Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
07-21-1986 Planning Packet
8.#1026 9.#1037 10.#1042 11.#1044 12.#1046 13.#1048 A\ ;lude ex units [earing PLANNING COMHISSION MEETING MONDAY, JULY 21, 1986 7:30 P.M. 1275 BROMN ROAD SOOIB - OODNCIL CHAMBERS #1051 Ronald L. Glesne, 1475 Cherry Place — Variance - Public Hearing 15. #1052 John T. Spence, 2040 North Shore Drive - Variances - Public Hearing 16. #1053 Raymond J. Kosak, 3265 Carman Road - Conditional Use Permit and Variance - Public Hearing 17. #1054 Steven Schnebly, 2555 Countryside Drive - Variance - Public Hearing 18. #1055 Daniel Lee Bragg, 500 Orchard Park Drive - Variance - Public Hearing ADDITIONAL ITEMS 19. Planning Commission approval of June 16, 1986 Minutes. 20. Planning Commission to select a representative toAugust 11, 1986 Council Meeting. enT;auive to adjournment ''m attend the Hearing rard - PUBLIC ATTENDANCE CITY OF ORONO MEETING DATE 77a//& PLEASE FILL OUT THE INFORMATION REQUESTED BELOW FOR OUR CITY RECORDS. ■Sit the NA^ (please print) ADDRESS ^ -k<^uML/A/ I 2-4.^$-Fox NAME OR NUMBER PRESENT FOR (from agenda) I 33-^ . JhllC^ ''si A Cf Vlr 3 5/0 0 -tfj^^g<YKgplv^Ucji. 3-spS( It-' ^u~~v<r'j^ '%.0, To. Da^vc. m7g/ie,L !) ■ V.i /3 'If V- /o t =it /f-)v^ u)ss^ 2SU S UipoW.. b P)/'fiU)/) /y/ r /ft %.J6'inMjki(.'/rA £V»^'JtO CR^Aiii') 7t><f i^lCv Xifiyu ^thth^A^-^'~^yV{.cZs, ^ 6jOt5t“,^i Y.V^, !'c7 'VC'k'f'^IS( :^^ctfti{/l-€LO "^d. ^/r • ^ nda) /JLf PUBLIC ATTENDANCE CITY OP ORONO MEETING DATE I yL PLEASE FILL OUT THE INFORMATION REQUESTED BELOW FOR address {01 ^,U OUR CITY records . name OR NUMBER PRESENT FOR (from agenda) -1 I //go 11), f(,J\ "S ■ C^r/r. 7. l£^ 11. 12. ^oo<i»n jif, "C?rc»%ci LpaJ L>i/^/ln. 55K V ft•) '■70 d,9ii^\'Pi^J WClS / \ ■J 20. -I TO: enda) *♦1 PROM: OATS: SDBJ: Mayor Butler Mark Bernhardson, City Administrator Orono Council Members Planning Commission Members Jeanne A. Mabusth, Zoning Administrator July 16, 1986 ♦1047 Dennis Kumlin, 2665 Fox Street - Preliminary Subdivision Applicant was granted preliminary approval of a 2 lot niat ot tK» kj ^ rxSfbiV„t expired Ocfob'e^^lsf 19« fr"e^!^ Zoning District - RR-lB Current Application - a) Subdivision - Plat - 3 Lots Area: Total * 7.49 acres Wet s= .21 acres Dry « 7.28 acres oL"rA%"a\%"r°oart “o%'frvt°a\T\"^^ List of Exhibits - A Application D “ Property Owners List C - Plat Map D - Staff sketch D “ Watershed Drainage Patterns P ” Wetlands mapping (elevations) G Watershed Designations H - Section 11.33 Subd. 4 I - Former Plat J “ Current Preliminary Plan Review of Current Application - road’''™The lots® a subdivision of 3 lots now served by a private ^exhibits E p" enclosed we°t®lanirma/pi®ng of\h ”lrea in subdivisi<!ll'code^^''staff°®MT®’^ installed per standards set forth density and theH™A suggest that in light of the three lot applied- limited area to be served that the following standards be 24* base covering (bituminous curbs - 20* tinished width between curbs) 40' finished cul-de-sac Culvert size at Fox Street to be reviewed by City Engineer left ibject eview i g use vate Ring back Zoning File #1047 July 16, 1986 Page 2 of 2 ™oft'con«rn"/d l?t“The ^co^f iguraUon'of 1 oT 2"fn"iegfrd" the "d t\T^oTe sftiVo ir°hirhr:xrat^^t''tr d^fve^tsee ixh\b\t"oK" -aligned to provide adegu^e area f^r reauired 2 anr^^cs a^^xw , . , , ^ wouxa sx:iii maintain the wetlands shoul^L lesigLtef at the® gif's ' , advised that the Staff Recooonendation - ave oeen satisfied. Approval is subject to the following conditions! if preliminary plan providing additional area to westof septic test sites on lot 2 for future driveway. w;t°:rini?h!riofl"'’ ^ elevations and confirm total a^tPeyioent of Park fee at S400.00 (5200.00 for each newly created anglf's^®s'^bearinas®f '’•^ainage easements on the plat with easement over wetlands.