl Pe^rA^T~ Coi^JC. 0e>^iAJn Cipocitv 1) /CO^ C< > ^ Propar outlet and inlet ___ 2)_Z^2Q Baffle* rAA\T7f Z^^j/zu / Uquid dcptn to flO i#»»* fc- y Height of tank bottom above Mter table A>gA/a^0istance to neeresl building t OflAiNPfELD: TotaHength of lines C^G (D Number of lines Total treatment area (lO- ft.I /Height of dramfield above water table 3 Trench nndth / ^ 'P I ,1 '< c,tu<jeT- Tvp. of filter mat.r,.i So.i tvo. BCAC^ . Scah € < ^ Oiltaoce from neareit bldg. _ Soil type ere rate 3g>mm/in 10 ^ ^ Deoth of fill ever drainfield Depth of rock over tile - ^ _______under tile —{_^ INSPeCTION RECORD DATE compliance >gE—Sk£CS£lL6i^ )f /V- yy /v;q / i (o'lAyM ^0^^: ^ /7) ne&t^& S222? O :--------------------- rr7idn"i-r^rJ r^ PUMPOUT RECORD DATE GALLONS Zooo I OCATION SKETCH C- CONFORMING S -substandard N - NONCONFORMING y R'-<7l4afg (r , - 7 ^ - -o-i' fne/ude: 1) WelMocabon / 2) C >tarx» from house ti • anki. ditt. boa, and dramfield j 5 co^rrt^3, Norm arrow and road L4K>^ I lap'll -a t* ON-SHE SEWAGE TREATMENT INSPECTION REPORT CITY OF ORONO On ihi' SoTth Shore of Ljki’ .Minnetniik.t POST OFFiCb BOX 66 1335 S. Brown Rd. Crystal Bay. MN 55323 473-7357 & □ 1 2 [ IThii II B4 an eMuTing rviTem O conitrucnoo) MMtl or current C.tv lUnrUrdl .n «l| reween rel.t.nq to OM.qn. conitrucl.on. jnd locl.on. Aopejrt to t» ooer.t.n, proparlv. nn.. not meet ell current C.tv ttanrUrd. lor ne»e contiruct.on (1978 Cone) Out .r. mott r«oect» jooeer, to be devqned lOCJted. end conjiructed generally m accordance er.tO prev.out cooet. Sviiem aooeeM to oe lunct.orunc orooerly. no meior upqradmq of tha sv»ta^ •» required at this time Doet not meet current C.ry itandarde .n many rnoecti reiat.oq to dn.qn, comtruct.on. or local.nn Aroeart to ^ adequately at th.$ t.me, but na» a relatively r>,qn oocent.ai 'o« 'uiure orobiem, No maior uoqrad.ns o »yi e ttii* lime. e nr mau not meet current C.tv ttandaroi *nr de».qn. conttruction or locat.on. but .» I J.I.nq to O. nperly treat and r.AT;;;,rr ” replacement procedure!. II dra.nt.eld replacement .« neceswrv. w.i teat.rvi er.ll u.oaiiy be .egu.red, an mult be lubmitted lor rev.ew Your contractor mull obta.n a oerm.i belore worn .1 iianed evSTPM CONDITION ( (Z Checked .temi may require your acnonl Tink in»p#ction indicatet □ Pumpout not needed at rh<» time. □ Sohdi accumulation m tanks ind«cJtes they shoui ^ Dump- ed out this year to help prevent future prooiemi. Solids accumulation m tanks is at a critical level, Tanfcs should be pumped out as soon as pouibie. System IS discharging to surface. Tanks mv r be pumped Mithin 48 hours to eiiminete surteev discher^ . Inspection riters mitiing-tenki could ot be inspected. ^ Inspection risers (4” die. pipe) must h msteited in eech tank •f neat pumpout. If tanks have no? ^jeen pumped out wvithjn the lest three yeers. t^ey tnouid B* pumped out now. □ □ 12 Inioection pipe n located directly over tjnn baffle. lOoei not give accurate meaiurernent of \o»'di accumulation I If tanks nave not been oumped out rfvitnm the 'ait three years they should be pumped out no»^ Oramfield inspection indicates ^ Drainfield <s dry, no surfacing evident. Some evidence of surfacing, not critical yet. □ Orainfitid is saturated and visibly discharging untreated effluent to the surface This condition may require replace ment or additions to dramfield. Contact the City Inspector immediarefy. Repairs must be completed iiviihm 90 deys. □ Oramfield e»rent and condition un.tnoswn. SITE CHARACTERISTICS Limiting Site Factors □ Slope Q Soil G Mtgh ¥vaier table C Lot si/e □ Lake, v^ef’and. or stream □ Drainage Potential for System Failure (depends on soil rypes. iwater table and system condition* G Low ■^SwMedium C Hiqn G System If causing visible Site Capabilities for Future Eapansion Poor G Inadequate COMMENTS surface dischaige ____________ ^ Date of Inspection . . <n «mtv The requirement! lor a morigaqm Or other trentfer of prooertv be e<»v.i«J That Note In the event that th.i .nioection report .t uied to i» ,.ont.nue to (unction properly, but .i merely an op.n.o.' t» the aoeouaev fft.l report doei not qua.ante* or certify mat an e.iit.nq lyitem w.ll ro Of Ihe^item under current cond.l.oni baled on .he available .nformai.on Th., -eport mut. tv kept on the p.em,»« w.h w,-em <at,on and Pump.nq .eco.d, GOLD CCP'^ ( Homeowner WHITE CCF^ Inspector s ► System inspector ON-SITE SEWAGE TREATMENT INSPECTION REPORT CITY OF I ORONO VOWNER PERMIT NO.'S. — ADDRESS DATES i)n the \orlf> Shore of Ljke .Mninetonk.t POSY OF! ICE BOX 66 13 jS S. Bfow^n Rd. Crystal Bjy. MN 55323 473-7357 P7C0 Uhife Oa.)L C’-nic. ____ CONTRACTOHS^'*^-^^*^^ c.fv Or<3in-nc» No. 210 reau.fe* tmt etch on^.tt >cw^ treatment tvttem ,n Orono be .ntoected or» • retjo.ar ban*. The oo-«.te lewatje treatment ivJiem at the abow^ddreu ha» been mttvected and aooeari to 'all mto the citesorv checked belonr. (Thmi e*»»ting ryiiem □ conttructionl reto4^ctl relating to detign. con%irucTion, jnd locifion. Apo^jrf to be ooeratiog □ 2 □ 3 exiting ryiiem Meets Of exceeds current C<rv standards m jil properly. Ooe* not meet all current C.tv ttanuardf 'or ne« comtruct.on (1978 Codel but n mo.t -e^oecM aooea.t -o be dei.qned ocated. and comtructed generally m accordance n„lh orev.Ou* coOei. Syitem aonean to be lunct.on.ng orooerlv no mai Upgrading ot the system is reauired at this time Ooei not meet current c.tv .tandard* .n many rejects -e-at-ng to dea.gn, con.truct.on, or locat.on Aooe.r* to be adeouatelv at th.» time, but ha» a relat.veW h-gn potent.al tor future problem. No maior upgrading o( wttem eQu.red this time Svttem mav or may not meet current C.ty itandards tor devgn, conitruct.on or locat.on. but .l fa.I.ng to prooeny d.foose of the current input, and .t endangering a water jupply. or a «jurce of pollution to lurface or groundwater*, o <> creating a lalety hazard, or .* othervwue creating a public nu.unce Ptee»e contact the C.tv ln*pe^or to ducui* tepiacement procedure*. If dra.nfield reolacement .* nece**ary. ,o.i te*t.ng w.il usually be required, and a design and site plan must be submitted tor review Your contractor must obiam a permit before worn n started SVSTEM CONDITION ( [2 Checked items may require your action! Tankc□ □ □ □ inspection indicates Pumpout not needed at this time Soilds accumuJation m tanks indicates they should be pump ed out this year to hetp prevent future problems. Sohdi accumulation m tanks is at a critical level. Tanks should be pumped out as soon as possible. Syitem is discharging to surface. Tanks must be pumped vkiihin 48 hours to efimmaie surface discharge. Inspection risers misimg —tanks could not be inspected, inspection risers (4" dia. pipef must be inttailed in each tank at ntMt pumpout. If tanks have not been pumped out within the last three years, they should be pumped out now. s / l» i>?ction pipe 'S located directly over tank baffle (Does not 5ive accurate measurement of soi'ds accumulation J If tanks have not been pumped out withm the last three years, they should be pumped out now D^amficid injpection indicates ^^i^Oraiofteld is dry. no surfacing evident. ^ □ ^6mt vidence of surfacing, not critical yet. □ Drainfie'd is saturated and vuibiy discharging untreated effluent to the surface. This condition may require replace* meni or additior.x *o dramfieid. Contact the City inspector immediatefy. Repairs .nut? be completed within dO days, n Oramfiaid eatent and condition unknown. StTC CHARACTERiSTICS Limiting Site Factors C Slope C Soil D H.gn watfr table G Lot si/e □ Lake, wetland, or stream O Drainage Potential for System Failure (depends on soil rypes. water tableland system condihon) G Medium C High G System n causing visible surface d'seharge Site Capabilities for Ft^jujai 6 upansion Adequate G Fair O Poor G Inadequate COMMENT, /I'M 'A-f r>. —'Jf- A. l-n-: -f.9 Date of Inspection Septic Svsterrw^upec •oc,. .. ..i«l to Mlijfy the reao.fethent* for a .nortgage or other tranjter of orooeny. b* a«7v.*e<; that Note In the event that th.* .n,peer,on .et^rt , ^ cont.nue to function ptooeriv. but .* merely an oo.n.on d the adequacy this report does not guarantee or certify that an e»isiir>g rys of The system under current conditions based on the available m ormatio Th., .RPO.t mu., be kep- on ,he orem„e, w.tn ,y,.em ocat.on and pump.nq reccdt w . GOLD CCPY / Homeowner WHITE COPY Inspector s File ON SITE SEWAGE TREATMENT INSPECTION REPORT A CITY OF ORONO On the Sorth Shore of Ljtze Mtnnctnnk. POST OFFICE BOX 66 1335 S. Brown Rd. Crystal Bay, MN 55323 473-7357 OWNER PHONE (cA<.mu_-S<k£AJ _____________ADDRESS ^^*7^0 \ PERMIT NO’S. _________________ DATES —.5‘ ^ ---------------- City Ordinance No. 210 requires that each on-site sewage treatment system m Orono be inspected on a regular basis. The on-site sewage treatment system at the above add»ess has been inspected and appears to fall mto the category checked below: Meets or exceeds current city standards m all respects relating to des.gn. construction, and location. Appears to be operating properly.2^1 Does not meet current city standards in some respects relating to design, construction, or location. Appears to be operating properly. Does not .neet current city standards m many respects relating to design, construction, or location. Appears to be operat;ng adequately. Does not meet current city standards of design, construction or location, is being overused, or is failing to properlv treat and dispose of the current input and is therefore ersdangenog a water supply, is a source of pollution to surface or groundwaters, is creating a safety hazard, or is otherwise creating a public nuisance. Please contact the inspector to discuss requirements for repairs to your system. Soil testing may be re quired. In ail cases a design and site plan must be submmed ‘or review. Your cont.attoi must obtain a permit before work is started. WORK REQUIRED: Septic tanks must be pumped within 48 houa. Drainfield must be repaired or replaced within 90 days. Inspection riser (4” diam. pipe) must be installed in each tank. Tank inspection indicates maintenance pumpout is needed as soon as possible City ordinance requires that□tanks be pumped out every three years SITE CHARACTERISTICS. Limiting Site Factors Q Slope (3 Soil 0High water table QLoi size QLake. wetland, or stream QDrainaqe Potential for System Failure (depends on soil types, water table, and system condition! 0 LOW f5^^edium □ High □ System 1$ causing visible surface discharge. Site Capabilities for Future Expansion 23 Adequate 0 Fair □ Poor □ Inadequate COMMENTS Date of l.ispection ^pnc System Inspector This report must be kept on the premises with system location and pumping records - - - :5 «<• Oa !*• A' ' K)rr opuci •• OflHlW PMONI >oon Cryttil SiV, MN B»»* 47»7907 humit nos. OATU - c 0*— **» ”• on • ’• ••./ MtMNrtN »« •*» »«*»*• * * * J ' ' i • □ 3 □ 4 MMt» 0» to b* DoM rtot «.'««» cifT to bo oporolt»'9 P«>b*»'y- . oiiT0«t m itoMo»t»» t" "^y '•*»**’* “OoH *»ot "*00I eurro^t to bo opocott**! odooMoo •¥■ „, „M«a. .< n-r. "'•"'“ir “ '*^'*"1-. .M. «.«<*. • • -szrjir::^3r:rrr.rrr'r-,- --------------------------------------------------* Dffofo omHt It ttatod. tuppty. •• • ^ooif WgQUlWIg: U tonkt bo p««P«» ««* eeoAbio atv llTf L(mtt<ft| SJto Pteton □ 9opo H$o»i o»otor ttb*0 nut til* QUtM. ^ QOroP*Obt COMMfNTS;— Ootontiol for Syt»m FoJI«m (<*opo«ai o« »»*> typ“* toblo tytw"* SJiodKim □ syitom. n eOMtia* ***» toottoiyttt"* Daw ot m**«*®" »| 7;. » 0» tb* North Storo of Loko Miooetooko Jk r .-A o If «8 0 t21 Wi o (j ONSITE SEWAGE TREATMENT tNSRECTION REPORT t f f > oryONo j POST OPPICE BOX B8 133B S. Broom M. Cryttal B*y. MN 8S323 473-7387 '' Ijk ST c 'J> • t#. • vr*• ‘-At !;• Qyyf^£ft i^u < f fi-L. H. /^AjcmrtfVK ADDRESS ^7^^_^fffrC^r Cd tct ^ - phone ____________—____PERMIT N3. SZ&^___________DATE—------ “*> • City Ortlinanct No. 210 rtouirw that #ach on tit# i#w«g# tr#atm#nt ;vit#m in Orono b« ioipocttdWH ra^lar batii. • hav# m«)#ct#d ih# on vt# «#wao# iraatmant facilitin at tha abova addrati and find th# lyattm clatfified ai ■ d- V r CONFORMING Meat* all the location, deitqn. ami comtructioo ttandardt of tha OatiQh Manual Mid •t ooefatinq latiifactonly Careful m*,ntenance of your tyite-n ihouid ormto COntInuad satisfactory operation SUBSTANDARD. Ooet not meet all the design, location, or conttruction ttandardt of tht Owlsn Manual but »t operating latofactonly. Your tyttam molt be in^actad vaarly and may roquiro reconstruction at • future ditt if found to bt fiitinj^ NON CONFORMING. Dofi not matt all location, davgn, or conttruction itandydt. it bafngotMn"^* or it failing to proporiy ditpota of tha currant Input and it tharafora a publtc wtan^ andangaring a wratar aupply. it a toorca of pollution to lurfaea or ground a ttfanThaiard. YOUR SYSTEM MUST BE RELOCATED AND/OR MAOl WITHIN ONE YEAR PROM THE DATE OP THIS INSPECTION.Piaaaao^^ ad application form and tubmit tha raquirad matarialt for ravlaw and appeoMl. Yo»» cwme* tor mutt obtain a parmlt bafora amra It ttariad. Septic tankt mutt ba pumped arlthin 4B hourt. Orainfiald mult ba repaired, altered, or raplacad iMthIn BOdayt. c ’TmAT' ’TArJf-t m/T tCOMMENTS: tnrdrOLV rytOArrHA TZ? L4i A LgTwr ^rrrfiiT ■ iw r —a ......................... ...................................................... p#>T/fc aJ L e^gjb.'TfArj ionj ^iur i^r ClifY □ Inmaetlon manhole mutt ba initaiiad. Plaata call me for datailt. ^ -2.x- OifB Ol iRBpBCtiOW Thit report mult be kept on tha pramltat arlth tyttam loeatlon and pumping raeordt. 9om O^irnmmrmmWWWt C«08/>W fl I 1. i V* "' *•~ vj CITY OP ORONO SEPTIC SYSTEM DESICK approved APPROVED WITH CORRECTIONS DISAPPROVED Addrest necc^ ^Lay- Bulldcr/Concractor (/aaJ — Convnents: /. 0*^ /v%u ty *7; --------fV- flgA7iU/VgT£^ - raiEC. flATT- CJ^ _________ •2.S—^Tl^e.—SPirgPn. -to JT^ OoA/xr^grarrt OjeuftifA —:>/rr PAi^AJ /!cCPje&/Aii:. ^ 3« Doa»iUf/ai.& g irg mt«tr y To e/wjM^e so/i. DirT»4<aeMce.-m/i /ai^ud^ A/o*^rr~Ai^^g^ictf //> 7S Date _____Septic Syateidfinapector ANNAPOLIS LANI '?': MINNIAPOLIS;. MINNtSOTA 8M41 tUITf M ./ . • . 4 ' December 8| 1976 4» . /Vait Ce»;kho-ii PuUding Corporal ton V75 105^ .;-y/ata Boulevard l/oyruto. Kinnr»otO 5539' AltcntJon: Mr. Chuck Van Ecckhout STS Job. Mo. 90800 0.. Soil Percolation Tests on Tract A of Registered land Survey Mo. U«'0 Located East of Old Crystal Bay Road In Orono, Minnesota. Centlenen: We were retained by you to perform soil percolation tests at the above Site. These tests were performed during the period of November 30 through DecMbar 5, 1976, at locations as shown on the enclosed soil percolation test location diagran. The procedures utlllxed In this testing were In accordance with the mathods dai- ignated by the Minnesota Department of Health, 1971. and were Son«what -odifled by our engineering judgetnent. The attached log sheets Indicate the observed parcolat'^ rates at aach of tSn test holes (P-l through P-kS). The observed pcrcolat'-n rates varied from 50 tc ICO minutes per Inch. The average percolation rate within th« preferred efflu-nt disposal sys.em area on any one lot was less than the e-..lmuei atlowabla of 60 minutes per Inch, as recoemended by the Minnesota Oep.rlm.nt of Health. 0.ssrd on th-se observations, the Installation of an Individual soil absorpUcKS system will bo accept.nbln In the preferred septic system disposal field .ra.S OS tc’^terf. X 1: i:-ihk '} •)i L y*n Eeckhout Building Corporation Oncfi»ber 8, 1978 Pagr txo "^VT. # • • . * * * ^ » . • * ' - . •> •* - V. ■ — 'a . I •• • - • • -» . •- »• \ • ■ V —; • ^' * ;• > .Vr •• ‘' ,•'-■? •- •' • ■ ^ •’* > ' ' •vfv «r.‘ In addition to tha abos-a parcolatlon last bolat,‘alght tast borings (A-1 *' ‘ •:.*or through A-8) ware drilled to a depth of 13 feat balow the existing ground surface to datarmlna If tha water tabla Is lets than that depth. According to the read ■r - »V* <*• • lAm ‘ f t r?,;’. .r ^ >r logs listed on tha log sheets. It Is our opinion that tha level of the long‘tar* * . * * * • — ^ , K*i ."kf ground water tabla was located at a depth greater than 13 feat below the exist- *; log ground surface In most cases, and below a depth of 8 feet In all cases. ? ' Fluctuations In tha water level may occur over a wide rarfie, depending upon >\.v / A •* - the amount of precipitation, evaporation and surface runoff which will vary with seasonal changes. Based on the test 'esults. Installation of Individual soil absoprtlon dis posal systems should b* arcrptable for a recommended design rate of 60 minutes per Inch. The observed water table In the area Is at a dep'h greater than 6.5 feet below the existing ground surface, making an absorption system acceptable accord ing to state code regulations. The provisions of the "Ordinance and Code Regulating Individual Sewage Ois posal Systems" (1971), as recommended by the MInnesote Department of Health, as well as any local ordinances and codes, should be followed In tfo design and In* stallatlon of the disposnl systems. If there ar i any questions with regard to this report, please do not hesi tate to contact us. I MttfSY Cf»tifT THAT THU PtAN. SPICIMCATION, 0« «fPO«T WAS PtIPAPfO BY Mf OB UNOtt MY OIPfCT StPIBVIVON AND THAT I AM A OUIY BTCIStmO PBOPfSSIONAl (NGINICI UNDIB THI >ws or thc stati or minnisota. Very truly yours, SOIL TESTING SERVICES Of HIHHESOTA, IMC. BATtO tic ’s» Jwnes H. Overtoom, P.E. Registered Professional Engineer, Minnesota Enclosures:Soil Percolation Test Location Otagram Percolation Test Summary Sheets General Notes Unifltd Soil Classification System JHO/lw •T ^ A ' ' 'f • \P<,^A' TRACT A, R.LS. /V*./S^cf * ^ ,x#/A ^xi« c^4 4f Pe/iCOLATfOAf T£SrC0^ K*<v seckpovr ^%UtLDfNO- COAP. • OK tllTlNO IlIVKIt OP WIICONtIM. INC. .«j2QEucJul!itoiwrfiniiiiBioi^tion Tesi Siiminary Sheet ClientSite Van Eeckhout Building Corpontlott lot H, Tract A. R.L.S. No. 1)40Orono. Mtnnefof *»• • * •t. HOtl MUMBIN A-8 OCTTN Of NOU 13.0 ft. fCKOLATION RATI •MMim/MCN Not Observed 50 mln/Inch •ML fROflU OlfTH ocscRirriON OtPTM OfSCRIfTIO*! O' " I Brown sandy clay - lo' - t « 3.0* (CL-SC) 3.0'~ I Brown silty and 8.0* I sandy clay (CL-SC) 8.0'- I Dark brown silty 13.0' clay - (CL) 3.0 Brown sandy clay - (CL-SC) P-44 P-45 3.0 ft.3.0 ft. 48 nin/inch 58 fiin/inch ocrTM O' - 3.0' f: $ Jf AUAAIUS t Wacc!* level. Dry while drilling. Dry after boring 24 hrs. ocscairnoN OtfTH rown sandr clay - I O' * CL-SC) I 3.0* ocscRirTioM Brown sandy clay (CL-SC) m -«: ir “ic#sS&S%.1 ----y*" geckhout Bundling®"« —!:°* "• * *' * “fi n^n JobWn ?