^^^"' " conservation and flowage road^lutlot!®" granting of road and utility easement over private privati^ro^d^ Maintenance agreement for future upkeep of F;x “ire®eT®a®l®lowli. °“tlot. No direct access onto 8. Applicant must submit road name choices for new private road. ’■ *’'^24®*'Lse®'^ —"Strutted per following standards: iuibl®'"''^ surface - curb required (20' finished width between 40' paved cul-de-sac sd :o I V7 CITY OP ORONO SUBDIVISION APPLICATION FORM applicant Name _X> (r a/ A/ i ^ i^nMT_Ty Mailing Address Date Rec'd By r^-zO Fee Rec'd ^ y>/Q. 6>o Re: / vasc> Telephone 3->qt-/y7/ PROPERTY Name OWNER JDE a/A/I^Telephone Mailing Address 2Jp(oS(Attach list if mor^ than on^^^—^Cty^/ PROPERTY LOCATION Street Address •3-Cg(p^ Fo Property Identification No. (P.I.D.) - - - - - - -f°“Plete_Legal_Description to be attached to application EXISTING LAND USE i / { f(i? t 'v.<? Acres Dry L Number of Tax Parcels Development Size 335 Present Use (check) Present Zoning District V p. Land Acres Wet Land Acres Total, all parcels Residential; no. of units Other (specify) __ _ _ _ _ _ PROPOSAL Division for Tax Purposes - - - Lot Line Rearrangement Only (no new building sites) Subdivision for New Building Sites Number of Building Sites:Existing Units Nev; Units Total Units Proposed Gross Density Units per 1.Z.9, Acres Minimum Lot Size: Proposed Use: (check) Sq«are-rctyb Dry Buildable Land y Residential Other (specify) (OVER) 'S is O /r>L %miwimum material necessary for 1. Application Completed C^|LET1^RE^HIBARY,^PI.^^N f;'( 'A /J ‘on Cepfeic^of * -M ^ '• «ithin 350- (this list can be '• the names on the complete?*^^°" Zoning Department that Preliminary Plat Application is Zoning Officials Signature —-- - - - - - - - - --- - - - - - Date MiHimm MATERIAL NECESSARY FOR COMPLETE PI^'pZAT'wPLiraiioN Payment of fees (park fees, filing fee, sewer and water assessments) 2. Signed certificate of survey or mylar copies of formal plat. 3. Title opinion. 4. Easements, Covenants, etc. 5. Developers Agreement and acceptable form of security. ZoninfSIfi^ia?^ S^gna^rr^'^"”""" Application is complete. - - - --- - - -—_ _ _ _ _ __ _Date FEES _ Sketch Plan Review (Class I, n & in) . Preliminary Review (Class I & n Subdivisions) ^ Preliminary Review (Class III and all non-residential) . Final Plat Review (Class III) legal or engineering charges) $150.00 $250.00 $300.00 plus 20.00/lot $150.00* or requested by the^Zoning'Xdm^^ to provide all information required to pay all additional Applicant's Signature Owner's Signature -\r Date (p • ^(p Date Planning Commission Meeting*^"''Plann^ City offices 25 days before the the third Monday of ea^h mo'ntif. Commission Meetings are usually held on an be nment >n the 00LU CD sO HH inCMz inOzOUl LU >- 1-Ho -D c ^ CM Z 3 ^ LU UJ Z too. •-« o uo CO CO »—1 CM ZD Z CO 1 00 < z -j h- CO s: Y tJ;>69 ’I^Vl'5-Vy \< UAND* 59* ii-i ------- 0 •- Xis-s^~ /'YS y y 94& -------- .