°«»° .t >j t. •%r Mou ••- *4,N*V *% % ««4 ♦ • »* .» ■BltniOflLC 3-, V •i .i f,* ? kf: • w: i » MUUIIKS » 4 P-(i6 3.0 ft. 60 «iln/tnch P-^7 3.0 ft. OtTTN octcKirriON OroMi tsndy cIav ~ (CL-SC) 38 mln/Inch OEScniPTlOM P-*i8 3.0 ft. oirTM 50 «)In/Inch OC«CWI»TKX» BroMn tandy clay (CL-SC) DirrH }■ ■ "v ocscMirrtM I */• aij ^ * {^'w, V* *‘H • •t'r.'v ••'••'I :.*• ■u \\. ■MP'l- ■•: ••.vv^f'-Vritr. •.»'V.'* 1 "•.A^ •'r .• jJ. .K-‘| M •> ••••.' • • • I f . I •I . • •• •• • • • J'j’ • I * S •• •• • •: ••• '• ■■• :‘l-i* ■ SCALE r-‘K>0~ ■'VJ • I. .• » '^1 •»^v.VM:'=.;r, »' V»i ■ * T ‘ ^ ;• .•?n I t 1 ' • **•... . .-• ' 1 PLOl HLAN ^S0lb^m^(^¥nN !=y<^AA;-emwTKncsi^!^mxm, i=----------------------------------------------^‘||| J 'V!'.o' .iH’ • % rs •V -V. 03 C\J U) o fs: 'U^PTtC JA. ISO ’€99CflL SEP7A p C k 9. / / / rt/* jCl* ioiret> * ^ 9 • •# V.- ELEV. 965.0 ','.-.Qao, _____ OVERFILL TO ALLOV/ ■ R SETTLEMENT _______25ZJS.iBfcljZS BACKFILL y.O‘ ;.^,i#.V0.‘-.‘’ U-ivO'v;«0!7.V:'.' JA^suitabue for^ material^ ^ sw?/E^^p oi€w J0/^f^s —V-rr V.,Lr:,/F‘A6 utile OR • , 4'CR6. PERFORATED IPVCPIPE iLmnQmmmA TOP OF BLOCMw956.50 GARAGBl:l!OCm.956..00 ' BASEM£NT\FLOQP:'$fiBJ50 '• .■* 4 • • I I •V F/LT IR MEL >IAN l-V.if-.-ivi I v/IV*WFABSORPIION -J£'t________i sp«cUi<«;lvi^i Jt>y me «r uix end lhal l irT^^'dvIyrnJl ___ netr. under AlJ^vw'6f^^\b«JSliMi,.ol M\nnno\£^M0} HoiLtPSS^ • . A' iv/,* T. • ■» . , 'i % * •;.*•*. • • • # • I iV ^*1* * :vi .1 %• iVv' 'Kv* I.: r. i Z700 U)hilcOi?M; ^ r« . / I* i / • * \ . ‘ • i? • •• .U:T‘il •. •' ' -■ ■ £(.£« S58.0T . F0XSTREE\T ^zWAD--------- I ^ -J *4^. t • » « . « #. •*. « . I « 1. • I € cff\ /.. %*!■ ':/• • .• t-.V'* /: I 'I.^'y • O .. v»*% •••' M .• Eijr¥uwm£ FOflTT I i N ». * ui*>vinv‘i'% • • . •*. *••. **•• ^ <, VILABSQBEm/:0Rm SC/)Fg /■i40’0' : ^ \ I i 1 C ■.-. •« •• ••• wtvw; ••;■■ ■• • /'■•V . # • . »• •• .• • « IS « A I M i: 1 t ' ,rS' tf yJIt EL£V< 965.0 j OVERFILL TO ALLOW ________EQ^^TTLEMENT »-|; BAa<FILL vol ‘SUIT ^DLF. FORC US MATERIAL OVER JOINTS "VI } ELEVATION!^ ■'■ . TOP OF BLOCKiyy956.50 garage FL00R'-956:00 ' basement FLOOR-9^8.50 4 AG OR ^ • :■ 4 J:R6. PERFORATED '■'^^PVCPIPE i .1 MEL »M A/sr«c,.lS‘MV» *>y "]f Of.urxjef r>y dir^.iupwvlslon end Ihal I am q duly rcBiilered tnti. fww under, the lawi of. tbe;8ttH,plnolxga?' I < I•■i.fify- TRzNCH R-0 'f While (l;tC ■ • I ’ I • ---------1 f.; » •£L£K SSaO FOX STREE\I te-flOAO----------- ► i r ,r. I *•« # 9 . i;I.V 11 I; IX i I If.v.» o o o r: -S-. r'V.‘t5/C<^‘^'lt •V-.'; u : A 1 -' i •' « -H. ' • . .w.^ . <,'*. * V • . * ' ' •,'.». • • ,T ■ '. ■ ‘. '" V *^. • > .., *• ’ * ■■ ■'".■' v| U • •-•-»* • ••••#•i . k* • .•: w . * • • ‘* .V;\, •'.%«■* TtWphon^ 47SUS1 - • . . .r . V , ^ 4 :iTy= <S»£ fORbNQ CITYof ORONO Host OflW* Bo« tfCry^ Bmf. Mlni**«oU 65333* MdiiWpal Oflicw . t On the f^’orth Short of Loke Minnetonka December 28, 1979 ;• r V C’*V;^ vr*« I s I' •' •• i/-' '*• » ,* ' '■* * ♦ •’' >'•'. • • ^ i » Mr. Jason C. Becker • •^~ 9200 Wayzata Boulevard Minneapolis, Minnesota 55426 Re: Your letter of December 20, 1979 Dear Jay: You do have two 1,000 gallon septic tanks. Each one should ^'«ve an inspection/cleanout pipe at the inlet end of the first tank and the outlet end of the second tank. These pipes may have been covered up when the lot was finish graded and may have been broken off or pushed aside at that time. The tanks are fairly shallow and using the dimensions on your drawing you should be able to find the holes in the tanks by digging down a foot or two. The 50' water table you referred to is the static water l*vel in your well. Without getting into it too technically, this due to the water pressure in the sand aquifer in which your The attached drawing should help explain it. The table may have some effect on your drainfield is a table due to surface runoff water from high ground settling into lower flat areas and soaking in. The rate and amount of water flowing down into these lower flat areas is greater than the rate the water can move downward through the clav layers of soil below the topsoil. This causes a buildup or saturation of the upper soil layers until the water gets a chance to move downward. If the saturation level of the soil increases to where no more water can be absorbed, it is feasible that further loading of the system (flushing toilets, etc.) would cause sewage to overflow the tanka at the inspection pipe or back up into the house. Not likely, but possible. Whenever possible wo try to got the contractor to keep drainfields in the more desirable soils. Your existing drainfield was installed so as to eliminate the use of a pump which is a mechanical device and therefore prone to failure. If at some future time your present system drainfield ceases to function properly, you could always p^ up to a new drainfield on higher ground to the southwest of the existing system. Hopefully this should not be necessary for 20 to 30 years or more. If you have further questions, please do not hesitate to call or write. Sincerely, ifl\ 7v^/ r*l P. GaMlchr^'l "P. Gaffron Septic System Insp»*ctor MPG:kh I hI .4 .- *••.•*»,■*•'»•' K ’ •’ ‘ f . • ’ . ♦'• • • • ‘^ . . — »• 4 • • • .' : *:ii^. -r "• ’ • •. * •• • •* '.■CJRW H ‘ A V . VT^',..'*' •'j+v "mm . • . V.« * <?ri i'l^ 4^ «JA0OH C. BCCKKH • too WATlAfA SOVLCTAM HtmtlA^OUtt, MUlimOtA BMai •*.* Decenber 20, 1979 I ' ^ 'i '4 . If'' ♦' *;i DEC 28 1979 •vj"!v; J cmr OF ORONO Mr. Michael P. G.iffron Building Inspector City of Orono P. 0. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Dear Mike: Thanks for sending me the information on my septic system at my new house at 2700 White Oak Circle. As I understand it, there are two 1,000 gallon septic tanks. Does each tank have a separate outlet for pumping out? I can find one outlet in my yard, but not a second. The only question I had was whether you antici pate problems because the water table is at 50 feet and, therefore, in the springtime the water table rising up may cause some filling of the septic system which would cause backup possibly into the house. Is this a potential problem? Thanks for your help. Yours truly. t > * > JCR:bbb ^9^ 'V' J j y , .» .•■■'iT-.-./'.r 1 ••• ;M'V■^1i" i'..«vi: ■’3 '< - •Jr.- i, s - *>. i :-f' I# -r, • .--/ rf- •■V/-- • _ /mm ■*v / W t1 RiMSnil If ?ft ij». / l1 ■ '■. r f 1 #T.I*4iI»] r»Til4JK* city ISrmJt< ,• *»*v * ■* ^ ^ • rt. -.2- 5286'''"^'^l Addrrts Own ft State Licenjc No . Addrets Gty Lictnse No. Parcel No. Section No. Plat No. Other Description: GENERAL PERMIT CITY OF ORONO Crystal Bay. MinnesoU Dale /-/- 7J . Block Subdivision I hereby agree that, in case a permit is granted, all work which shall be done and ail materials which shall he t^. shall comply with the Qly Code of Orono applicable thereto, and shall include all additional specifications B listed below. To:Mayor Callahan and Orono Councilmembers Ron Moorse, Citv Administrator From: Date: Michael P. Gaffron, Assistant Planning & Zoning Administrator CITY OF ORONO July 7, 1993 Subject:1993 Joint Use Dock License - Big Island Veteran’s Camp List of Exhibits COUNCILMEETING A B C D E Resolution 1993 Application State Statutes RE: Board of Governors City Ordinance RE: License and Permit Fees Resolution No. 2802 (Vet’s Camp CUP) JUL 1 2 1993 CITY OF ORONO 1993 License Request Tlie Big Island Veteran’s Camp is requesting a Joint Use Dock License for 3 docks containing a total of 8 slips, of which 3 slips are for seasonal overnight docking of camp-owned boats, and 5 are transient slips. In the past, Orono has licensed the Vet’s Camp for up to 14 slips and 2 buoys. The Veteran’s Camp has more than adequate shoreline length to accommodate this level of use. The Big Island Veteran’s Camp first obtained an annual Joint Use Dock License in 1982. The City has received no complaints regarding operaii'Mi of this joint use dock. The level of use of the cam.p is governed by City Resolution No. 2802, allowing 5 cabins and 25 tent camping sites. Tlie LMCD has approved a 1993 Multiple Dock License for 8 slips at this location Request for Fee Waiver The Board of Governors has verbally requested a waiver of the annual license tee (and in this case late fee), based on their "status as a state agency", although they did submit a check for the entire $51.00 amount. Absent a formal letter of request for a waiver, and noting that 1) the municipal code section regarding fees does not provide for waivers and 2) the State Statutes specifically state "the Board is not a state agency", staff cannot recommend a fee waiver or refund without further information. Staff would note that the fee for Joint Use Dock License has remained at a low rate ju.st covering administrative costs. I would also note that the Vet’s Camp has not historically been exempted from City licen.se fees nor building permit fees. 1993 Joint Use Dock License - Big Island Veteran’s Camp July 7. 1993 Page 2 Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval of a 1993 Joint Use Dock License for Big Island Veteran s Camp Board of Governors for use of 5 transient and 3 permanent moorage slips, subject to the •^1 1 ♦’Continuing compliance with Resolution No. 2802, and no waiver ot fees. A license approval resolution is attached for Council adoption. Moved by , seconded by____, to approve a 1993 Joint Use Dock License for Big Island Veteran’s Camp Board of Governors per the attached resolution.___Ayes,____Nays. RESOLUTION DIRECTING STAFF TO issut : a joint use dock license TO BOARD OF GOVERNORS, BIG ISLAND VETERAN’S C/VMP SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS NOTED HEREIN FOR THE PERIOD OF JANUARY 1, 1993 TO DECEMBER 31, 1993 •'VHEREAS, the City of Orono. hereinafter "City" is a municipal coiporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota and has the authority and responsibility under Minnesota Statutes. State Statute 412, et. seq. and State Statute 462. et. seq., to protect the health, safety, ana general welfare of the citizens of the City and other members of the public within the City; and WHEREAS, the City shares concurrent jurisdiction over the primaiy' harbor limit of the City of Orono with the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District and the Department of Natural Resources of the State of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, the regulation of the navigable waters involves an exercise of police power of tl»e State, LMCD, and the City of Orono. all of which have adopted rules to ensure to all equal enjoyment of the public rights and equal protection from activity on or near the public waters and on the land within the City which, if unregulated, may be detrimental to the public health, «^afety and general welfare; and WHEREA*7, Lhe regulations of the DNR, LMCD, and the City of Orono regulate the property rights of the riparian owners both as to residential owners and the commercial marina owners to the exten prohibiting any interference with the public waters adjoining their property. The LMCD. DNR and City of Orono must fulfill their trusteeship over the public waters by protecting against interference by anyone, including those who assert the commonlaw rights of riparian owners, whether or not they be commercial marinas or residential owners; WHEREAS, as to Lake .Minnetonka, a mutual right of enjoyment exists between and is shared by riparian owners and the public generally, no one riparian owner has exclusive privileges over Lake Minnetopl a, The only additional private right that any riparian ow ner may have over the public generally is to construct one dock to the navigable depth of the public waters. There can be no dispute but that the public generally and each riparian owner to Lake Minnetonka has the right to u.se the entire surface area of Lake Minnetonka for all suitable purposes in common with all other riparian owners. This right is a right not only to members of the public but the right to each riparian owner. This mutual right of enjoyment which is shared by riparian owners and the public generally includes the recreational benefits of the lake such as boating and fishing therein; the riparian ow ner has no exclusive privileges to these rights; and Page 1 of 2 WHEREAS, Lake Minnetonka is capable of substantial beneficial public use only as long as all riparian users of the lake are regulated in such a way as to ensure there is no abuse of the limited riparian rights; and WHEREAS, the City has adopted reasonable regulations regarding the construction and use of lakeshore and dock facilities when such facilities are used and maintained by three or more families, which regulations include the annual licensing of Joint Use Docks pursuant to Section 5.42 of the Orono Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, the purpose of this Resolv.tion is to set forth the above noted general condition.s and concerns and the following special conditions as they relate to an application for an annual Joint Use Dock License described on Exhibit A attached, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Orono hereby directs the Staff to issue a Joint Use Dock License according to the facts and conditions noted on Exhibit A attached. .Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono at their meeting on the 12th day of July. f9b3. ATTEST: Edward J. Callahan, Jr., Mayor Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 12th day of July. 1993 by Edward J. Callahan, Jr. & Dorothy M. Hallin, Mayor & City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public Page 2 of 2 CITY OF ORONO EXHIBIT A RESOLUTION NO. CONDITIONS OF ISSUANCE F OR ANNUAL JOINT USE DOCK LICENSE I. LICENSEE: Big Island Veteran’s Camp Board of Governors Dock Address: Big Island - Record Lot ,^^1 - 100 Big Island Agent: Tom Schottenbauer (Chairman) Address: Box 598, Excelsior. MN 55331 Licensee is: Statutory board/club or recreation group License Period - January 1. 1993 to December 31, 1993 II. BOAT DENSITY The number of in-place boat slips, lifts and buoys shall not exceed the number shown on the attached plan. Exhibit B, and in accordance with Resolution 938, in no case shall the number of authorized boat slips, lifts, or buoys exceed the number permitted in the prior year ’s license. Authorized Boat Density per attached plan: Bay Transient (Day use only) Slips Permanent Moorage Slips Boat Lifts Sub-Total: Slips at Dock Offshore Buoys Maximum Boats in Water Maximum Boats per prior license MAXIMUM BOAT DENSITY. 1993 Lower Main Lake f 8 (14 slips, 2 buoys under previous license) 8 Exliibit A Resolution No. Page 2 Exceeding this maximum boat density, or exceeding the number of permitted slips, lifts or buoys is a violation of this license subject to revocation and/or prosecution for violation of Section 5.42 Subdivision 2 of the Orono Municipal Code. III. DOCK LAYOUT Ihe dock structure or layout authorized by this license shall be as shown on attached Exhibit B. Any changes in this layout shall be subject to prior review and approval of the City Council. IV. SPECIAL CONDITIONS required for compliance with the ordinance of the City and/or the LMCD. The issuance of this license is subject to full compliance with these conditions. Failure to comply with these conditions is cause for license revocation and/or prosecution by the Citv. 1. 2. Based on the 5 cabins and 25 tent-camping sites approved by City of Orono Resolution ^5^2802, 8 slips are approved for the 1993 season per your application. Future requests for additional slips will be subject to City Council approval and shall be reviewed and considered in relation to the concurrent level of allowed camp activity. V. Nothing in this license shall confer upon any person for the benefit of any property any vested right to use Lake Minnetonka or the premises in a manner permitted by this resolution, but the use of Lake Minnetonka and the premises shall remain subject to such regulations and ordinances as the City and other competent regulatory authorities shall deem necessary from time to time in the public interest. •• < » ^ • li^F^ nJliClilV't*-^ DEC 1 G 1992 1 ••C.D. /' )N ^)C4/i£>fT ^ fCe <r ^ w 77 /(? LoSCL^ /2f Big Island Veterans Camp i 3 VETERAN'S BAY 'ilcio *Z**iy.73 m'b' sp •. #• • • . • • 0 Z' 0 i • ^ *^**"*]lP _n^. C.ll-4 fis, Ut/. P J Sc-olc JT\ ^^**“*< ‘- - -^ ^ J) ./.'GUU -iC.ort.o i,*^» ^ X»Oc./C U^c ® Po.k -,.-.fa„cK ( s^a,.) <5; 0,-. aJo 'R^■fE.c^^^<^ bofl i ^''1 (ppCK- P^ f r.f** \ ;P: \ o ^ (g 1^ tCi -i- S Ajdll U £7 ^ IrVa'^ 5/1^ PlAfvj Ri:.Cfc.JV£D # DE:C 2 31986 L.M.C.D. /ffl- 1*10' 19V - |‘?1^ 9P • ^j) -/2- T>- El /4<f/- ^¥0 /ii* - C5) /J^Q^^r.decf ^JO.^l.hc^ #« I I DOCK BIG- ISLANDAN 5 veterans cAmp « • \ EX\^T I N(hd p U T U K £ • • • • J"vA vA e I 5c4le ‘. /”• 20 ’ c Vfi / 3// sH^)Rc.LINe: jSH/\UmV_s^AT£R______ r- , •» ^dd^tOM4\ iui)\ 1>« A d.d «<i A.S K e e d. LWC.0^^ 3^51** d*v>d. **»^*ft V CV^'Cf unA «; £.<L is ao'x ’io* E:.«.cV; ’ doe.y; u/,\\ h40< 4 slips. D*«-K lev^i'U uiiU iitf J c.'^cviMi w« (J do^ nlfV^ ^ ux^'fev-Cvft'T'f S+ovA^c Uvvl"ts ^ s Voia \i1 l)« 2^ PfiV* W\a%A <%| "t* -or- sf.uv»i "H ii- ,1 • f 9k4)(«ui u;4*fev flw U»4'i>V 64 d't'lltv AM e tf.v\ U tf M (J • L^X^ J :•: •t eKc««d loo’ ,1 AM tl ■fU iuJl\ 'loT ?,r It -o «D i Tin fTltfUl n CITY OF ORONO P.O. BOX 66 CRYSTAL BAY, MN 55323 473-7357 LICENSE YEAR 19 LlJl iiL 13i3iVVW^ul i'En »/i.w U r* i. I nI w i^ A a V%/ ANNUAL JOINT USE DOCK LICENSE APPLICATION Pursuant to Orono Municipal Code Section 5.42 ;;2T7320 V^Ol » I * / . w'/ *-* 4vu/ tf. / / w* Date Form Sent by City Staff February 1. 1993 Date Application Renimed to Cit>’ Fee Received S Bv Employee Section 5 42. Subdivision 2. I irFNSE REQUIRED - It is unlawful for any (group or association of persons or families, more than two in number, whether incorporated or not) to engage or participate in ... joint use (of any lakeshore property) without first having obtained a license therefor from the City. PLE4SE COMPLETE ALL ITE.MS .AND SUBMIT SIGNED .APPLIC.ATION. REQUI^D A^ACHMENTS, and LICENSE .APPUC.ATION FEE TO THE CITY CLERK BY MARCH 1 OF THE LICENSE YEAR. A.SSOCIATION INFORaMATION 1. Association title or name (if any) Lake Mt aJk/tf'rT? a ; ________^——-----------------------------------—— Person responsible for this application: Mailing Address ^!rcY. S _______ Relationship to association AiU Phone >2^^ 7£> TC Association is (check applicable items): ____ unincorporated homeowner’s group. incorporated Homeowner s Association, unincorporated club or recreation group incorporated clr.b or recreation group. <r-'TTyrU^7 Page 1 of 5 D. 6. 7. 8. 