-944 l«“-^/ // y./St f ^rc\rytl ! ^ P-4. \ / f y \/ / joY^'-^ ^t * . -• n ,-V. / /.. .....I , ’/V \ • ■• V-. ■v^^V \ ^g fV»^AS^ -Tc^ ’ie*»5!;;V ^36.25 / \\ \/ r ^ ------ ry'0 // I ■t / I 4^ Ct'Wi EVrs^»n<j ^ ho uiC \ I mii^rx/v/' #. V • \ yJj//, ^ t /fCXCJ / y / ^95t^yv^/y/ / / } Y.Y3 SAC. T otal 2.SS t AC. OAr ?B$0icL. y y y y i y • mm m mmrn.jL ^ »'l -/ / \ N \ z' // / // 536.25 / / ( r'^ y / \//' ‘’^‘p J ' r y .y ^ ' \ \ Vs /' il er,IQ'IS'‘W ( / —1 j*« **w- y .^4. >W« w |4 ^/•’ m p 1I 1)31 u • I, ¥m 'i j S 11.33 stopping area o£ at "leaVt*°thi°tv no)'’^fee> ®and sixty (60) feet in a ^ residential area stopping area shall be designed to orovi^o industrial area. The (2) percent. ^ ^ provide a maximum grade of two banks or existl’ng**vegeta'uo°ninvolve earth create a traffic hazard ^hvH <=°rner that would shall cut such ground and/or VMetation^YineVud*^-'’® subdivider connection with the gradinq of the r.'nhr jt^nduding trees) in deemed necessary by the City to provide a^n adlquTt? sight "d^sVanc2‘ intersections, shall be®three°percent (®3%f orVess."®' herein is as^* deteVmined‘'?or®rci?' ‘VPical section indicated tion) and may be ISbjIct ?o chfnoe Classifica-to be determined by the City. ^ * ^oil borings may be required Private Street - Residential a/units ^ 3-6 R.O.W.* M.p.w.** 50' 24'Section Clsss 5 100% crushed 3 2341 Bituminous Surface Over 7 50' 28'2" 5 100% crushed ^ 2341 Bituminous Surface Public Street -• Residential Units 3-10 R.O.W.* M.P.W.** 50' 28'Section Olass 5 100% crushed 3" 2341 Bituminous Surface Over 10 50' 32*^l3ss 5 100% crushed 3 2341 Bituminous Surface Maximum cul-de-sac length - 1,000* Maximum number of units on cul-de-sac - 10 R.O.W.* 70'M.P.W,** 32' * Right-Of-Way Width ** Minimum Paved Width ORONO CC Section 8" Class 4 8“ Class 5 100% crushed 4” 2341 Bituminous surface 462 (4-1-84) \ It \a e 'O h d r n t r I!* ‘i'.f . Proposed Subdivision for Dennis F. and yarbara B. Kumlin of Lot 2, Block’ 1. FOXWOOO Hennepin County. Minnesota o iv84! r.. 2 3i0 ‘ „ _______ C'Vv f.Ff : '0 I #85^ Fox 1 r^ .'7'' -'y/,-' y T / ■ y /■ / /S^ 'i ', I'!li / • f * , ■ f // / I V \l li} ;///^ / /H lif f ^ ’ w i'’ yum'h \ / / f * V ' - ^ 9St ^— / / / «> x\ />0\\' .1------------------.1 • ■ » • ' -' ' ■):" ■'y!" V j-------— - ---^'x: _ij-._::. i /V ?a b s Existing j.egal Oescription: lot 2. nh'ck i. FOxwooD ^.4n4 1C res / Total area: fTP- Scale: 1 inch ^ 100 foet Date : August 22. 1984 tppo^ tnkm f<r»nsa. .*y GORDON R. COFFIN CO.. INC. trig inters <mi<J Land •'lurveyors Long Lake, Minnesota ' '““■“T^'v. i^*n.' r pp.,n‘' ; . oy me or under my Ms cl rjrx r-yi -H- .. ! ,1, , j ^ ^ Ruau'.md be SuK' y< «n.!. r the lewsr4 thmSutei4M-.-j. :z^__/y / y< TO: PROM: DATE: SUBJ: Mayor Butler Mark Bernhardson, City Administrator Orono Council Members Planning Commission Members Jeanne A. Mabusth, Zoning Administrator July 14, 1986 Municipal Regulations - 3^- cHrMapfityra^"" - '•4.45.47,48.49 List of Exhibits ~ A - Public Hearing Notice B - Existing and Proposed Sewer Facilities Map C - Gaffron Memo - 9-20-84 ^ *" Septic mapping of Fulmer Property E- Inventory of areas already sewered or approved for sewer and nnf- formally included in a Comprehensive Plan Amendment. Review of Application - pSlm^er-TV''® the'"parro7\he C?t7‘’^Th7MWCc"haf advised thH under the standards set forth by the City in its CompreheLive sLer Policy Orono has never filed a formal amendment