9. Principsl purpose of joint use dock is (check applicable items): provide boat mooring and lake access for residential property, provide swimming access, beach, or offshore dock, provide a club or association gathering place for activities. Dock is located on (check applicable item): ____ one member’s private property. easement or outlot owned in common. ____ property leased by the group/association. v/ property owned by the group/association. List Dock location and ownership information: Street address _______^^ Legal property description “2. — PID# ________________________________________________________ Listed property owner(s) At>4_ \j\s ^—O p Names of abutting lakeshore property owners: t North/West)________________________ (Name + Address) LSnuth/East) A- (Name + Address) Names of other affected property owners: j tr iName + Address) (attach sheet if necessary) Insurance Coverage - Tne jointly used dock is insured by one of the following: property owner ’s homeowner ’s policy, separate group/association owned policy. List the following information: Name of insured____/sL-ArJ >2) Vc T'^XAtJs—------------------------- Name of insurance carrier ----- Name of insurance agency /V^ —/a/s—^— Policy No. CP (S'/91^/______Effective date of coverage Amount of coverage: Public liabUity, per person, per occurrence S 57V?, Public liability, per occurrence S _ Page 2 of 5 10.Security and policing of the jointly used dock and property is provided by (check applicable items): fencing ___ security lighting ____ property owner’s presence contract security service other (specify) DOCK TNFORM.^TION 11. List Dock Use Area Specific.'>.iions: ^ Width of shoreline: Kli R- ft. Length of main dock from shore: Dock setbacks from side property lines at ^hore: —and ---- Dock Construction (check applicable items): ft. ft. 12. seasonal dock (relocated or replaced each vear) permanent piling with seasonal deck ____ permanent piling and decking wooden decking metal decking 13.Lilt Dock Accessories: Number of fire e.xtinguishers available at the dock ---- Number of life preserv'ers available at the dock ^ 14.List number of slips in each category ("slips” includes boat lifts). Transient (day use only) slips ___ Transient (day use) off-shore buoys _ Permanent moorage slips ^ _ Permanent moorage off-shore buoys . Dry storage (rack) slips ____Maximum number of boats at the dock 15.List number of off-street parking spaces available for users of the joint use dock. Parking, if provided must not be separated from the dock by any public road. spaces. FBOSTON .4NT> «sFnTMENT.ATIOy CONTROL 16. Shoreline is protected by (check applicable items). stone rip rap ___ wood seawall ___ metal seawall concrete seawall grass and vegetation only _____other (specify) 17.Depth of water at shoreline. _£__ft; at cO ft. out:at 100 ft. out: Page 3 of 5 J REQUIRED ATTACHMENTS The following must acco npany this application. A. B. C. nnrK" pi AN - ALL APPLICATIONS A dock plan, drawn to scale, showing the shoreline width of this property the side property lines and the location, layout and dimensions of all docks, slips and buoys. It off-street parking, dry storage or other on-land functions are intended, these a so s ou be shown on the plan. unincorporated groups or associations Srf^r^ 1. A list of the names and mailing addresses of all members and/or slip users. T A cenified copv of the bv-laws or agreement for joint use. Note- This coov is not rcouirgd if the applicant initials and ccr.ifies the following statement: "This is a renewal application and our joint use dock is to be operated under the same by-laws or agreement onginally made in_______(state year) and on file with the City. Applicant’s initials incorporated clubs or associations 1. A list of the names, mailing addresses and titles of all corporation otticers. 5^ krrf\CH-ei> , ^ ^ . 2. A statement as to the total number of members in the club or association. A/'14- members A cenified copv of the anicles of incorporation and by-laws of the corporation. Note- These copies are not required if the applicant initials and certifies the following statement: ■niis is a renews] spplieslion sod our joint use dock is io be opersled under the j' incorporation and/or by-laws as originally made or last amended m -------- (stutc year) and on file vyjth the City." I (/Applicant’s initials ANIkfUAL*! ICENSE FEE - ALL .APPT.ICATIONS Join] Use D.)ck License Applicaiion Fee according to the cerrerti City Fee Schedule INITIAL APPLICATION FEE RENEWAL JOINT USE FEE, per year PI I T.S .SI IP FEE for each permanent moorage slip lift, dry stack, or buoy 2, slips @ 2.00 each total dlt : this application s s $ $ 20.00 6 I t-v f.. ^ .b /. Pace 4 of 5 LATE FEE - Renewals Application for renewal of licenses shall be made no later than March 1 of the license year. JM City shall not accent renewal license applications received after March 1 unless the anplicanmi is accompanied bv a late fee of $25.00. REVIEW PROCEDURE When a complete application is received, the application will be reviewed by the City Council and, in the case of new or unusual applications, also by the Planning Commission and * lanna Committee. The Council will pass upon the application after complete review TH^ SUBJECT DOCK MAY BE INSTALLED AND/OR OPENED FOR USE ONLY UPON APPROVAL OF THE LICENSE BY THE CITY COUNCH . Pursuant to Section 5.42 of the Orono Municipal Code, the applicant hereby requests the Orono Citv Council to review this Joint Use Dock License Application, and agrees and authorizes me City of Orono and me City’s employees and agents to enter upon me property at any reasonable time to perform safety and code compliance inspections. Signed Date V Paee 5 of 5 DEC 1 G 1992 ’ • • C.D. / /o f-r Big Island Vaterana Camp VETER.\N'S BAY iUw ml- gp J BIG ISLAND VETERANS CAMP BOARD OF GOVERNORS November 1992 Dennis Blanchard (DAV) 8110 - 12th Avenue South Bloomington, MN 55425 851-9114 Gary Fish (Purple Heart) 7464 Colfax Avenue North Brooklyn Park, MN 55444 560-2617 Louis E. Penna (Purple Heart) 3955 Perry Avenue North Robbinsdale, MN 55422 537-4306 Emil Sulander (AL) 5001 Williston Road Minnetonka, MN 55345 h) 935-4680 W) 938-3705 Roy Bromley (Caretaker) 25865 Smithtown Road Excelsior, MN 55311 474-9274 Roger Fahrenkrug (VFW) 5329 - 45th Avenue South Minneapolis, MN 55417 724-8611 David M. Haukom (AL) 128 West 36th Street Minneapolis, MN 55408 825-4976 Thomas Schottenbauer (VFW) 4170 Webster Avenue St. Louis Park, MN 55416 h) 922-7070 W) 546-7601 Tom Swanson (DAV) PO Box 18124 Minneapolis, MN 55418 781-3030 -J- The commissioner of veterans affairs shall have charge ol activities as provided in this section, and may employ assistants and incur other expenses as may be necessary for the administration of the state soldiers’ welfare fund and carrying out the provisions of sections 197.01 to 197,07, No expense shall be incurred under the provisions of sec tions 197.01 to 197.0Ain excess of the moneys available to the state soldiers’ welfare fund. The duties and poweXof the commissioner of veterans affairs, in addition to those provided elsewhere by law^shall be to: (1) Administer the state\oldiers* welfare fund; (2) Cooperate with national state, county, municipal and private social agencies in securing to former soldiers an^their dependents the benefits provided by national, state, and county laws, municipaPordinances, or public and private social agencies; (3) Establish and provide assisumce to a former soldier who is in need of hospital ization but unable to accept it becau^ the acceptanc^would imperil the soldier’s cur rent employment in order to insure employment after hospiu ’ization; (4) Provide necessary assistance wwre otheradequate aid is not available to the dependent family of a former soldier whi)e the.soldier is being hospitalized and after wards during such period as is necessary; (5) Cooperate with United States government agencies providing compensation, pensions, insurance or other benefits provided^ by federal law, by supplementing the benefits prescribed by federal law, when exceptional conditions in an individual case make it necessary; and y \ (6) Establish and provide employment, placerri'ent, and advisement service for dis abled veterans as cannot be furnished by cooperation with other free public employ ment agencies. , History: (4604) 1923 c 436 s 6: 1925 c 88: 1929 c 327: 1980 c 414 s 5: 1986 c 444 197.07 SOLDIERS’ WELFARE FUND DEPOSITED IN ST.4TE TREASURY. The soldiers’ welfare fund shall be deposited in the state treasury and paid out only in such vouchers as may be authorized and approved by the commissioner of veterans affairs in the same manner and under the same restrictions as arenow provided by law for the disbursement of funds by the commissioner. \ msiorr. (4605) 1923 c 436 s 7; 1986 c 444 •T/A 'V. ^ • .1' 197.09:A[Re^eVl983 c 335 s 3] ' MO/; - • r; * > > 197.KK. „[Rep^ed,.1983 c 335 s 3]. 197Jri [Rep^ed, 1983 c 335 s 3] 197:12 mm • * • * • *• # • [Obsolete];: “ r; ~ £ .T.r. i. [Repealed . r ••• 197.131 BOARD OF GOVERNORS OF BIG ISLAND 'VETERANS CA.MP. ' Subdivision 1. Creation and meml^rship. The board of governors of the Big Island Veterans Camp - Lake Minnetonka supervises and manages the camp. The board con- ' sists of eight members. Two members each are appointed by the state level organization of the American Legion, the Disabled American Veterans, the Milit:iry Order of the Purple Heart, and the Veterans of Foreign Wars provided that at least two appointees are Vietnam veterans. The commissioner of veterans affairs or the commissioner’s des ignee may attend and participate in an advisory capacity at any of the board meetings. ‘ The term of each member of the board is two years or until the appointment and quali-' fication of a successor. The board selects a chair and secretary from its membership who 5gj-ye terms of one year.'-*0 * ' Subd. -2. Vacancies and removal. A member of the board may be removed at any ‘ time by the organization appointing that member. Also, by written notice to the' i •V 197.131 VETERANS; REWARDS, PRIMLECES 5008 appointing organization, the board may remove the member if the member has been absent for three consecutive meetings of the board. To remove a member, the board must notify in writing the appointing organization and the member after the second consecutive missed meeting that the member may be removed if the next meeting is missed. Any vacancy on the board is filled for the remainder of the unexpired term in the same manner as the original appointment. .......... , " History: 1985 c 152 s 1; lSpl985 c 16 art 2 s 4; 1986 c 444 ■_.. 197.132 POWERS AND DUTIES. : . The board of governors of the Big Island Veterans Camp - Lake Minnetonka estab lishes policies for the proper management of the camp. The board may contract for ser vices needed to operate the camp including the services of a manager, may hire employees, and may make other expenditures for the procurement of materials, ser vices, or equipment necessary for the operation of the camp. Expenditures are made upon the approval of the chair. The bo^d must prepare an annual report detailing a complete report of financial transactions, usage levels, and other activities regarding the management and operation of the camp. Copies of the annual reports must be submit ted to each appointing organization and to the commissioner of veterans affairs. The board may accept donations, contributions, gifts, and bequests of real or personal pro]> erty that may be made for the maintenance or operation of the camp.;; zuis-.v. —i.The board shall make the camp available to veterans using the following priorities: (1) qualified disabled veterans and their dependents; - (2) qualified veterans, their dependents, and surviving spouses of qualified veter ans who were campers prior to the deed transfer, and (3) qualified veterans, their dependents, and surviving spouses of qualified veter ans. The camp must be operated as a family camp for the rest and relaxation of veterans and their dependents rather than as a program-oriented camp. The board must publicize the camp to the greatest extent possible to make the camp’s facilities known to Minnesota veterans. 5^ The board is not a state agency. The board shall purchase liability and related ' insurance sufficient to indemnify the state against all claims arising from the conduct or management of the activities conducted by the board, its agents, or contractors. History: 1985 c 152 s 2: 1986 c 444 197.133 DISPOSAL OF PROPERTY AND EXPIRATION OF THE BOARD OF GOVERNORS. If a majority of the board determines that the disposal of the camp or a portion of the camp is in the best interests of Minnesota veterans, or if the camp is not used solely as a camp for and by disabled and other veterans and their families and operated and maintained in compliance with all state, federal, and local laws, the board may dis pose of the property at market value as provided in this section. Before disposing of the property, the board shall give notice by certified mail to the commissioner of veter ans affairs of its decision to dispose of the propeny. The commissioner shall publish the notice in the State Register. Interested governmental agencies have until the end of the next legislative session after the notice to appropriate money to purchase the property. Proceeds realized from the disposal of the property and any assets on hand at the time of the disposal of the property, must be placed in an irrevocable trust to be used for the initiation or maintenance of veterans programs in the state of Minnesota. Trust ees must be appointed in the same manner as provided for under section 197.131. The trustees shall consult with the commissioner of veterans affairs to determine the needs of Minnesota veterans and provide the commissioner and the committee on general leg islation and veterans affairs of the house of representatives and the committee on veter ans and general legislation in the senate with an annual written report on the trust. The ¥ »-^r: cc as as or ar al e.x IS IS IS IS IS IS IS 11 11 11 r a: rr. 0 ir u C( 0 ih g a 1 i: L a r r % n c b d i: p a 5009 MTITRANS; REWARDS. PRTVILEGES 197.2J5 JV t i m.* i 4 commissioner must approve all expenditures from the trust. A cenihed audit of all assets, expenditures, and property must be conducted prior to any disposition of any assets under the control of the board. Any board member who would benefit directly or indirectly financially from the sale of this property must be removed by the ^ard and a successor appointed as provided by section 197.131. Upon final disposition ot all assets to the trust, the board must disband. Should the assets of the trust be exhausted, the trust must be terminated. History: 1985 c 152 s 3 197.14 197.15 197.16 197.17 197.18 197.19 197.20 197.21 197.211 197.22 [Repealed, [Repealed, [Repealed, [Repealed, [Repealed, [Repealed, [Repealed, [Repealed, [Repealed, [Repealed, 1976 c 149 1985 c 152 1985 c 152 1985 c 152 1985 c 152 1985 c 152 1969 c 275 1969 c 275 1969 c 275 1969 c 275 s63] s5] s5] s5] s5] s5] s 12] s 12] s 12] s 12] • • • ^ • 197.23 PURCH^E OF GRAVE MARKERS. Subdivision l\Authorization. The commissioner of veterans a^irs may provide, within available funosand upon request of a county veterans service officer or any con- gressionally charteredveterans organization, an appropriate marker for the grave of any veteran as defined under section 197.447, Any marker provided must be used for memorial purposes to permanently mark the grave of a veteran buried within the limits of the state, // Subd. 2. Account for inarkeKj)urchase. An accounlinust be created by the depart ment of finance under the control bf the commissioner of veterans affairs that must be used to purchase markers. The commissioner shall provide the available funds for each county in the ratio of the number of niht^ers plp^d in the county to the tot^ number of markers placed in approximately the s^e ratio as funds that may be received from that county to the total amount of funds T^Yunds of each county includes the county government and any donations from oiganlzations and individuals that are head quartered or resident in the county. / History: (4373) 1909 c 299 s 1; 1931 c 363 s 4\l969 c 275 s 6; 3Spl981 c 2 art 1 s 28: 1983 c 147 s 2 y/ 197.235 VETERANS’ CEMETERY. Subdivision 1. Acquisition^ The department of veteran'i^affairs shall acquire a site in this state to be used to establish a cemetery for the inteR^nent of veterans of the United States armed forces and for qualified family members of^eligible veterans. The approval of the governing body of the county in which the proposed site is to be located must be obtained priorto any acquisition of land for this purpose. The department may receive any land granted to the state or any of its political subdi visionS^for this purpose. Subd, 2. Operation and maintenance. The department of veterar^s affairs shall supervise and control the veterans’ cemetery established under this section^The depart ment may contract for the maintenance and operation of the cemetery, All^ersonnel, equipment, and support necessary for maintenance and operation of the cemetej7 must be included in the department’s budget. \ Subd. 3. Eligible veterans. Any veteran who received any discharge, other than a dishonorable discharge, from the armed forces of the United States is eligible for burial in the state veterans’ cemetery and any indigent veteran is eligible for burial in the cem etery without charge, except that funds available from the social security burial allow ance, if any. must be paid to the cemetery^ director. - f . f « i t > • ! 1 t 0 n « «x: i: 5 t-ii I V A. T. * * 51 ..H.-.si * vH •» T X ** T § 1.02 .• 'W' r > vSubd. 20. "Ordinance" means an ordinance duly adopted by the City Cbjuncil of Orono, Minnesota. Su^d. 21. "Ex Officio Member" means a- person who is not counted for tlie purpose of determining a quorum# and who has no right t."' vote# l?ut who shall have the right^and obligation (within his discretion) tO\ speak to any question coming before the board# commission or other^^deliberative body of'^which he is such member. Subd. 22. Subd. 23. May" is permissive. Sh^ll" is m^datory. Subd. 24. "Violarer includes failure to comply with. Subd. 25. "Premises''\means any lot, piece or parcel of land within a continuous boundary whether publicly or privately owned# occupied or possessed. ^ SEC. 1.03. ,MEANINGS. As used irNthis City Code# words of the maJ.e gender shal'l include the female and^hieuter# the singular shall include the plUral and the plural shall include the singular# and the present/^tense includes the past and future tenses and the future# th^^present. Words not specifically defined shall have the meanings .set forth in Webster's dictionary. SK, 1.04. LICENSES AND PERMITS. No license or permit issued by tJi"e City shall imply that the permittee has fulfilled his responsioility to any other person# governmental agency or entity# or/that the activities proposed by the permittee conforms with any standard# regulation or requirement of the City or any other governmental aqencv_._ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ SBC. 1.05. LICENSE AND PERMIT FEES. Subd. 1. Fees. The City may prescribe fees in an amount allowed by statute and/or as needed to defray the costs incurred by it in reviewing# investigating and administering an application for a license# permit, or other permission required by this Code. The fees to be paid shall be in the amount prescribed by the current City fee ordinance. The fee shall be payable at the time the application is filed with the City and is not refundable unless the application is withdrawn prior to any review of the application by the City. Subd. 2. Variable and Additional Costs. Each applicant shall be charged and shall pay an amount equal to the additional cost incurred by the City in reviewing, investigating and adminis tering each application including# but not limited to. City employee time and costs, engineering# legal and planning consultant costs. ORONO CC (4-1-84) § 1.05 SiSSi; Ls3^.^/l.^'r:iSo^v,r.^r.'^^V■v“^"N°• ?■ variable additional costs. If, during the reviewing, investigating and administering of the application, will be additional deposit is necessary to insure that sufficient to reimburse the City forso inform the applicant and suspend ®ny action on the application until the additional deposit has been made by the pp Subd 4 Payment of Costs. If no estimate of costs can be made by the City, or if the costs incurred by ^g^Hl the estimate of costs and amount on deposit, the which receive a monthly statement of costs incurred by the City shall be payable fifteen days after receipt by t Failure to pay such costs shall result in a suspension of action on the application or revocation of the permit a payment of estimated costs has been made, such credit against such statements until the sum is ^Anv event the excess shall be due upon receipt of the unused portion of the deposit shall be refunded upon on the application. No permits need be issued until an applican shall make payment in full of costs billed to the applicant. Subd. 5. Unpaid Costs. The Council "|ay certify all unpaid costs to the Hennepin County Auditor who shall ®^^®/ubielt upon the tax records as a lien upon such land which is ^he ^^ect of the permit, to be collected in the same manner as other real eLate ?axes are collected. In addition thereto, the City may sue to collect the costs plus its reasonable attorneys fees and Court costs. . -- - - ---- -- - - - - - - - - - -- - - - -— -SBcTToe^ VIOLATION A MISDEMEANOR OR A PETTY MISDEMEANOR. Every person violates a chapter, section, subdivision, provision of this City Code when he performs an act £^9 herein, as set forth in the specific chapter in which ' subdivision, paragraph or provision violated ^e tion for a crime, the actor may be convicted of either the cri charged if it is a misdemeanor, or a petty ”*^sdemeanor as included offense necessarily proved if the misdemeanor charge proved. SBC. 1.07. OTHERWISE DNLAWFOL. The City Code does not authorize* an act or omission otherwise prohibited by law. * -T* ORONO CC (4-1-84) *•**• • • •. ^ • * I •* • - 1 • •••• %• • • * * *. ■• I ■• • V • ■■• .S .tv ;•;•■ •'.-. ■ • . ’V • • m • • • . •- .S. V-: r I CITY II I1 ORONOj City of ORONO • • resolution of the city council NO.2802 A RESOLUTION —" xo.ax.^r^B^B 3 SECTION 10.31, SUBDIVISION 11 PILE #1518 WHEREAS, Alan :^^^^^^^(”he°/ei^nafter "the Governors, Big Ian Veterans applicant") has an xnteresw in j;a- p- . city of Orono per Orono Classification ;s (hereinafter "City") and legally cesc.ibed as See Exhibit A, attached (hereinafter "the property ), the pier foundations as proposec. NOW, TBEREPORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council o Orono, Minnesota; FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #1518 2. The property is looted in the RS^Seasonal. SSr"re7t eitlona^lse Yetra o^ the facility will recuire the following area allowances: 25 tent camp sites require 12.5 acres Lr-Srea??Sn"Le af^O user level requires 12 acres total area required = 29.5 acres Existing Acreage = 57 acres o .n ar^•r-^ 1 16 1990 the Orono Planning Commission the °app*?f«\ion al'pr^osed and recommended approval based on the following findings: •H - ‘ * Page 1 of 5 • • • m ••• • •• • • • •• ,-n ■ ■ CITYl~I ORONO City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO.2802 « ,• c la'-ae enough to support a dayA) The 57+ ecre site ctmping use as use recreatxon __ effect upon the lake or amended without , •tha^"'a’'e located within theupon the adjacent wetlands tha- a.e subject property. B) The proposed use will have no negative impact upon the neighboring property. C) Based upon the s-r/'^anl aOD^liolnt will ronVinfe" ^^VrotV6\'Tut n-ecessary precaution in maintaining th4 public safety and wel.a... ^ t./-; 1 1 recuire no variances to theD) The proposed use will . section 10.31, >-eaui’*ed standards set ..ori-n xr Subdivision 3 (D) for overnight camping use. T’he C-tv continues to receive no negative_ co^ents from the permanent ^/o^J^lTa^y ^reefre^at^ion^ use.since the ca.mp reopenec in 1988 -o- cay XT) •De’e- •foundation prooosed with the construction of 1987 and 1988. 4 The City Council finds that the conditions existing on fire harard or other danger to neighboring propertiesr would SIcesHry to alleviate a demonstrable • hardship or of the City. "1“: f“" thr^ons^t^u^Vion'^ IPf'«"bLs° w“ri°"be dlS-menlal to the health, safety or genwal a"lr n"r pis I a nublic, would not adversely affect light, air nor P°^ fire hazard or other danger to neighboring °he will it deoreciate surrounding property keeping proposed level-of use of the property will with the intent-and objectives of the Zoning Cod Comprehensive Plan of the City. Page 2 of 5 •* • • 1 ' i\ CITY Ir 11 ORON(^ City of OROrSTO resolution of the city council NO. 2 802___________ ^ -1 >,»C considered this applicationii^^he City Councxl has consxa Planning and the affect of the proposed use on tne ne welfare of the community. CONCLDSIONSr ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or Hunic?pri City Council herejjy S"“‘® * 3 (C) to permit the Zoning Code Sections 10.31# _„__n-ion o* overnight camp use at construction of 5 cabins aoproves a variance Big island Veterans' Camp, Record for each thit would allow the construction of Pt|- 1°“."“^^,-°" proDOsed cabin where block foundations a.e requ-ea, subject to the following conditions: 1. Applicant to apply fcr a joint use dock license from the City of Orono for the 1990 season. , , , , . o-.,,-„Kc ;>''d t^e®s to be trimmed within 100' ^f fhi le°?in\"d^"la^S-si?e^arer."-?his area be maintained in same manner throughout overnight camping seaso . 3. All 11 re.maining buildings to remain secured as directea by the Orono Building Inspection Department. 4! All designated /^".“Yand S^rplL'^orTver”^^^ camping, dated April 5, ^^^xUlnl^o fringe"” or %r by the Orono staff to insure coinpli2inc0 • s. Any changes in signage for the 1990 season must be aoproved by staff. No signage area can exceeo 50 s.f. •• I* 6. Appropriate signage must be detering the use of "out door" stoves within interior cabin. 7. No internal plumbing has been approved for the 5 cabins- 8. The City does not recognite the 5 cabins as accessible to the h2Uidicapped. Page 3 of 5 * • • • • * •__^ CITY 6p ORONO City of ORONO resolution of the city council NO. ^^02-------------— extinguishers per standards ser x xo. Applicant is hereby that all or at the 5 cabin/25 tent and imtediately. overnigh. | j-sooened for public use recreational day use f»all adeaua'te septic treatment until applicant has ^ needs of* the full camp use. facilities to support sewage nee .. .3 K,r +-his resolution run with the 11. Authorities ^ but are permissive only and property not wxth^ the a building permit for must be exercxsec by of the date of Councxl Vplcllffonfti^^^ Of this resolution wxll expire on that date (May 14. 1-9-)- 12^ Violation of or r'cSnsSituL conditions of —au-omatically terminate any I^-h\\\tV°"^"a^ntrd°Verlin“an\““sTall be punishable as a misdBinsanoir • 12. The undersigned -Pf i|-\J'Vesriution\"nd ”on°°^^^^ irf^e Totn o°f governors of Big island Vetera^^^^ -“!dfn^g”i thir?»oLtfonnrc^al^of ?itle of the property. Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 14th day of . • *. •- • •: • “.v ; • V • •t.' • .-i- • vj crTY OF OBONO City of OROINO resolution of the city council 2802 STATS OP MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OP HENNEPIN ) The foregoing Db°roth^ m” this 14th day of city of Orono, a Minnesota Eallin, Mayor & City was executed on behalfmunicipal corporation and said instrumenw was execuc of the City. ^ P' f ^/C< MV Cc •OTission Expires STATE 0? MINNESOTA ) ) SS . COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) on this rt-j'Vo^said county, pii'sonlll? before n.e n Notary *^^,°^h^l /oythe'Bgird^bi Govrrnorl Big Isllna Vetera iS' Camp, ^owffo me\o be the perscn(s) described in and who e.ecuteo^t^ foregoing instrument, and acxnowledged ..nat he (w. y 3 . . ar-** anrl nP^C- THE^ESA L NAAB MOTARr puBuc - Minnesota HENNEPIN COUNTY lly uMwniirm M-C MY COMMISSION EXPIRES Page 5 of 5 resolution Jf2802 Zoning File #1385 EXHIBIT A‘ . ••• TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Mayor Callahan and Orono Council Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator ^0(ji /"• % , Asst. Planning & Zoning Administratc^^VMichael P. Gaffron July 6, 1993 Forest Arms - Siltation Problem Update /V Since the Forest Arms Homeowners Association came to an agreement with LMCD regarding dock layout, and since the lake level is quite high (see note below), their interest in a quick solution to removing the accumulated silt has apparently waned. However, staff has met with Mr. and Mrs. Kalweit, on whose property the storm sewer discharges and who are equally if not more so affected by the silt problem. The Kalweits are requesting that the City not let this matter drop, as the storm water discharge affects them negatively, and the City does not have an easement for that storm sewer. While the Kalweits have indicated a willingness to cooperate with the City in solving this problem, they do not want it to continue forever. otaff will be arranging a meeting with the Kalweits to include the Public Works Director and City Engineer to further investigate options. Council will be kept updated on this matter. Lake Level E.\tremely High As of July 6th, the elevation of Lake Minnetonka was 930.28’, just short of its highest levels in this century. The lake has exceeded the 930.00 elevation only eight or nine times since the mid-1890 ’s. These high water levels have a potential for impact on a number of neighborhoods in Orono, such as Baldur Park, Eastlake Street, and a few others. To: From: Date: Subject: Mayor Callahan and Orono Councilmembers ■///Ron Moorse, City Administrator July 8, 1993 % %J e Resignation of City Recorder % Teri Naab. who has been the City Recorder since 1991, has submitted her resignation effective July 29,' 1993. She has accepted a full time position as Deputy City Clerk with the City of Shorewood. Staff is in the process of contacting other cities and organizations to find a replacement for Teri. Teri has done an excellent job for the City and we wish her well in her new position /fe L j t • V ^ » CITY OF ORONO ANNUAL SUMMARY FINANCIAL REPORT YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1992 dry VQ OP ^0/lfQ The purpose of this report is to provide a summary of financiaf information concerning the City of Orono, Minnesota to interested citizens. The complete financial statements may be examined at the Orono City Office at 2750 Kelley Parkway. Questions about this report should be directed to Tom Kuehn, Finance Director, telephone (612) 473-7357. The information presented is from the general purpose financial statements of the City for the year ended December 31, 1992 and 1991. The right-hand column shows the percentage change in dollars between the two years. Percent Total Total Increase 1992 1991 (Decrease) Revenues Taxes $1,842,525 $1,682,260 10% Special Assessments 351,807 166,987 111 Intergovernmental Revenues 129,365 81,202 59 Charges for services 781,235 726,118 8 Other 1,059.366 764.999 38 Total 4,164,298 3,421,566 22 Expenditures General Government 596,138 652,105 (9) Public Safety 1,562,709 1,508,485 4 Streets 463,710 474,350 (2) Parks and Recreation 53,590 44,791 20 Other 199,114 218,619 (9) Capital Outlay 5,149,111 668,005 671 Debt Service 403.209 406.266 (1) Total 8,427,581 3,972,621 112 Excess of Revenues Over (Under)(4,263,283)(551,055)(674) Expenditures Other Financing Sources (Uses) Bond Proceeds 1,980,582 3,964,230 (50) Operating Transfers In (Out) - Net ——- Fund Equity, Beginning of Year 9,052,454 5.639.279 61, Fund Equity, End of Year $6,769,753 $9,052,454 #/7 To: From: Date: Subject: Mayor Callahan and Orono Councilmernbers Ron Moorse, City Administrator July 8. 1993 Cooperative Service Study Agreement Cn^‘ The City Managers and Administrators of the fourteen Laxe Area Cities have been meeting for a number of months to develop a process for identifying additional opportunities for cooperative provision of services. This effort has resulted in an agreement with the Metropolitan Council to provide staff and other resources to assist the Lake Area Cities in carrying out a comprehensive saidy of how each city provides its various services, then using this information to identify opportunities to provide services more cost effectively through cooperative arrangements. The agreement with the Metropolitan Council, which outlines the study process, is attached. A recent meeting to review the agreement, attended by repiesentatives of all fourteen Lake Area Cities, resulted in unanimous support of the study process and the agreement. Council action requested: Motion to approve the agreement with the Metropolitan Council for the Cooperative Service Study. i MEMORfVNDUM OF AGREEMENT FOR METROPOUT.VN COUNCIL TO PROVTOE TECHNIC.VL ASSISTANCE IN PROGR.VM REVIEWA\NALYSIS TO LAKE MINNETONKA .VREA CITIES THIS AGREEMENT is entered into the ______day of---------------------------------------1993. betueen the Metropolitan Council ("the Council") and the cities of Chanhassen; Deepha%en. Greenwood and Woodland: Excelsior; Minnetonka; Minnetonka Beach; Minnetrista; Mound; Orono; Shorewood; Spring Park; Tonka Bay; Victoria; and Wa>-zata (Cities) for the purpose of conducting a three-vear program review and anaU'sis of city services and alternative methods of delKery. I. NEEDS STATE.MENT Less state aids and flattened property tax revenues have resulted in revenue decreases to local governments. The economic conditions of recent years have required public agencies to focus on etflcicncv* and effectiveness. .Agencies are faced with choosing between needed services and desirable ser.ices or different wavs to deliver services. Many cities have trimmed staff and ceased expansion of services as revenues have flattened or decreased. With staff stretched thin and often performing more than one job, it is almost impossible to free up staff to do special projects such as looking at ways to create greater etflcrency in ser.ices or to provide them in a different way. Governor .Ame Carlson has placed a priority in asking local governments to find ways to deliver services more efficiently and effectively. He has asked the Metropolitan Council to assist local <Tovemments in this effort. As a result, the Metropolitan Council is offering to a select number ot community groups some technical assistance. The technical assistance will enable local^ units to e.xamine current practices and to evaluate a variety of options and efficiencies for a vatiety of services. .According to .Minnesota Statute -173.244 Subdivision 10 the Metropolitan Council is authorized to conduct special studies and prepare reports regarding the necessity for the consolidation ot common ser.ices of local governmental units and the kind of consolidation most suitable ;n the public interest. It is not the intent of this agreement to consolidate municipalities. This agreement is entered into recognizing that: • Competition between local governmental units can produce pressure for efficiency'; • Big is not always bette.'. Large cities are decentralizing decision making and providing se.'vice delivery at the neighborhood level; and • Maintaining community identity and local control are important elements in decisions on service delivery. The Lake Minnetonka area cities currently cooperate and contract for services in numerous ways such as* contr3c:incT with other local units; contrkting with the private and non profit sectors and special purpose districu* pooling of labor for cfnciency and increased specialization: combining or centralizing Of fixed facilities ’ and inventories; joint purchasing and cooperative agreements. II.PURPOSE Tne Lake Minnetonka area cities recognize that more can be done in searching tor more etncicnt and effective wav^j to provide services, in finding the most appropriate service area for eacn rnunicipal service in developing more creative, cost-effective options for local otfcials m provading se.f-service. in developing determined levels of municipal services The overall goal of the Council ’s New Ventures in Delivering Government Services project is to assist III. SERMCES TASKS 3 01 Advisory* Grounds). Each participating city may appoint staff, elected officials and citizens to an advisory group. The .Advisory* Group may be asked to: • act to challenge assumptions throughout the study; • act as a liaison to the city councils; • continually ask: What are we doing? Why? Are there other, more effective ways to do this?; • review and comment on the first draft ot each report, • serve as a city aelegation to meet and review the final report and make recommendations on areas for their city council to investigate further; • make joint recommendations if service options involve more than one ctr/ (coordinated by Metro Council). 3.02 Steering Committee . .A steering committee whose purpose is to coordinate activit:^ of the project vvith the Metropolitan Council staff will be made up of the c.ty administrator/clerk; managers. 3 03 Data Collection. Work groups of four to six individuals will be formed by the stec.