with the Metro Council to r#»floot Pll7. ^R^view^Exhibit ’Bapproval of the 79/80 Comprehensive (11) r Exhibit B. The Minnetonka Bluffs/Browns Bay neighborhood o7sewe7f7/lL“s7ul7r*k““^ -'onsidered by the City with the ordering the plannina studvl with* ^ Hwy. 12 area (upon completion of incite th^^foT^ 1^5^- year. The latter amendment will also A - North Sh "r7/Hi7hwoy ^®®^^ ”''P ‘ ‘ B - Northern Ave. C — Carmans Bay (Lehman project) ^ interceptor - expansion to east - New Life oildig Ciiurcn — H0nn0pin County Libirar*y E - North Shoro/Scotch Pine ^ ~ tho"=« - development on east side of road and to sewer plant and proposed Noerenberg G - Navarro plat ties iot . Comprehensive Plan Amendment July 14, 1986 Page 2 of 2 ” ' ^district^^^ approved for sewer service within the defined rural °L property in relation to Alternative Waste Treatment Methods (Required by CMP review CMP 6-44 [items 1 - 6] and exhibit D). feasible nor practical for Fulmer to alter water use in the Kennel operation. site evaluator, Steve Schirmers and Gaffron confirm that system cannot be expanded nor a new system installed V/ of the code nor with any assurance that such a system will provide continuous service in the future. ® alternative.^ approved a composting or incinerative type system in Ihl 1 system would not be effective with a high water user asthe kennel operation. adequate maintenance of holding tanks not economically feasible in light of the location of the interceptor Tnc^« 1lines. The current system serving the house, property^ already inadequate on this severely limited 6. The property is surrounded by large acred lots with no record of septic problems. The property itself is bordered by railroad, Hwy. 12 ^^senger property to the east of the wetlands^is a former dump/fill site and not suitable for septic systems. A collection system and community or shared drainfield is not feasible. Staff Reconendation - kJ! ®PP^°y® City's application to amend the Municipal Comprehensive Plan - boundaries within t'^he City to serviceapproved by the M.W.C.C. for sewer SinnetonL W V°" neighborhood. Windward and^ Boats Works properties on Shoreline Drive and the Crystal Bay to approve new sewer connection for the residence and commercial kennel at 3505 Wayzata Blvd. based on the following findings: 1. The extension of municipal sanitary sewer is (was) required because environpental and or health problems could not be technically or economically resolved on site. 2. The subject properties were all located adjacent to a M.W.C.C. interceptor . 3. The serving of these properties will not increase densities nor open new areas for development because of such a sewer extension. !L.^ CITY OF ORONO Vi Ural e in that Lied ch a Illy ptor use, Lted d of C.C. nor The Planning Commission will hold a Public Hearing in the Council Chambers at 1275 South Brown Road on Monday, July 21 1386 It .00 P.M. to consider an amendment to the City of Orono Management Plan. The proposed amendment wo" Id proT^de fT^t^e inclusion of the following described propertierwithln designated Metropolitan Urban Service Area „usA,, a tw Metropolitan Sewer Service Area (HSSR): '' * AREA 11 - MINNETONKA BLUFFS commencing et the northee.t corner of the eouthwe.t go.rter of the eonth- weet guerter of Section 2. Township in north. Range 23 west. Hennepin County. Hinnesote, thence e.st 330 f,,et along the north line of the southeast guarter Of the southwest guarter of Section 2; thence south at right angles 375* feet - the centerline of County Road Ho. 15; thence 380* feet southwesterly'.long the centerline of County Road 15 to the east line of the southwest guarter of the southwest guarter; thence southerly along the centerline of County Road 15 370* feet on . curve deflecting to the left; thence southerly .long the cent- erline of County Road 15 ini ay a 15. 