-mg committee to set the parameters for each study and to assist with the collection ot information and data. Each work group will include administrators and staff from t^he vanous cities who work in the area to be discussed and a possible outside consultant wt expertise in the area who is under contract with the Council. Metropolitan Council statf will taci.itate and coordinate the proceedings of each work group. Two specific services within each ot six areas will be studied each year. The six areas identified include: Building/Zoning'PIanning EndncerinE'Conslruction Maintenancc/Public Works.1., Public Safety Rccrcation/Youih/Senior/Culture Administration and Miscellaneous The work groups, in cooperation %vith Gauncil staff will; • determine the best means to measure costs, personpower and efficienev; identir/ specific areas where a "value for money" study couid be valuacie in providing comparability data and establishing performance benchmarks; identify areas svhere cooperative efforts could be undertaken on a "fast track; identify different standards and levels of service for each community; produce reports in each functional area; develop service delivery options with a cost analysis. The Council staff will: Conduct "value for money" studies to be agreed upon by the Steering Committee and Metropolitan Council staff; meet with each city's staff to accumulate data; coordinate the efforts of the Steering Committee, advisory groups and work groups; aeveloD and administer a citizen satisfaction survey document whicn may be utilized by the various cities to incorporate satisfaction in determining ser. levels; ace offer technical assistance in analyzing and developing, or mediating services and in implementing cooperative service delivery options chosen by t..e city councils on an as needed basis. 3.04 Prepare Dnft Report. A draft report of the results in each of the semee areas ^th recommendations wiil be prepared by Council staff in consultation vdih t e ^ . ' The draft will be presented to the advisory group(s). The recommendations wi 1 analysis of various options including cost and feasibility questions regarding tmp em 3.05 Prepare final report. Hnal reports wiU be prepared by Council staff on behalf of the advisoly group(s) in each of the service areas for discussion and approval by each ot me affected citv councils. The final report will include the considerations and recommendations bv the advisory group(s). k rV'. GENER.\L PROVISIONS 4.01 Staff . Tne Council shall provade staff to help research, coordinate, facilitate and prepare reports in order to accomplish 3.03 in this agree.ment. 4.02 Siinnlies and Materials. The Council shall furnish all supplies and materials needed to complete this study such as phctocop>'ing, computer time or word processing. V. ADMINISTRATION OF AGREEMENT 5.01 Authorised .Agents. The Council will authorize an agent for the purposes of coordination of this agreement. Each participating city will also identify- an agent to ser.e as its contact person. 5.02 Amendments. The terms of this agreement may be changed by mutual agreement of the parties. Such changes shall be effective only on the e.xecution of written amendments signed by the Council and the cities. 5.03 Termination . The Council and the cities shall each have the right to terminate this agreement at any time for any reason by submitting written notice to the other party at least thitty (30) da>s prior to the specified effective date of termination. M. USE OF DATA The data collected, developed, processed, or produced under this agreement is public information and may be used by any party for any purpose or in any manner. VII. LIABILITV Each party agrees that it will be responsible for its owm acts and the results thereof to the extent authorized by law and shall not be responsible for the acts of the other panies and the results thereof. The* Council’s liability shall be governed by the provision of the Municipal Tort Claims .Act. .Minn. StaL ch. 466, and other applicable law. This clause shall not be construed to bar legal remedies any party may have for any other party's failure to fulfill its obligations under this agreement. MIL TERM OF AGREEMENT This agreement is effective upon execution and shall re.main in effect until July 31. 1996. IN WTl'MISS WIIKRKOI', ihc parties have caused this agrce.^ient to bo executed 'ey tr.eir duiy a u t he ri aed r o p res e r. t a t ives. CriT OK ClIAMiASSKN.\ I irriio i’o Li i'AN CO unci l 17.. . 4.. # « • Sharon G. Klurnpp. Executive Director Date: Aonroved as to form: .Assistani Council CUT OF EXCELSIOR Mavor of Excelsior Cit>’ Manager cm' OF MINNETONKA Mavor City Manager CITY OF MINNETRISTA Mavor Ciev Administrator CITY OF ORONO Mavor Mavor City Manager CITIES OF OEEIMIAVEN, G R EENAVO O n, WO O I) LAN I) Mavor of Deeohaven Mavor of Greenwood Mavor of Woodland Administrator CITY OF MINNCrONK.\ BE\CII Mavor Clerk cm' OF MOUND Mavor City Manager CITY OF SHORE^VOOD Mayor i ! Ciiv Ati.T.inisrra'.or Ci'.v Administrator cm' OF SI’RING I’ARK CUT OF TONrLA IJAV Mayor Mavor# Administrator Administrator CITY OF VICTORIA cm' OF WAYZATA Mayor Mavor# Administrator City Manager I To: From: Date: Subject: Mayor Callahan and Orono Councilrneinbers Ron Moorse, City Administrator July 8, 1993 Potential Expansion of Municipal Sewer System HS’ COUNCIL MEETING JUL 1 2 1993 CITY OF ORONO The Council recently received a memo from Mike Gaffron concerning issues relatea to the potential expansion of the Municipal Sewer System. His memo was in response to questions and issues raised in the discussion a*>out providing sewer to the Nettles’ property. Based on Council direction at the June 28 Council meeting, staff is preparing to proceed with an amendment to the MUSA related to the Nettles’ property and will also include a portion of the sewer plant property in the amendment if the Council determines it wants to move ahead with the subdivision of that property. There are no other areas in the City where an urgent need for sewer expansion has been identified. However, there are a number of areas where it is anticipated a relatively near term need will develop for sewer. Council and staff should review and discuss how to address these anticipated needs either at a Council meeting or a work session. In preparation for this discussion, please lei ataff know if there is additional information that would assist the Council in its consideration of these issues. /• J ^ it • TO; FROM: DATE: Mayor and City Council Ron Moorse, City Administrator ^ July 9, 1993 SUBJECT: Preliminary Long Lake Fire Service Contract COUNCIL MEEHNC JUL 1 2 1993 CITYOFORONO I have attached a copy of a preliminary proposal for a fire service contract with the City of Long Lake. The proposal reflects a number of changes to the current contract. These are as follows: 1. The current contract includes language indicating that property within Long Lake shall have the first call on the service of the Long Lake Fire Department. This language has been deleted in favor of language that indicates that in the event two fire calls are received within the same time frame, the call first received shall have priority and the second call shall be answered as soon as possible. 2. The proposed agreement is a three year agreement. The preliminary proposal also includes an automatic annual renewal unless specifically cancelled by either party. The proposed agreement also requires a twelve-month notice ot non-renewal. The current notice is three months. Although a three-month non-renewal notice provides more flexibility to Orono, the twelve-month notice reinforces the long-term nature of the agreemeiit. 3. The agreement calls for an annual audit of actual costs and provides that any surplus shall be added to the Fire Fund Reserve balance and any deficit shall be funded from the Fire Fund Reserve balance. 4. The cost sharing formula has been changed by adding a second factor to the formula. The current contract allocates the Fire Department costs according to market value. This results in the following cost sharing percentages: 1. Long Lake 10% 2. Medina 12% 3. Orono 78% The proposed contract includes a two factor cost sharing formula. One factor continues to be market value. The second factor is the number of fire fighter hours used by each city. This formula is similar to the formula in the fire services contract with the City of Mound. The new formulci is being proposed because the current formula tends to inflate Orono's share of the costs and tends to minimize Long Lake's share of the costs. Preliminary Long Lake Fire Service Contract July 9, 1993 Page 2 5. The per capita cost for the City of Long Lake in 1992 was $7.29. The per capita cost for Orono in 1992 was $14.65. Although it is reasonable for the City of Long Lake to have a significantly lower cost and a higher level of service due to cooperating with the City of Orono, Long Lake's share of $14,000 seems to be low in terms of the high level of fire and emergency medical response service it receives and in comparison to other similar cities who provide fire services to other cities. Although market value is a good general measure of the potential need for fire protection, or of the base level of fire protection service needed and types of equipment needed; when used as the only factor in a cost sharing formula it has two short comings. 1.Market value in itself does not measure the actual service need or service usage. 2.In the specific case of Orono and Long Lake, Orono's market value and related need for service is inflated due to the higher valued homes and high land values in general, and especially of lakishore properties. The two factor cost sharing formula tempers the inflated market value by using a second factor (number of fire fighter hours used). This factor will enable the formula to better reflect the actual usage of the fire service. Based on fire call information for the first five months of 1993 it appears that the new formula will somewhat reduce the percentage share of the budget paid by Orono and Medina and somewhat increase the share paid by Long Lake. A paragraph setting out the process for distributing the assets of the fire department in the case ^ dissolution has been added to the contract. This dissolution language basically calls for the division of botli equipment and fund balances according to tne shares contributed by each party. There are two issues related to the distribution of assets that have not been specifically addressed in the dissolution language. One issue is whether the dissolution language should cover equipment purchased by th=.: parties prior to the existence of the dissolution language. The other issue is whether a more specific basis for determining t.ne value of the equipment at the time of dissolution should be included in the contract. Preliminary Long Lake Fire Service Contract July 9, 1993 Page 3 The current contract and oast contracts have not included any provision for division of assets upon disollution. If the dissolution language is to pertain only to assets contributed after January 1 of 1994, the tanker being refurbished in 1993 and the pumper that was purchased new in 1990 would not he Included in the division of assets. It is staff's recommendation that, at least from an initial proposal standpoint, the dissolution language should include items purchased jointly prior to the 1994 coni -act year. The inclusion of language related to the determination of a value for the fire equipment at the time of dissolution could present a dispute at the time of dissolution. In preliminary discussions with the City of Long Lake, it was suggested that an amortization schedule or depreciation schedule be developed for each piece of equipment as the basis for determining the value in any given year. The schedule would need to take into account the long life of fire equipment and the rapidly escalating cost of replacing that equipment, both of which cause fire equipment to retain a fairly high value for a long period of time. Isv FIRE CONTRACT BETWEEN ORONO AND LONG LAKE The agreement, made and entered into this day of 1993 by and between the City of Long Lake a municipal corporation of the County of Hennepin and State cf Minnesota (hereinafter referred to as Long Lake) and the City of Orono a municipal corporation the County of Hennepin and State of Minnesota (hereinafter referred to as Orono) witnesseth: Whereas, the City of Long Lake has the facilities and equipment and is willing and able to provide fire protection service to the City of Orono, and Whereas, the City of Orono is desirous of having fire protection service furnished by the City of Long Lake Fire Department. Now therefore in consideration of the covenants herein contained the parties hereto agree as follows: 1. Services to be rendered. During the term of this agreement Long Lake shall furnish all the fire fighting services to Orono for the area outlined in red on the attached map marked Exhibit A hereinafter referred to as "Service Area". All of said Service Area is located within the corporate limits of Orono• 2.Level of Service Long Lake through its fire department shall endeavor to protect and save life and property from destruction by fire in the fire Service Area to the same extent as it does within the City of Long Lake. In the event of two fire calls received within the same time frame the call first received shall have priority and the second call shall be answered as soon as possible. 3. Command Responsibility The Fire Chief of Long Lake or his Deputy shall have the sole and exclusive right and responsibility to prescribe the manner and method of giving the alarm for fire within the Service Area and to prescribe the manner and method of responding to calls and rendering the services contemplated. The said Fire Chief or his Deputy shall immediately upon arriving at the scene of any alarm or fire emergency have the sole and exclusive responsibility and authority to direct and control any and all fire fighting and the emergency operations at such scene or scenes. Long Lake will furnish sufficient staff to each call to safely, legally and effectively operate all necessary vehicles and equipment and provide axl necessary services. 4. Volunteer Fire Fighters of the Citv of Long Lake P'^rsonnel assigned to provide fire protection services in the City of Orono shall be volunteer firemen of the City of Long Lake. Which City shall assume all obligations with .agard to Worker's Compensation, Firemens Rel.ief Association, withholding tax, insurance, etc. for such volunteer firemen, if any. 5. Nature of Long Lake Undertaking In no event shall this agreement be construed to fix upon Long Lake any responsibility or liability to Orono or to third parties which are greater or different in kind than the responsibilities and liabilities borne by Orono if it were providing such services through its own fire department. 6. Liability Insurance Long Lake shall carry liability insurance protecting it.self against damage claims of its fire fighters for personal injury sustained while in service within the said limits of Orono as hereto set forth and further carry liability insurance saving both parties harmless so far as negligent acts of the fire fighters of Long Lake are concerned. 7. Preliminary Budget Estimate and Contract Payments By September 1 of each year during which this contract remains in effect, the City of Long Lake shall notify Orono of the final cost estimates for the next contract year. The final estimated costs shall be paid in equal quarterly installments on January 1, April 1, July 1 and October 1 of the next contract year by Orono to the City of Long Lake. Long Lake agrees to provide Orono with reasonably detailed information relating to its estimated expenditures and its actual expenditures so as to adequately inform Orono of the basis for the calculation of billings made by Long Lake. Under the provisions of this contract, Long Lake agrees to make its records available to Orono for inspection for the purpose of determining the basis for the calculations by Long Lake under the provisions of this section. 8. Term of Contract The contract year shall commence on Januairy 1 and terminate on the next December 31. This agreement shall remain in full force and effect from January 1, 1994 until December 31, 1996, and be renewed annually automatically thereafter for a successive contract year unless cancelled by either party by serving preliminary written notice to terminate upon the City Clerk of all parties to this contract by January 1st of the last year of service, and with a final notice of termination no earlier than April 1 and no later than May 31 of the last year of service. Termination of this contract by either party shall not affect the obligation of either party to perform the contract prior to the time that such termination becomes effective. 9. Annual Audit of Actual Costs Orono understands and agrees that it impossible to project with complete accuracy the actual costs of labor and equipment as well as the service to be required by each City for the forthcoming contract year and thereby hereby agrees to a yearly audit to adjust the prior year's estimated cost of service as set forth above to the actual costs incurred by the City of Long Lake, On or before April 1 of each year the City of Long Lake will tabulate, the actual cost of the fire department budget for the prior contract year and will submit to Orono a summary of the actual costs. The actual costs set forth for the prior contract year may result in either a surplus or deficit. Any surplus shall be placed into the Fire Fund. Any deficit shall be funded from the Fire Fund balance. 10. Unplanned Capital Expenditures Notwithstanding any of the above, Orono shall have the right to be heard regarding any proposed capital expenditures which are not in the annual estimated cost budget and which exceed $5,000.00 and/or interim increases in the Funds not otherwise included in the annual budget. Notice of such proposed and non-budgeted capital expenditures and/or interim increases in funds shall be in writing to Orono prior to actual expenditures for such items and the contracting cities shall thereafter have 21 days in w».j.ch to approve or disapprove the same in writing and if there is no response which disapproves the expenditure, it is agreed that such pjfoposed expenditures may be made and the cost thoreo- shall be included in that year's budget. 11. Arbitration If the contracting city is aggrieved by the determination of the City of Long Tiake as to the allocation of the actual costs of the prior year's service, the contracting city may appeal said determination within 30 days after receipt of the City of Long Lake's audit. Said appeal shal3 be in writing and shall be addressed to the City of Long Lake asking for arbitration by a board of arbitration. The Board of Arbitration shall consist of three persons; one to be appointed by the City of Long Lake, one to be appointed by the appealing contracting city, and the third to be appointed by the two so selected. The name of each arbitrator shall be submitted in writing to the other party. In the event that the two arbitrators so selected do not appoint the third arbitrator within 15 days after receipt of written notice of appointment of either of the first two arbitrator's, the Chief Judge of the District County of Hennepin County shall have j'-^^isdiction to appoint, upon application of either the City of Orono the appealing contracting city, the third arbitrator to the Soard. The third arbitrator selected shall not be a resident of either contracting city, and shall be a city manager or administrator. The arbitrator's expenses, not including counsel fees, incurred in the conduct of the arbitration, shall be divided equally between the parties to the arbitration. Arbitration shall be conducted in accordance with the Uniform Arbitration act, Chapter 572 of the Minnesota Statutes, and any decision shall be rendered within 60 days of appointment of the third arbitrator. Said arbitration shall be binding on both parties. 12. Special Fire Funds In order to facilitate the accounting and reporting of all fire funds, two special Funds have been created. One is the Fire Operating Fund the other is the Major Fire Equipment Fund. Reports on each of these funds v'ill be provided to Orono by Long Lake annually following the contract year. 1'’^ •Joint Advisory Committee Each contracting city may appoint a volunteer member to a joint advisory committee and the name of such appointee shall be furnished to Long Lake. The Joint Advisory Committee shall meet periodically to discuss and make recommendations concerning concerns or problems identified regarding the provision of fire service. 14. Cost Sharing Formula Each City receiving fire service from the Long Lake Fire Department shall pay the costs of the Long Lake Fire Budget according to a ratio based on the following two factor formula. 1.Market Value 2. Number of fire fighter hours used for fire calls and rescue calls. The market value of the fire service area of each contracting city is based on taxes due and payable for the year immediately preceding the budget year. The source of the market value data shall be the official figures of the Hennepin County Assessor's Office. The fire fighter hours used will be based on a three (3) year average of hours provided to each city for fire and rescu** calls. The market value and fire fighter hours factors will be balanced equally to determine each city's percentage share of the budget for the upcoming year. Attachment A provides a sample of the work sheet to be used for calculating the factor percentages in the cost sharing formula. The figures used for firefighter hours are based on year-to-date information through May of 1993. 15. Dissolution In the event this agreement is terminated, the parties shall divide the value of the fire department equipment acquired by the parties to this agreement according to the shares contributed by each party. The parties shall calculate the percentage contributed by each party of the total expend!tux..s for the equipment acquired. &■' The parties may agree upon a reasonable price and the purchase of the other parties' percentage in the jointly acquired equipment or upon a division of the equipment, or upon such other disposition as shall be mutually agreeable to them. In the event the parties cannot reach agreement as to the disposition of the jointly acquired equipment, the property shall be sold by the City of Long Lake upon competitive bids at a reasonable price with the proceeds divided between the parties according to their percentage interests. Either party may be a bidder at any such sale. Any fund balances in the Fire Fund or Fire Equipment Fund shall be divided according to the shares contributed by each party. Any dispute related to the dissolution of this agreement shall be resolved through an arbitration process according to the rules of the American Arbitration Association. ATTACHMENT A. COST ALLOCATION WORK SHEET (Avg. of Tax CapacityTax Caoacitv %Fire Fiahter Hours %Final % Long Lake 979,959 10 355 33 21.5 Medina 1,175,951 12 52 5 8.5 Orono 7,643,682 78 656 62 70.0 I » To: From: Date: Subject: Ron Moorse, City Administrator Tom Kuehn, Finance Director July 9. 1993 1992 Police Department Operations - Financial UL 1 2 1993 CiTYOFORONO The attached schedules compare the 1992 actual expenditures to the budgets for the police department operations in the "base" contract, and the additional manpower contracts for Long Lake and Spring Park. Also attached is a copy of the 1992 cost distribution by city and the resulting amount due to or from each city. The report format for the base budget vs. actual presents the information by type summary rather than by individual line item. The repon format for the estimated cost distribution summary reflects the total base budget and additional manpower rather than the detail, which was presented in the original documents. The 1992 final costs are under the estimated costs. The amount under is made up of three parts. The base contract is over S2.322; while the Long Lake additional manpower is under $960 and the Spring Park additional manpower is under SI.897. The net effect of the 1992 final contract costs is that Long Lake will be credited S9, Minnetonka Beach will be credited $28 and Spring Park will be credited $575. Isv r r CITY O? ORONO ACTUAL COST DISTRIBUTION COMPARED TO ESTIMATED COST DISTRIBUTION 1992 BUDGET YEAR ESTIMATED COST DISTRIBUTION ORONO SSSSSS33 LONG io/n-Tw. 33333333 MTKA BEACH SS3SSSS3 SPRING PARK 33SS3333 TOTAL ssssssssss Total base budget Total additional manpower 594,301 125,517 93,453 63,929 94,520 194,456 878,267 287,909 Grand Total Estimated Cost 594,301 213.970 S33SS3333S3SSSS3333 53,929 333333333 288,976 SSSS33SS3SS 1,166,176 SS3S3SS8S3 ACTUAL COST DISTRIBUTION Base contract Administration 566,777 56,670 99,404 9. 940 50,606 5.061 75,155 7,516 791,942 79,867 Total Police town aid credit 91-92 623,455 (29,076) 109,344 (4.776) 55,667 (2,943) 82,671 (3,598) 871,009 (40,393) Total net of to^^n aid Contract charge 594,379 104,563 21,399 52.724 11,177 79,075 16,770 831,416 49,046 Total Base Contract 594,379 333333333 126,467 3333333333 63,901 95,043 3SS3333S38BSSSSS888S: 080,589 3333388333 Additional manpower Town aid credit 91-92 96.196 (0,938) 201,522 (19,863) 297,718 (28,801) Total net of town aid Contract charge 87.258 5,225 181,659 10,900 268,917 16,135 ToCa>l Grand Total Actual Costs 52.493 S8SaSSSSS = SSSS3SSS= = 594,379 218,961 Bassssassssssssss 192,559 205,052 a = a a = a a =3 = rr a a a a 3 3 a a s 3 I aaaaaaaaa 63,901 208,401 1,165,641 S33S 3 3aSB8B333aaSa3SS 333333338 Actual costs over rmder) estimated costs irge (Credit) to 1993 3rd quarter billing 4th quarter billing 78 (9) (28) asaaSSS33333S3333S3SSS33 (575) (535) 3333388 8338388388 0 (9) 0 (28) (207) (288) Total Charge (Credit)(9) (28) (575) 33BS8asBsss3ss333s:cs:a3rtrr — *TBsas ▼ X tBIlUl CITY OF ORONO POLICE DEPARTMENT 1992 BUDGET YEAR - BASE CONTRACT YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1992 BUDGET ACTUAL ACTUAL +/ BUDGET Personal services 559,090 570,652 Commodities & supplies 57,005 55,255 Professional services 8,500 7,777 Communications 8,600 8,500 Printing & publishing 3,500 2,271 Utilities 3,400 3.103 Rentals, radios & building 28,400 26,676 Contract mainc & repairs 24,100 23,448 Data processing 22,020 21,609 Other contract services 12,000 11,120 Insurances 22,410 24,247 Other charges 2,310 1,930 Capital outlay 45,200 42,027 POST State Aid reimb (5,200)(4,944) TOTAL BASE CONTRACT 791,335 798,671 7,336 r;s = s==ss=ss= ssssss = = = = s:ss= = s=^ CITY OF ORONO POLICE DEPARTMENT 1992 BLTDGET YEAR Y'u'Ji ENDED DECEMBER 31,1992 BUDGET ACTUAL ACTUAL +/ BUDGET LONG LAKE ADDITIONAL MANPOWER k Salaries - Regular - Overtime - Holiday P.E.R.A. / F.I.C.A. Health & Life Insurance Worker Compensation Insurance Clothing & Personal Equipment Memberships & Licenses Total Additional Manpower SPRING PARK ADDITIONAL MANPOWER Salaries - Regular - Overtime - Holiday P.E.R.A. / F.I.C.A. Health St Life Insurance Worker Compensation Insurance Clothing & Personal Equipment Memberships & Licenses 70,017 69,574 3,620 3,956 3,045 2,929 9,295 9,248 5,270 5,420 4,015 4,021 595 1,008 40 40 96,697 96,196 (501) w mmm mmm mmm mam amm5m mma mm mma a^m mmm = r==s = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = 146,980 150,503 8,000 2,733 6,240 6,371 19,549 19,289 11,570 12,048 8,350 8,402 1,300 2,016 80 80 Total Additional Manpower 202,069 201,522 (547) rr s= r= =r rz rs s s: rs rs ~ ss s — — ss /) TO: FROM: Mayor and City Council Tom Kuehn, Finance Director *7^^ *COUNCIL MEETING DATE:July 8, 1993 SUBJECT; 1992 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report JUL 1 2 1993 CITYOFORONO The auditors have completed their review of the City's Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) for the year ended December 31, 1992. A separate letter of comments on the 1992 audit will be presented to Council at the July 28th Council meeting. The CAFR is for inclusion of the July 12th agenda for Council review and acceptance. If Council should have questions for the auditor, a representative of Malloy, Karnowski, Radosevich & Co. v.'ill be available to be at a subsequent Council meeting. I would request that Council accept the annual financial report and indicate if the auditor should be at a following Council meeting. Proposed Motion: Moved by to approve theseconded by _ _ _ Independent Auditor's Report as presented in the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for the year ended December 31, 1992. Motion: Ayes Nays Isv d To: From: Date: Subject: Mavor Callahan and Orono Councilmembers Ron Moorse, City Administrator July 9, 1993 COUNCILMEEnNG JUL 1 2 1593 CTIY OF ORONO Ordinance Reizulating the Surface Use of Long Lake The City of Long Lake has proposed an ordinance regulating the use of personal watercraft on Long Lake. The Long Lake City Council gave conceptual approval to the ordinance at their July 6 meeting. The City of Long Lake has requested that the Orono City Council review the ordinance and also provide conccpmal approval subject to a public hearing process or provide suggestions for changes. Long Lake has proposed that after the ordinance has conceptual approval by both Councils, a joint public hearing be held on the ordinance. The ordinance, in addition to restricting personal watercraft, also restricts speeds during morning and evening hours. It wilt be important to obtain input from those who live on the lake concerning these restrictions. The Police Chief believes the ordinance will be beneficial in two ways. First, it will provide a way to get the message to personal watercraft operators that there is concern about the noise these watercraft cau.se and that there arc now restrictions on their use to address the noise concerns. Secondly, the ordinance will provide police with a basis upon which to deal with those people who do cause noise problems. However, the Chief also cautions against heightened expectations in terms of this ordinance solving the noise problem. This caution is due to a number of problems related to enforcing the ordinance. In order to take enforcement action, either a police otticer must witness the violation or a citizen must be willing to sign a formal complaint. This may be difficult for several reasons. First, citizens are often reluctant to sign a formal complaint. Secondly, enforcement action by a police officer could be very time consuming. If a police officer was to witness the violation, it would mean observing the operator for more than 15 minutes, then waiting until the operator remms to die launching area which could take up to several hours. The other option is to request assistance from the Water Patrol which would have to bring a boat fiom Uke Minnetonka. Either of these options requires a considerable amount of officer time. The City Attorney is also reviewing the ordinance and will provide comments at the Council meeting. CITY 0? LONG LAKE Long Lake, Minnesoca ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE REGULATING THE SURFACE USE C? LONG LAKE The cicy council of che cicies of Long Lake and Orono, Minnesoca, hereby ordain: Seccion 1. PURPOSE, INTENT, AND APPLICATION. As authorized by Minnesoca Scacuces 363.201, 363.205, and 459.20, as now in effect and as hereacter pended, this oirdinance is enacted tor che purpose and with ^.he .^ncenc ^ to control and regulate che use of che waters of Long Lake in Henneoin County, cities of Long Lake and Orono, Minnesota, said bodies of water being located entirely within che boundaries or the cities of Long Lake and Orono, to promote its fullest use and enjoyment by the p’lblic in general and the citizens of Long Lake and Orono in particular; to insure safety for persons and prooerty in connection with the use of said waters; to harmonize and integrate the varying uses of said^wacers; and to oromoce che general health, safety and welfare or che citizens of Long Lake and Orono, Minnesoca. Section 2.ADOPTION AND INCORPORATION BY REFERENCE OF MINNESOTA V?ATERS AND WATERCRAFT SAFETY LAWS, AND BOAT AND WATER SAFETY RULES PROMULGATED 3Y THE MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES. The Minnesota Waters and Watercraft Safety Laws, Minnesota Statue®, Seccion 863.001, as they now exist and are hereafter bv che State of Minnesoca Department of Natural Resources, Minn. Rules parts 6110.0100-.2300 as c.he same now exist and are hereafter amended, are hereby adopted, incorpcr(r,ced herein by reference, and made a part hereof as if sec forth in chei.. entirety. At least three copies of said Waters and Watercraft Safety Laws and Boat Water Safety Rules and Regulation, so adopted, shall be marked as official copies and filed with the offices of the City Clerk of che cities of Long Lake and Orono along with this ordinance. Seccion 3 . VIOLATIONS OF THE MINNESOTA WATERS AND WATERCRAFT SAFETY LAWS, AND BOAT AND WATER SAFETY RULnS PROMULGATED BY THE MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES % Any person violating che Minnesoca Waters and Watercraft Safety Laws, and che 3oac and Water Safety Rules and L RegulaCions promulgaced by the Minnesota Departr.ent of Natural Resources, adopted and incorporated herein by reference, shall be subject of the penalties and punishment hereinafter provided. Section 4. PROLONGED OPERATION. No personal watercraft shall be operated in a single area for more chan fifteen consecutive minutes in any sixty consecutive minute period. A person in control of such watercraft shall be subject to citation, i single area is defined as an area of the lake which is so small that the noise emanating frc.m personal watercraft operated continuously within it is liable to* be a .nuisance or cause substantial annoyance to residents of one or more shoreline properties during all of the time of such continuous operation. Section 5. (a) (b) SURFACE ZONING 0? LONG LAKE 3Y RESTRICTING SPEEDS DURING CERTAIN HOURS. During the hours of 9:00 a.m., and 6:00 p.ni., on each and every day of the wee.k, .motorboats shall be subject CO no speed limit and may be operated at unrestricted speeds within c.he safety framework of Section 2 of this ordinance. Duirina the hours of 5:00 p.m. and 3:00 a.m., on each and every day ot the week, no motorboat shail be operated at an excess of fifteen (15) miles per hour. Section 6. ENFORCEMENT. The enforcement of this ordinance shall be Che primary responsibility of c.he peace officers of Che Orono Police Deoartment or Che Henneoin County Sheriff's Department. Ocher licensed peace of ficers'including Conser'/acion _0f f icers of the Deoartment of Natural Resources of the State of Minnesota are also authorized to enforce this ordinance. Section 7. All authorized Resource Mcinagemenc, Emergency and Enforcement Personnel, while acting in the perrormance of chei. assigned duties are exempt from the foregoing restrictions. Section 8. It shall be Che responsibility of the cities of Long L^e and Orono to provide for adecjuaca notification of the public. which shall include placemenc of a sign ac each public watercraft launching facility outlining essentia- elements or the ordinance, as well as the placement of necessary buoys and signs. Adopted this _ _ day of June, 1993, by the city council of the City of Long Lake. Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk Published in the Pioneer/Laker on the . 1993. day of Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk Published in the Pioneer/Laker on the _ _ day of , 1993. CJD:X:J3s 3 . r•^ ' > LIST OF LICENSES FOR COUNCIL APPROVAL FOR MEETING OF JULY 12, 1993 COUNCIL MEETING JUL 1 2 1993 CITYOFORONO Special Event Application -Corn Days Foot Race Rick Recker August 15, 1993, 12:15 p.n. - 1:00 p.m. At Hackberry Park, south on Willow Drive to Brown Road, north on Brown Road to Orchard Lane, west on Orchard Lane to Holbrook Park Date: To: From: Subject: June 28, 19-93 Ron Moorse, City Administrator Steve Sullivan, Chief of Police Special Events Application I have reviewed the application of Rick Recker o.n behalf of a ?A?j^2S S SPECIAL ET/E^iTS PEILMIT APPiftCATION CITY OF ORONOf MIN^fESOTA * * • W m • ________ Fee: S50.00 CITY of OKONO !C- • ^ m SEPTIC SYSTEM INSTAIXEPS LICENSE APPLICATION - (612) 472-7251 Post office Box 66 - . . crystal Bay, MM 55323 ill questions rmst be answered. Lic"fense fee, bond, certificate of Insurance^ and evidence of MPCA Certification must be attached. All apllilations are subject to a ten (10) day approval period. 1. 2. 3. 4. Business or trade name __RfiC-K KcdaBusiness address /" 11^- -c^jL- - Business phone <//./.- Residence phone Name of applicant or company representativecCh^lding MPCA 5. Tyre of certification held: _Y, 6. 7. 8 . 9. _ Installer Y Pumper Certificate expiration date Qgit__— Have vou ever held a Septic System Installer license in Orono before? Most recent year ? Have you ever had a license revoked? Where? When? Do you do Municipal Sewer hook-ups? Yes - - - - do Do you pump out septic tanks? /es -- - No -- - - • ••••-* .