101.4 feet on a curve deflecting to the right cen- tral angle 6 05*; thence south 20^ 25* east 4S+ f ^5* feet to the shore of Lake innetonka; thence northerly along the shore of Lake Minn.t u linsh -Is Minnetonka to the eaat line of the southwest quarter of thi* «« -i, the southwest guarter Section 2; thence .ast er y along the shore of Lake Minnetonka to the east line f ncne eaat Une of the southeast quarter of the southwest quarter of Section 2- th,.n , thence easterly along the shore -- « the east line of the southwest guarter of the southeaet quarter Section 2; thence easterly along the shore of Lake Minnetonka to a point 235.3 feet west of the east line of the southeast guarter of the south- oast guarter; thence north parallel with said east line to a point 721.88 feet aouth and 235.3 feet weai- -k the northeast corner of the southeast guarter of the southeast guarter of Section 2; thence east 235.3 feet to the east Une of the southeast guarter of the southeast guarter of Section 2; then’'crV'?21.88 oet to the northeast corner of the southeaat guarter of the aoutheast guarter "I ff- r t S P a u /nV. rj <> iv <? •■) * of Section 2- m.t thence weet along the north line to i-iiine to the northeaat Corner of the flouthwest quarter of the aoutheaat quarter Section 2- tlcccion 2, thonco wnat ‘I'l'i*- fo„t a o„g the north line of the eouthwe.t quarter of the eoutheaet quarter; "thence northueeterl, 130. feet along the centerline of fernaale Hoa<i Went; thence aorthueaterl, feet along the centerline of fernOale goaO «e.t on a curue of the northwest quarter of the aoutheaat quarter of Section 2. U32. feet aouth Of the northwest corner; thence north along the west line to anoint 965.2 feet south of the northwest corner of thecorner of the northwest quarter of the aoa-st quarter of Section 2; thence 130.3 feet northeasterly along the rrght-of-„ay line of the P.rlington Northern Railroad; thence 155.8 feet northerly; thence 83 feet westerly to a point on the west line of the north- -eat quarter of the southeast quarter Section 2 and 741.5 feet south of the northwest corner; thence north 114.3 feet along said west line, thence west .05 feet along the north line of oicKenson Street; thence northwesterly lini o/rr"" — xc enson Street; thence westerly along said centerline 994.34 feet to He west line of the northeast quarter of the southwest quarter of Section 2 0.00 feet north of the southwest corner; thence south along said west - 6eet to the point of beginning and there terninating all located in ectton 2. Townshtp 117 north, range 23 west. Hennepin County. Minnesota. AREA 12 - SHORELINE DRIVE .. ... ..... n ..... the north line of Section 11 to the NF ro NE corner of Governraent Lot 1; thence south 10° east, 585 4 f-pr »-i, e point of the beginning; thence south 67® Page 2. i 5»n-^ j ;/ 48* wcat| 192.97» f«t to the ehor. of T.