* r* 4 • f» Wi ‘• '.itl’ji,- • C*0A JaaW'/vvvv SUBMITTALS REQUIRED: l/^i. $50.00 License application fee. ,^.4.,, nmno as / $2000.00 license and permit Je accepted. yy. $50-100-300,000 minimum Certificate or Insurance. ,y4. Copy of current MPCA Certificate. LICENSES HILL NOT BE PROCESSED DNTIL ALL ITEMS ARE SUBMITTED List persons other than applicant^who are^ ^“thorired by you to apply for permits under your license - - - - -— The undersigned hereby makes £^^sept'^c°systems,Minnesota, for a license to instal l =nd repair^ sept.c s^y^^^ and/or pump out septic tanks, - nrono. Minnesota and the Ordinances of the /CTty _ ^ Date Applicant's Signature •Ajt^ lTY »s ILY Staff recommendation Approval Reason for denial: __ _ _ _ _ _ _ City Council Action Date _ _ _ Date license mailed _ _ _ _ _ _ __ Denial Date Approved Denied CITYofOUONO_________ SITE EVALOATOR/DESIGNZR r612) 473-7357 APPLICATION Post Office Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 ,, Tnn«i4- be answered. License fee and evidence of MPCA ce“ fe attrch^^^^ All applications are subject to a ten (10) day approval period. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Business or trade name - -^AeX.Wcfe Business address I KBS ^ ) t.Q- - 147AJ Business phone JJU-Residence phone ±Msu:SJS^L- Tvpe of certification held: _X- Site evaluator designer. Certificate expiration —-d'l '11 -3— Have you ever performed site evaluation or design work in Orono before? Most recent year 7..A Have you ever had a license revoked? Where?_ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ __ ___ _ _ Qo When? StJBMITTALS REQUIRED ,1. $100.00 License application fee _ _ ^ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _^2. Copy of current MPCA Certificate. LICENSES WILL NOT BE PROCESSED UNTIL ALL ITEMS ARE SUBMITTED The undersigned hereby makes septic Minnesota/ for a license to per f-he State of Minnesota andsystem design subject to the laws of the State of Minne the Ordinances of the City of Orc..o. / / ^ ^ Pate _ _ _ Applicant's Signature ^ Staff recommendation Approval^J^^^!^ Denial n ^ Vi • _ _ _ _ _ -Reason for denial: _ _ __ City Council Action Date Date license mailed _ _ _ Approved Date /(-30-9S Denied _ _ __ Amended 1/3132 LIST OF LICENSES FOR COUNCIL APPROVAL FOR MEETING OF JULY 12, 1993 V''’ yOUKiJ: uiSFlSG JUl 1 2 1995 CITYOFORONO Special Event Application -Corn Days Foot Race Rick Recker August 15, 1993, 12:15 p.m. - 1:00 p.tn. At Hackberry Park, south on Willow Drive to Brown Road, north on Brown Road to Orchard Lane, west on Orchard Lane to Holbrook Park Septic System Installer/Pumper License - Don's Backhoe Cologne, MN Site Evaluator/Designer License - Don's Backhoe Cologne, MN Limited Firearms Use Permit -Robert Sorensen 4245 Chippewa Lane Maple Plain,MN 55359 Elimination of woodchucks & groundhogs W W 4> A A 4 CITY OF ORONO DATE: APPLICANT'S NAME: APPLICANT'S ADDRESS: X 2AiM4\/ Street APPLICANT'S PHONE: HOME^^C^^ city WORK PROPERTY OWNER'S NAME: PROPERTY OWNER'S ADDRESS: DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY: TYPE OF PERMIT: $25.00 ANNUAL $10.00 OCCASIONAL (Club Only)(15 to 120 Days) $25.00 GAME ANIMALS (Limited Use) RESTRICTIONS: DATE 'STARTING; / PURPOSE: VA : ar1: /It’. rxTv fir nzuiAtn i. X I I xjiMjnu rTAt^^irc fiLerrc m, J ‘ JkUU f 7? T.ti‘ir»n/Via wTf VV'wv /•) 1 rrj VJL i/ClV Lrri* M ■A.UJ\ I L. TYPE OF FIREARM: TiC- 1 ^ r , f.'V /Vi XX.'» vv f,7 ,V A V • vv .:-rrr70T.*?u.u;v Vm// \ y ^ V/"’ ^ Ti 7*rH'J. I XU* nT //“ D V I / V / / (M.Juj-V -VO ^:>c-____ __ __________ /r: >M»v>-> L*<; ’ iAQ~. fl-, tvcL(c.l>^^v.-.s ,o.n(_v.~* S:. ^ ^ u.*^-• v -'.J* .o - - I 't ;-ioe ^ CO 7 i Lv/ • c'Z.lC^ ^ -A_j !-♦ ^ I if'. V V I agree that this permit doesn't allow the hunting of game birds or game animals in the City of Orono unless specifically stated in this permit and agree to abide by all applicable federal, state and local laws. Fee Paid: Date: Signature ol^applicant RECOMMENDED: '' YES NO Check: Cash: 0 4 , •V.- I / Public Safety Director Initials: REMARKS: I I j 1 t '-i ubU^tCiLrv.cciiuu ;Ul 12 199>5 CITYOFORONO 07/04/93 PR: CB PRREQOR 178EMP • NAME47iei8080474563339476921819471840871475443862 472503991 469526026 476643387 475989721 471963129 468821018 468622840 472529007 488701868 507585424 469686562 468420832 469087884 474667812 475380151 477500668 475444249 477463877 475069821 388625358 471569863 473141824 477647279 475604753 504260307 472500574 469820293 121262417 469723373 475344512 480843542478018974 477700023 334506281 477028779 473108428 468909535 476783251 470700901 469848107 475382983 473746173 P R ANDERSON, BRUCE L BOBZIEN, SUE A BORIS, SCOTT W BOSMA, JAMIE L BRINKHAUS, JOHN F CHESWICK, GARY B CORNICK, JAMES L DELANEY. JANE E DEMBOUSKI. JAY C ORESSEL, ROBERT P ENGLISH III, IRVINQ ERICKSON, DOUGLAS J ERICKSON, KURT R FISCHENICH, DAN T FRITZLER, iOHN M QAFFRON, MICHAEL CrRHARDSON, JOHN GOMAN. DAViD J GREGORY. JAMES D HALLIN, DOROTHY M HANSEN. STEVEN C HANSINd, CAROL J HASEMAN, CAROLE HULTMANN, TIMOTHY J JENSEN, ROONEY W JOHNSON, BRADLEY P JOSTROM, FOREST J KARNITZ, RICKY D KENNEN, JANICE M KNUTSON, CHARLOTTE A KUEHN, THOMAS M KVAM. DANA J MABUiTH, JEANNE A MAY. DAVID E MCINTYRE, WILLIAM E MCNICHOLi. DAVID L MILLS JR. WALTER H MOORSE, RONALD J MOROWCZYNSKI. JAMES NELSON, DAVID D OAS, DANIEL O OBERAIQNER. SCOTT Q OBRIEN. RANDY L OMAN. LYLE E PALMER, GREGORY A OUAST, WAYNE A RATHBUN, BARRY J 473609629 470566529 469629194 475569177 267460042 472563051 474663296 470704904 475505292 468629488 500403192 477881539 ROSS, JOHN A SCHOENHOFF. JOHN B SKREEN. DALE S STEFFENHAOEN. RONALD SULLIVAN. STEPHEN X THOMTON, MARK R TOMCHECK. LAWRENCE F TOMCZYK. MARK W VANG, BRUCE L VEE. LINDA S WALTERS. LINDA G WECKMAN. STEPHEN J YTD CURRENTDPTGROSSGROSS3123989.24 1686.033114323.22 1014.64313018.47 159.41128529.14 576.04 42 22524.69 1611.693124139.18 1727.20 31 23560.06 1509.75931652.00 268.45 31 20448.94 1703.9593185.40 123.603123688.73 2271.99 93 102.30 65.103122103.96 1568.40 31 23183.34 1840.023123655.15 1692.233320592.60 1473.43 42 28722.39 2172.43352887.09 234.76 42 19118.89 1239.37 12 17739.33 1269.28 42 16793.21 1377.81 31 8177.21 571.39 12 12778.64 913.20 61 1287.00 456.00 93 700.42 123.60 31 23661.88 1921.29931157.75 96.25 31 1718.93 74.39 31 3352.50 311.23 15 14199.53 1014.65 15 30294.23 2167.61 93 151.25 60.50 33 25788.53 1845.21611629.00 450.00 93 343.75 266.753118574.67 1649.00931035.01 215.63 12 33710.03 2511.84 31 22968.34 2112.44 35 1966.86 152.1093542.80 153.40 42 16554.29 1029.11 92 17644.82 1530.133320592.58 1473.43 42 15974.18 1083.27 92 20145.95 1366.32 92 17027.75 1245.77 93 1232.00 195.25316324.45 472.904216720.75 1083.28 93 17739.32 1269.283128779.18 2059.20 31 21390.79 1627.723121604.80 1622.993122236 11 1568.403317739.34 1269.281213858.72 1014.641512411 14 867.89 33 15621 96 1117.91 07/31/93 PR CM PRREGOR 177 cnPAYf 'EMP 8 YTD CURRENTNAMEDPTGROSSGROSS469188026CALLAHAN, EDWARD J 11 2100.00 300.0018324677GOETTLN. J OlANN 11 1691.69 241.67470366069HURR, JOELLEN L 11 1691.69 241.67473646272JABBOUR, GABRIEL 11 1691.69 241.67 476527186 KELLEY, CHARLES 11 1691.69 241.67 1,266.68 ti)‘‘ 11' ‘'! h ^':.huui ’ ^*rA *• •• • i‘• • *.'o ©# .•r rrr ■* -;.M. . .,r .?Jiy ,:3, 'm .......sr^sL":; .........."•?"•• .»:'.l:.;::::l liv. itl'.53.03 HW TR .Atj'»• ^CHECK REGISTER ’•=" prog: CK200 <l.07>--”.'.:’r?* I-.5',‘“ ;”' p«fl« 1 •report Id: CKREa-—OR 026962 T311 OR 026963 490 M »nj* • •*» ■ • OR, 026964 ; 629 V.';. OR 026965 T329 OR 026966,T330 I OR 026967 T331 OR 026968 T332 OR 026969 T324 OR 026970 T333 OR 026971 T334 OR 026972 T329 OR 026973 512 • OR 026974 291 OR 026975 T006 OR 026976 T006 OR 026977 T335 OR 027342 291 OR 027343 678 OR 027344 490 ■ • f».« • t* • • •* • , • * Kyi t fI. • : I' • • •. • ♦ %, - - - . - . - f ' • • < ’ :,.v; f* • • ■ r I ■ • . • •»...•! * #- * *: <« T : '/• I r •••'/ • ■ !.. : V .*« • • »»:■ • »|I..■ 0 RON STEFFENHAQENMINNEQASCO_ _ » ’ POSTMASTER’:’ UPS MN COUNTY ATTORNEYS ASSOC RADISSON HOTEL MPLS WEST MN DRIVERS & VEHICLE SERVICES MN DARE OFFICERS ASSOCIATION RAY SIEBENALER HOWARD CHAPMAN UPS OMAN/LYLE HALLIN/DOROTHY MN DEPT OF REVENUE MN DEPT OF REVENUE ROTA ”• '■ HALLIN/DOROTHY SAFE BENEFITS MINNEQASCO SUB TOTALS: Total Void Machine Written Total Void Hand Written Total Machine Written Total Hand Written Total Revertali Total Cancelled Checks SUB TOTAL 08/01/9306/02/93 08/09/83 06/10/33 06/10/93 06/10/93 08/10/93 06/10/93 06/10/93 08/11/93 06/14/93 08/18/83 06/16/93 08/10/93 06/18/93 06/28/93 08/24/93 08/24/93 06/30/93 Rel To NoteHand Written r* 8-'■■■■■■•■■■•■■■■■•••a549.41 900.00 10.38 115.00 432.91 24.00 15.00 50.00 62.49 10.28 40.00 43.38 747.50 1,489.00 100.00 64.58 1.653.68 339.91 HW,,, TR . •HW • TR Hand Written Hand Written r , rr '‘r*'Tf'** r.8;* t.* HW TR HW . TR Hand Written Hand Written f», -r ap HW TR Hand Written Y 1 HW TR Hand Written • • * • 1 • HW TR Hand Written • ■■ '•> ■ • HW V. TR Hand Written • « •. « HW TR Hand Written • ;.0’V; HW . TR HW TR Hand Written Hand Written • * !' * HW TR HW ! TR HW . TR Hand Written Hand Written Hand Written ■ ‘ • ■ ' -r • 1 • HW TR HW * TR Hand Written Hand Written *f 1«» • • ; • »• • • , i • HW •: TR HW TR Hand Written Hand Written «. p * <■ ■ ^ • r* . • 0.00 0.00 • • e i -f '• . 0.00 'rr (! ■ 6.710.01 0.00 0.00 : • 6.710.01 Number of Checks Proceased: i 0 Number of Checks Processed: 0 .\f' Number of Checks Processed: V . ' ‘O > v •.••j ViY^'’■•• ’• r.'’- • •yiAi'*-' Number of Checks Processed: 19 ;; ‘ Number of Chocks Proceilod: ' 0 ’ „ ^ •' • ’ ‘t *■Number of Checks Processed: 0 I • i* • . I CHECK REGISTER “ ' . 'U.SM* ^rog: CK200 <l.07>“---r«porT id: CKREG—> II •0 Not*Hind Wrltt«n Hand Written .Hand Written Hend Written Hand Written Hand Written Hand WrittenHand Written Hand Written Hand Written Hand Written Hand Written Hand Written Hand Written Hand Written ; Hand Written * Hand Written Hand Written Hand Written ' . • I . ! Checki Proceaied; i ' ( Checki Proceiied: f Check! Rroceaied: '• . if Check! Proceiied: »f Check! Proceiied: . * a* )f Checki Proceiied: • *1 »■ 'f* e*S ^ »; a ^ 4^*,» V . • ♦ I ; *, • f • . I • *• 1. '* • # M^:r f*•' '* * i*»•** *t : ' t I ‘ ( r • * ■ . 'M--‘V.W‘‘ . • ' I • . ■ >ri 1 V! V i -f 'V •. . . . . . . . . . . . . “ •* > -j.* * • • '•/1\: 0 ' .\F ; V •• ® V r !>>• 19 -I ’ 0 ... .... i ' l’ ‘ “ ' wCOUNCIL CHECK REGISTER TUE. JUL 6. 1993. 9:25 PM page 1CHECK NO CHECK DATE 1993/07^228424 <•>28425 <•>28427<•>28429 <*>28430 <•>28431 28433 <•> 28434 <•> 28435 2^4jS <•) 28437 <•> 1993/07/121993/07/121993/07/121993/07/121993/07/121993/07/121993/07/121993/07/121993/07/121993/07/121993/07/121993/07/121993/07/12 1993/07/12 1993/07/12 1993/07/12 1993/07/12 1993/07/12 1993/07/12 1993/07/12 1993/07/12 1993/07/12 1993/07/12 1M93/07/12 284j:; 1993/07/12 CHECK AMOUNTS28.44$28.44*$70.84$70.84*$233.85$294.90$528.75*$1,876.32$1,876.32*$103,615.42$978.10$104,593.52*$374.53$374.53*$86.50$86.50*$42.65$28.64$28.64$28.64$28.64 $28.64 $185.85* $44.74 $36.00 $30.54 $111.28* $1,647.00 $1,647.00* $37.28 $37.28* $161.08 $58.58 $146.97 $366.63* $41.00 $41.00* $12.24 $12.24* VENDORA T A TALL STAR ELECTRICALL STAR PRO QOLF CO ALL STAR PRO GOLF COALL STEEL PRODUCTSAMERICAN NATL BANK AMERICAN NATL BANKANCHOR PAPERASPLUNO COFFEEINFO SYSTEM INFO SYSTEM INFO SYSTEM INFO SYSTEM INFO SYSTEM INFO SYSTEM Alio IE S MOBILE CHEF AUGIES MOBILE CHEF AUQIES MOBILE CHEF DESCRIPTIONTELEPHONEREPAIR LIGHTSUPPLIESPENCILS ACCOUNT PONUMBER INVOICE NO NUMBER0590-4320 0007060249-4233 9272.20CULVERTS0590-4232 55251 0590-4232 489110249-4233 1642INTEREST DUE 7/15 HRA BON 0911-4620 000760 PAYING AGENT THRU 6-14-93 0911-4630 000780COPY PAPERINSTALL COFFEE MAKER 9001-1261 7258690099-4343 61546DATADATADATADATADATA DATA PROCPROCPROCPROCPROC PROC 0129005900690129 0174 0249 4340434043404340 4340 4340 000707000707000707000707 000707 000707 SANDWICHES COFFEE SANDWICHES 0591-4802 2385 0591-4802 19832 0591-4802 000743 AUS COMMUNICATIONS INC VOICE/DATA CABLING FINAL 0480-4520 000762 BAYSIDE FLORAL BLACKOWIAK & SONS BLACKOWIAK & SONS BLACKOWIAK & SONS BUDGET PRINTING CELLULARONE $191.70 CHIPPEWA TOP SOIL FLOWERS-ABDO TRASH HAUL TRASH HAUL TRASH HAUL PRINTING TELEPHONE DIRT 0020-4399 19335 0290-4343 000744 0590-4343 000744 0099-4343 000744 0129-4322 36887 0249-4320 1993 0290-4231 000708 MANUALOHOHOHOHOHOHOH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH [HM piflt 2COUNTIMBERINVOICE NO NUMBER MANUAL1-4815 96851819-4152•9-415219-4152'4-415219-415219-415210-415219-4152)1-1298 000745000745000745000745000745000745000745000745000745)1-1261 000746 E9-4221 58694 E9-4243 5544819-4232 1970 19-4232 198815-4392 686 10-4232 7213 {9-4221 544268 19-4232 000709 JO-4232 000709 59-4232 000709 90-4331 000747 JO-4342 000747 29-4356 1808 49-4383 000711 91-4802 240023 OHOHOH OH OH COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER TUE. JUI. 6. 1993, 9:25 PMVENDOR pige 3CHECK NO CHECK DATE <•>28453<•>28454 «•>28455 <*>2845628457 <»>28458 <■> 28459 <•> 28460 <•> 28461 28462 <•> 28463 <•> 28464 <•> 28465 CHECK AMOUNT $28.72*1993/07/12 $1,163.21$1,163.21*HENN CTY FIN DIV1993/07/12 $95.47$95.47*HENN CTY SHERIFF DPT1993/07/12 $37.80$37.80*HIGHWAY 55 RENTAL1993/07/121993/07/121993/07/121993/07/121993/07/121993/07/121993/07/121993/07/12 $91.50$61.00$91.50$183.00$30.50$30.50$30.50$91.50$610.00*IMS/MNIMS/MNIMS/MNIMS/MNIMS/MNIMS/MNIMS/MNIMS/MN1993/07/12 $50.00$50.00*INTEGRATED COMM SYSTI1993/07/12 $148.80$148.80*JIMMY JINQLE 1993/07/12 $9.25 $9.25* KEAVENYS DRUG 1993/07/12 $41.90 $41.90* KOEHNENS STANDARD 1993/07/12 1993/07/12 1993/07/12 $12.54 $12.07 $65.30 $89.91* KUEMN, THOMAS KUEHN, THOMAS KUEMN, THOMAS 1993/07/12 $5,387.50 $5,387.50* LAKEMTKA CONS DIST 1993/07/12 $29.25 $29.25*LASER LAB INC 1993/07/12 $20.00 $20.00* LONG LAKE VET CLINIC 1993/07/12 1993/07/12 1993/07/12 $142.81 $15.66 $67.10 $225.57* LONG LK FORD TRACTOR LONG LK FORD TRACTOR LONG LK FORD TRACTOR 1993/07/12 1993/07/12 $35.00 $13.25 MABUSTH-JEANNE MABUSTH-JEANNE DESCRIPTION NUMBER INVOICE NOMAY ROOM & BOARD 0080-4358 002031 OHMAY BOOKING FEE 0080-4358 000712 OHRENTmL0099-4331 000710 OHMAINT POSTAGE MACH 0039-4340 14224 OHMAINT POSTAGE MACH 0C89-4340 14224 OHMAINT POSTAGE MACH 0059-4340 14224 OHMAINT POSTAGE MACH 0174-4340 14224 OHMAINT POSTAGE MACH 0249-4340 14224 OHMAINT POSTAGE MACH 0295-4340 14224 OHMAINT POSTAGE MACH 0549-4340 14224 OHMAINT POSTAGE MACH 0569-4340 14224 OHANSWERING MACHINE REPAIR 0129-4340 13093 OHCOFFEE & PUNCH OPEN HOUSE 0299-4900 1711 OH SUPPLIES 0590-4210 000713 OH REPAIR 0129-4341 000748 OH MILEAGE JUNE 0174-4381 000761 OHMILEAGE JUNE 0569-4381 000761 OHMILEAGE JUNE 0069-4381 000761 OH 2ND QTR 1993 0020-4380 000716 OH REPAIR 0129-4342 000714 OH VET FEE 0129-4244 000715 OH REPAIR 0590-4242 169557 OHPARTS0249-4232 169935 OHPARTS0249-4232 170176 OH MILEAGE 0174-4381 000727 OHMIG EXP 0174-4382 000727 OH o aCOUNCILCHECK REGISTER TUE. JUL 6,, 1363.9:25 PM 1CHECK NO CHECK DATE CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT 1PO< ■ >28467<•>1993/07/12 SIS.00 SIS.00*MALEFI DUES 0129-4380 000723 •OH28468<•>1993/07/12 S2S.00S2S.00*MCPOA DUES 0129-4380 000728 OH28469<•>1993/07/121993/07/12 S80.00$50.00$130.00*MGCSA Macs A DUESDUES 0590-43800590-4380 000719000720 OHOH28470 <• >1993/07/12 S926.91$926.91*MIDWEST ASPHALT ASPHALT 0249-4233 000718 OH 28471 <•> 1993/07/12 1993/07/12 1993/07/12 1993/07/12 1993/07/12 1993/07/12 1993/07/12 1993/07/12 1993/07/12 1993/07/12 1993/07/12 1993/07/12 $25.07 $25.06 $25.07 $25.07 $25.06 $25.06 $140.93 $131.63 $11.90 $11.90 $11.90 $11.90 $470.55* MIDWEST MIDWEST midwest MIDWEST MIDWEST MIDWEST MIDWEST MIDVEST MIDWEST MIDWEST MIDWEST MIDWEST BSNS PROD BSNS PROD BSNS PROO BSNS PROO BSNS PROD BSNS PROD BSNS PROO BSNS PROO BSNS PROD BSNS PROD BSNS PROD BSNS PROP OFFICE SUPPLIES OFFICE SUPPLIES OFFICE SUPPLIES OFFICE SUPPLIES OFFICE SUPPLIES OFFICE SUPPLIES OFFICE SUPPLIES OFFICE SUPPLIES OFFICE SUPPLIES OFFICE SUPPLIES OFFICE SUPPLIES OFFICE SUPPLIES 0039-4210 0069-4210 0174-4210 0059-4210 0249-4210 0129-4210 0039-4210 0069-4210 0059-4210 0174-4210 0129-4210 0249-4210 541904 541904 541904 541904 541904 541904 551614 551614 551614 551614 551614 551614 OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH 21472 <•> 1993/07/12 $36.22 $36.22* MINN COMM TELPHONE 0249-4320 000749 OH 28473 <•> 1993/07/12 • i $752 00 $752.00* MINNETONKA INTERIORS TILE POST OFFICE 0099-4343 000726 OH 28474 <•> w 1993/07/12 $24.98 $24.98* MN BENEFIT ASSN INS 0129-4152 000722 OH 2847S <•> 1993/07/12 1993/07/12 $25.00 $25.00 $50.00* MN CHPT MN CHPT MCFOA MCFOA DUES DUES 0030-4380 0039-4380 000725 000750 OH OH 28476 <•> 1993/07/12 1993/07/12 1993/07/12 $1,059.00 $30.00 $15.00 $1,104.00* MN DEPT MN DEPT MN DEPT OF REVENUE OF REVENUE OF REVENUE JUNE SALES TAX JUNE SALES TAX JUNE SALES TAX 9674-2222 9001-3500 9672-2222 000751 000751 000751 OH OH OH 28477 <•> 1993/07/12 1993/07/12 $360.00 $150.00 $510.00* MN DEPT MN DEPT PU^* SAFETY PUB SAFETY CJDN OPERATION CHARGES CJDN CHARGES 0129-4355 0120-4355 9302203 9302202 OH OH 28478 <•> 1993/07/12 $500.00 $500.00* MN POL RECRNMT SYS MPRS LAWSUIT 0080-4303 000724 OH P«9* 4 0 COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER TUE, JUL 8. 1993. 9:25 PM page 5ACCOUNTlECK NO CHECK DATE CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION NUMBER INVOICE NO NUMBER MANUAL28479<•>1993/07/12 $1,502.32$1.502.32»MOTOROLA INC INSTALL MOTOROLA EQUIP 0484-4530 W2533187 OH284801993/07/12 $13.50 MPLS OXYGEN CO DEMURRAGE 0129-4232 374956 OH <•> 1993/07/12 $31.50 $45.00* MPLS OXYGEN CO DEMURRAGE 0249-4232 374955 OH 28481 1993/07/12 $116.34 MTI DIST CO PARTS 0290-4232 338830 OH 1993/07/12 $135.47 MTI DIST CO PARTS 0590-4232 000721 OH <•> 1993/07/12 $13.33 $265.14* MTI DIST CO PARTS 0249-4232 000721 OH 28482 <»> 1993/07/12 $6,987.38 $6,987.38* NATIONAL TRADE TRUST 90% BALANCE DUE INV12522 0480-4540 000703 OH 28483 <•> 1993/07/12 $95.00 $95.00* NATL FIRE PROTECTION ASSO DUES 0174-4380 000729 OH 28484 1993/07/12 $132.48 NORTHLAND BUSINESS SUPPLIES 0129-4210 2346 OH <*> 1993/07/12 $25.05 $157.53* NORTHLAND BUSINESS SUPPLIES 0039-4210 3471 OH 2S48S 1993/07/12 $102.91 NSP UTILITIES 0249-4324 000730 OH 1993/07/12 $187.21 NSP UTILITIES 0569-4324 000730 OH 1993/07/12 $291.39 NSP UTILITIES 0509-4324 000732 OH 1993/07/12 $205.48 NSP UTILITIES 0249-4324 000732 OH 1993/07/12 $1,570.03 NSP UTILITIES 0099-4324 000732 OH 1993/07/i2 $56.51 NSP UTILITIES 0290-4324 000732 OH <•> 1993/07/'2 $322.28 $2,735.81* NSP UTILITIES 0549-4324 000732 OH 28488 <■> 1993/07/11 $1,137.88 $1,137.88* NSP ST LIGHTS 0249-4325 000731 OH 28487 <•> 1993/07/12 $24.92 $24.92* OMAN/LYLE MILEAGE 0174-4381 000753 OH 28488 <•> 1993/07/12 $166.67 $166.67* OTTEN BROS MAIN! SUPPLIES 0249-4233 6544 OH 28489 <•> 1993/07/12 $9.30 $9.30* PACK & SEND POSTAGE 0129-4321 00075S OH 28490 <•> 1993/07/12 $80.64 $80.64* POf^lER COMPANY INC PLAQUES OPEN HOUSE 0299-4900 32839 OH 28491 <•> 1993/07/12 $146.00 $146.00* POPMAM MAIK & ASSOC BAL APPLIC FEB 0840-4303 000764 OH 28492 <■ \ 1993/07/12 $143.78 $143.78* PRECISION TURF HERBISIDE 0590-4343 3177 OH 28493 <• > 1993/07/12 $736.00 $736.00* PROLAWNS WEED CONTROL 0290-4343 000733 OH ptgt 8( MANUAL OHOHOH OH OH OH OH • y ;yI t . i COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER TUE. JUL 6. 1993. 9;25 PMCHECK DATECHECK NO <*>CHECK AMOUNT $798.12»28509<•>1993/07/12 $819.50$619.50*28510<•>1993/07/12 $30.00$30.00*28511<»>1993/07/12 $675.55$675.55*28512<•>1993/07/12 $5,044.00$5,044.00*28513<*>1993/07/121993/07/12 $151.77$131.60$283.37*28514<•>1993/07/12 $43.13$43.13*28515 <•> 1993/07/121993/07/121993/07/121993/07/121993/07/121993/07/121993/07/121993/07/121993/07/121993/07/121993/07/121993/07/12 $141.90$105.29$255.14$98.13$40.78$81.52$81.52$81.52$12.22$28.52$53.78 $54.52 $1,034.82* 28516 <• > 1993/07/12 $5.24 $5.24* 28517 <•> 1993/07/12 $493.93 $493.93* 28518 <•> 1993/07/12 1993/07/12 $57.12 $23.24 $80.38* 28519 <•> 1 1993/07/12 $125.00 $125.00* 28520 <•> 1993/07/12 1993/07/12 $55.00 $258.00 $313.00* 28521 <•> 1993/07/12 $8.75 $8.75* VENDORTRI STATE PUMPTRI-K SPORTSTRUCK UTILITIES MFG COTWIN CITY STRIPPINGU S WEST CELLULAR U S WEST CELLULARULTIMATE AWARDS DESCRIPTION ACCOUNTNUMBER INVOICE NO PONUMBERUS WEST US WEST US WEST US WEST US WEST US WEST US WEST US WEST US WEST US WEST US WEST US WEST COMMUNCOMMUNCOMMUNCOMMUNCOMMUNCOMMUNCOMMUNCOMMUNCOMMUNCOMMUNCOMMUN COMMUN VESSCO INC WATERPRO WECKMAN STEPHEN WECKMAN STEPHEN WIOMER BROS WILLIAMS CLOTHING WILLIAMS CLOTHING WRIGHT HENN ELECTRIC REPAIRREPAIR MOWER MOTORROAD STRIPPINGTELEPHONETELEPHONEPLAQUES OPEN HOUSEADVTELEPHONETELEPHONETELEPHONETELEPHONETELEPHONETELEPHONETELEPHONETELEPHONETELEPHONETELEPHONE TELEPHONE PARTS WATER METERS MILEAGE MILEAGE REPAIR UNIFORMS UNIFORMS UTILITIES 0569-4344 90110590-4342 0DU7370569-4232 781980249-4233 25070129-4320 000757 0129-4320 0007580299-4900 291105900590012900390C690174 0059 0249 0549 05890175 0549' 4323432043204320432043204320432043204320 4320 4320 000739000739000739000739000739000739000739000739000739000739 000740 000756 0549-4232 3688 9672-1273 463050 0174-4381 000742 0174-4381 000759 0249-4233 11937 0129-4221 3839 0129-4221 4104 0249-4324 000741 P>9« 7MANUALOHOHOHOHOHOH OH OH OH OH OH ,••• • • “T INVOICE NO NUMBER MANUAL9011OH•000737 OH78198OH2507OH000757000758OHOH2911OHJ 0007393 000739 Q 000739 0 000739 0 000739 0 000739 0 000739 0 000739 0 000739 0 000739 ;0 000740 to 000756 OHOHOHOHOHOHOHOHOHOHOHOH 32 3686 OH 73 463050 OH 81 000742 181 000759 OH OH J33 11937 OH 221 3839 OH OH221 4104 324 000741 OH 6 Oi COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER TUE, JUL 6. I0B3, 9:25 PMCHECK NO CHECK DATE CHECK AMOUNT28522 1993/07/12<•>S402.30$402.30*$161,396.81*VENDOR ZARNOTH BRUSHWORKS INC o: i5? a ZZ3 &' @? >nH £; 'd Si a-%k=^ I’-h try 'r^^3-tu >S3 S 15 ri#tf COUNCIL MEETliilG JUL ] 2 1393 CITYOFORONO *•• M» •• ♦ •• • \ c crrrcfc«>o ■a ^ • I f •JUL 6 1993 July 2. 1993 City of Orono P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323~0066 Attention: Mayor Callahan Dear Mayor Callahan, On June 28, 1993 the City Council held a closed meeting regarding the recommendation to enaut a one ( 1 ) day suspension without pay upon me (Randy O’Brien). This is the result of an incident that Mr. John R. Gerhardson observed in May of 1993 involving the operation of a City-owned vehicle. Your decision was to impose that suspension. On Uednesday, June 30, 1993 , I met with Mr. Ron Moorse, City Administrator and Mr. John Gerhardson, Public Works Director and was informed verbally and in writing that the day of suspension would be July 7, 1993. I was also informed at this time that could exercise my Right to Appeal this disciplinary ac tion, at which time I would be granted a time to meet with your self and the Council to present my appeal. Please take this as my request to appeal this action. At a time convenient to all parties involved, I would like to meet and dis cuss the discrepancies between myself and my accuser, Mr. Ger hardson, on the facts of this matter . Sincerely, Randy O’Brien SENIOR COMMUNITY SERVICES 10709 VVayzata Boulevard. Suite 111, Minnetonka. MN 55305, 54M019 FAX 541-0841 BCAROcf C.mECTCRS Tom TIcen President Daralyn Peifer 1st V>ce President Marly Guritz 2nd ViCQ Prospcent Bob Zagaros Secretary Ryan Schroeder Treasurer Walter Levesque Past Prosicent Bob Miller Momt>er at Large Carla Pavone Merrber at Large Lucille Crow Karl Oansky Robert DeGhetto Jim Fisher Alison Fuhr Tad Jude Leonard Kopp John Nelson Senator Gen Olson William G. Weller John Young Benjamin F. WiihharC Executive C rector S C.E.O A United Way Supported Agency 9% • $ July 6. 1993 Mayor Edward Callahan Jr. and Council City of Orono P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN. 55323 rjuu 7 lOK Dear Mayor Cailahan and Council Memoers: Senior Community Services' request of funds from the City of Orono to support the operation of programs serving the local frail and elderly population for the 1994 calendar year is $12,497 reflecting a 4% cost-of- living increase over our 1993 level of support from the City. The request is divided among three seperate programs as follows: 1. Senior Outreach Program 2. Tamarak (Long Lake) Senior Center 3. Westonka Senior Center $5,433 2,250 4,814 We have very much appreciated the City of Orono’s support of senior programs. We look forward to continuing the relationship of cooperation including Westonka Rides, Westonka Seniors inc., Westonka Community Services and local cities in order to provide the best services possible to area seniors. As in past years we also will be raising funds from the United Way and private individuals to support the programs. Sincerely, 7“Bbfijamin F. Withhart Executive Director cc: Ronald Moorse, City Administrator •?»ARTMENT : Mn/DOT Preliminary Design Metro Division - Roseville DATE : July 2, 1993 STATE OF MINNESOTA Office Memorandum TO : FROM : Policy Committee Members TH 12 Corridor Study Valerie Reinaas. Project Manager Roseville Valley Pre-Design PHONE: 582 - 1293 D' '/lii__ rjuu e 1SS3 SUBJECT: Economic Study Development Enclosed please find a draft Scope of Services for a Social and Economic Study for the TH 12 Study Corridor. We have decided that it may be more appropriate and more consistent to have the Social, Economic Land Use and Relocation Impacts done together. It is proposed that each impact would be researched by alignment segment. The study would proceed with the alignments that are currently mapped. Please review the enclosed information for discussion at the next Policy Committee Meeting. At that time we will be looking at the Scope of Services and making any modifications that are required. If there appear to be areas of question, please bring these comments to the meeting as well. Feel free to contact me at your convenience if you have any questions. The r^xt Policy Committee Meeting will be held on July 21, 1993 at the new Orono City Offices, time is 5:30 p.m. Committee Members: Dwight Poss Bob Bauman Marvin Johnson Tod Olson Marion Alger Ann Thies Ed Callahan Robert Gisvold Michael Mathison John Russek Kay Gabriel Sam Rettinger Barry Petit Dick Harmon J. Diann Goetten Ken Nielson SCOPE OF SERVICES T.H. 12 S.P. 2714-8888 CORRIDOR STUDY rone.r-al- The proposed project studies several alternatives to C^ner^X^ Tlie propo roadway. T.H. 12 would be upgrade the exis 9 „ east of Montrose to improve reconstructed ^ roadbed correct substandard vertical anS“horIL\"rge^"m"etricV^an"?ncre;^ and capacity. There a?e ?hreralternl?ive alignments on the east end of the project and 4-wo alternatives for the west end that can be connected in three ^Lrltl locations to provide eight total build alternatives. In addition there is a "DO Nothing" and a Traffic Demand Management a?teriaSlve Among the areas of extreme controversy are: 1 sicill economic and land use, 2) historic/ archeological, 3) wetland and water quality, and 4) noise and air quality. fot* niirnoses of this study, the economic, social, relocation and land^use impacts will be included in the Draft prepLed in accordance ^with Federal Highway . ReaSlations (as specified in 23CFR771 and FHWA Technical Advisory T6640.3A) and the Mn/DOT Highway Project Development Process TASKS 1.0 INVENTORY The purposes of this task are to determine data needs, by colle^cting and evaluating existing data, plans, policies, maps, and other information relative to the study. The following sub-tasks will be performed: 1.1 Assemble relevant data, plans, policies, maps, etc. from affected cities, counties, and agencies. 1.2 Determine data deficiencies and needs. 1.3 Meet with Pre-Design Staff and report needs 2.0 DESCRIPTION The purpose of this task is to describe the economic and land use setting for the area affected by the alternatives. The following sub-tasks will be performed: m^x"'leve^^^ "Tnd' tr7nd"r^ho'^u'sing!^“"^^^^^^ recreation, and community facilities; accessibility to local and metropolitan activities and opportunities; cultural aspects; public institutions; neighborhoods and aesthetics• 0 2 Describe the Economic setting, including employment levels and trends; land values; tax base; income; labor force* industry and services; accessibility to centers of economic activity; and economic viability of existing cities. 2 3 Describe the local, county and metropolitan lani-use plans, development and transportation policies, and any other federal activities in the study area and their interrelationship with the corridor alternatives. 3.0 IMPACTS AMD CONSEQUENCES The purpose of this task is to address the probable social, economic, and land use impacts of each alternative. The following types of impacts will be addressed, where applicable, for each sub~task; * direct impacts and their significance * indirect (secondary) impacts and their significance * adverse effects that cannot be avoided * adverse effects that can be mitigated with possible mitigation alternatives where appropriate. The following sub-tasks will be performed: 3.1 Impact on neighborhoods and community cohesion. 3.2 Impacts to travel patterns and accessibility. 3.3 Impacts to sensitive and public facilities. 3.5 Impacts to public safety and emergency response time. 3.6 Impact on social groups (elderly, handicapped, transit dependent, children, minorities). 3.7 Regional economic impacts and impacts to the local economy. 3.8 Economic vitality of.existing businesses. 3.9 Impacts to established business districts (centers of business a-tivity). 3.10 impacts to the economic viability of communities (Market Study). 3.11 Construction impacts. 3.12 Number of displaced households. 3.13 Available housing. 3.14 Special relocation considerations. ti>-ia«-hoy or not sufficient comparable3.15 Determine whether or nov, replacement exists. 3.16 Number of displaced farms and businesses. 3.17 Relocation impacts on households and businesses. 3.18 impact on residential and commercial development. 3.19 Induced development and consistency with local and regional plans and policies. 3.20 Impacts to MUSA location. 4.0 ANALYSIS Emphasis will be placed upon identifying the key tradeoffs for each alternative. The following sub-tasks will be performed; 4.1 Highlight major advantages and disadvantages of each alternative. 4 2 Identify impacts to specific groups so that equity considerations can be factored into decision making. 4.3 Identify any assumptions made in the analysis. 4.4 Prepare study document for inclusion in the DEIS. 5.0 PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT The purpose of this task is to provide for continuing opportunities for the public to be involved in the 6.0 identification of social,, econonic, relocation and land use impacts of the project. The following sub-tasks will be performed: 5 1 Personal contacts by the consultant of key individuals, businesses, groups, and officials. comiissi"onV,a"nd%urcouncil^ i" project. 7.0 5.3 Public information meetings on the study and/or public hearings. FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT . . a TTiaa/ hp rsouired as a result of comments orAdditional analysis may^be prepared by question chanqes and additions to the appropriateincorporating the Chang preparing the DEIS (assuming rEl“chan°gL"rre^rnL“rnd rll^/asonalle alternatives are adequately presented and evaluated). The following sub-tasks will be performed: 6.1 Perform additional analysis as directed by the Project Manager. 6.2 Address comments in the public hearing record as directed by the Project Manager 6.3 List commitments for mitigation measures for the selected alternative. 6.4 Revise and submit study document to Mn/DOT for approval and inclusion in the FEIS. management and COORDINATION The purpose of this task is to ensure completed on time, within budget, and in accordance with state and federal law, rule and regulation. The following sub-tasks will be performed: 7.1 Provide adequate coordination with affected local, state, and federal agencies throughout the study. 7.2 Review study technical approach and monitor progress and budget throughout the study. 1 •» ^ i m • Maintain close communication with T.H. 12 Project Manager an^review approach, progress, and results throughout the Study. 7.4 Provide presentation and discussion with Policy and Tec'^nical Committee. r>.- ' ’■ ■ To: From; Date: Subject: Mayor Callahan and Orono Councilmembers Ron Moorse, City Administrator /•/j July 9, 1993 Sewc*- Plant Property Appraisal When the City received an offer for the purchase of a portion of the sewer plant property, the Council directed staff to obtain an appraisal of the value of the property to be used as the basis for responding ic the offer. I have attached the summary sheet from the appraisal indicating the appraised value is $335,000. The appraisal was based on the use of the site as a single residential lot to provide a private estate-like homesite. Copies of the appraisal report are available at City Hall. It is recommended the report be kept confidential so that in the event the potential buyer decides to have his own appraisal performed, it will be an independent appraisal and will not be influenced by the information in the City ’s appraisal. Staff is scheduled to meet with the potential buyer on Friday afternoon. A report on the results of the meeting will be provided to the Council. J ] ■f j Herman A ppraisal Services REAL ESTATE APPRAISALS 43?: DUPONT avenue SOt-TH MINNEAPOLIS. MINNESOTA 55409 6I2-325-I969 .'i\ 612-824-2107 1 J J Mr. Ron Moor' City Administrator City of Orono P.6. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 June 30. 1993 Re: Market Value Appraisal Sinsle Family Residential Parcel Municipal Waste Water Property Old Crystal Bay Road Orono. MN 1 Dear Mr. Moorsc, As vou requested. 1 personally inspected the above referenced property on June 17. 1993 for the purpose of estirTiaiing; ihc inarket v'alue ot a ice simple interest in the subject real estate. The description ot the subject real estate, comparable data used, and the analysis that led to mv value judgment are described within this report. This appraisal report has been prepared in conformity with the requirements of the Code ot Professional Ethics and the Standards of Professional Practice of the .Appraisal Institute. The report vatisties Federal reuulaiions 12 C. F. R. Parts 1606 and 1608. promulgated by the Financial Institutions Reform. Recovery, and Enforcement Act or 1989 (FIRREA). anu adheres to the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP) adopted bv tlie Appraisal Standards Board of the Appraisal Foundation. This appraisal is subject to the appraiser's certitication and limiting conditions wliich are part ot the report. This appraisal assignment and appraisal opinion are subject^ to the following specific requirements, assumptions and limiting conditions, as weii as others that may be described in the appraisal report: ■ The valuation of the subject property assumes an "as is" land status and condition as described in the tollowing appraisal report. The subject property i: a 13.98 acre vacant single family residential site. My effective date of opinion is 6/17/93. ■ .Anv outstanding special assessments are assumed to be paid in full at the appraised market value. As ot the date ot apprajsal. the subject propertv had no jpecial assessments or delinquent taxes. ■ .Appro.ximately 8 acres ot the subject pioperty are located in wetland basins that are designated zone .A flood hazaid areas by the National Flood Insurance Program. These ponions ot the property have inadequate drainage and are subject to continual flooding. The remainder of the property (about 6 acres) is situaied in a zorie C tlood hazard area. This zone denotes areas of minimal flooding. Site drainage appears to be adequate and soil conditions appear to be sound within the zone C portions of the property. These are conditions ot this appraisal. Mr. Ron Moorse June 17, 1993 Page 2 I ■ The subject property has natural, recreational, and possibly scientific values due to its approximate 8 acres of protected wetlands. The property has no known cultural or historic values. ■ Unless otherwise stated in this report, the existence ot hazardous or potentially hazardous on-site or off-site materials, which may or may not be present on or off the subject property, was not obserxed by the appraiser. The appraiser has no knowledge ot the existence ot hazardous or potentially hazardous materials on. in. or affecting the subject property. Mv value estimate is predicated on the assumption that there are no hazardous materials on or in. or potentially affecting the subject property that would cause a loss in value. On the basis of mv studv and experience as a professional real estate appraiser, and after giving due consideration to all factors affecting the market value of the property, it is my opinion that the subject’s estimated "as is" market value, as or June 17. 1993 is. THREE HUNDRED THIRTY FIVE THOUSAND DOLLARS S335.000 I would like to acknowledge the assistance of Mr. Jay Reeves in the research and writing of this appraisal. It has been a pleasure being of service on this assignment. Please contact my firm if you have any questions or comments after reading this report. Ellen B. Herman Principal Appraiser Cenified Federal General License ^4001467 jviv 311 s iDHfans I.A r I I I I r I i: r f