„a«er take; thence „„.cherly alo„« ahore of Xa„a«er Lahe to the aooth U„. of the notch onc-haU of the northweat quarter of Section ll; thence eaaterly along .aid aouth line to the shore of Lake Minnetonka; thence northerly along the ahore of Lake Minnetonka point 14.3 feet north 57 48' eaat of the point of beginning; thence to the point of beginning and there terninatine an • ccerainating. All m Section 11, Town.hip 117 oorth. Range 23 weat, Hennepin County. Minneaota. area 13 - CRYSTAL BAY Cotnnencing at the aouthueat corner of rh.turner ot the northeast 1/4 of ►h- -i. 1/4 Qorai.; i/x ^ southwest fti ir the “°“‘'>®«herly froa, the northeaaterly line of the Ora Park ahh ^- ition; thence northweaterly along r:r“'‘’ "■ “ “■ - .. •long aaid eaat line to a point 7 an u • “f ‘ho north.o.c cornar- thence ueaterly 370 feet; thence aouth 41° weat 239 f of Hilloo n • ®“ «"t«rline Drive; thence northweaterly along the centerline of HiUeu ,, . point deacribed aa follow.: "Co^.encing at the aouthweat corner of the northeaat 1/4 of the northweat 1/4 of Section ,n .k weat line 3n-i t ’ "“"‘herly along the aoutherl fer y roe. ...d point at right angle, to „iUo„ northeaaterly --.P Une to the weat line of the aouthe.at 1/4 of the northweat 1/4 of Pago 3, °ss° HIIIIIIIIMiiiiii U 8 I 4 •t. cr^ / \ O ,3^ ■MF » J. _■ ‘ U--1 i*a \i - !-I ( ffSB ' I ' • ■ ‘I MVr_"':rrHl Li^ il1: • ., C »■ / f \ 'ilV-'S / rlr;: W--1M rT'^'> 1 .f /' I < / N •• » \ vr/ A Ihif/ ‘—I\ / r> c ^ n>«§ v.-i “1 n fl’-" \H' I W*.---- « •‘vi <j,r$f ? ? ./ 1 v 1 - V I ■ V \ I (■>I 1 ^ J ■~|ga't'i,'.j|fj..-^.^,.^__ .xy ^ y. *n o i>o o c:> r-'*» rr < (./> t n___r >____~TL_ 1 ) To: From: Brian f-Lilmcr and Jeanne Mabusth Michael P. Gaffron. Assistant Zoning Administrator Date: September 20, 1984 soil «^^J‘t|^Conditions For Dog House Kennel Proposal or^a^y syj?em?" big enough for a mound Garaye slab is over ex i eif-< r-in m • r- official recommendiuonTi-EhSt thS’iiFlge Sfab^SI ^emoCed!®’ drffnfilfd °^otentral “ at'"’?hi; sttT^ “*^tle alternate Should be preserved for al t^r^'^tS^^f^e tS■^a:r^^: ^^ifng^h^-L.‘ = that*'t-h^“:‘"? P til^"thi:^‘■^% - likely would be saturated to very near°c^^f*^ surface and indicated he would not want to surface in the spring. He better knowledge of the high seasona^ mound without a ".on.toring a number of insplctf::"::rL ‘'t‘ra"year Agrcufturr^E«tension “serC;ce‘'^'"h^ s' ‘be U. of t1. funr?' system be Investigated furthe^trSer existingFunctioning, and relate it'c p^xi, determine how well it is ".ight be found With f> hum^-'w^^e »bat ^vai'^ati""" .7?rrs:ii;"'^::rwr'" ^nd sou would allow a system under only the^most* ®°*^s see encountered, §'^i Sting lot configuration The ri f ^ e>-'treme conditions due to approve a system on theie“iSi 1 s obligation would be subject to meterina of inxi ^ system was allowed, it quality testing. I drnS? believe the^r''f'’^"i°'’‘= Qroundwlte^ system to be constructed for- a n City should allow a new minimum acceptable soil conditions°*" use unless the .C..U00 g 0.. .c.bl_e, wher^n^^^^aTp\:r:%^o ex^s^nL.*^^ that no animal fecal materiaTs^ar^’• repeately told and that the only discharne ^^^‘"°^*^oed into the system stalls and from dog wash water^ ^hencS'^'"^^^kennel intensity effluent which might not form expect a low- thiB IS found to be the case toh ^ sludge or a biomat. If groundwater quality or liquid volumn^rt?° ^PPf^eot problems with' feel fairly comfortable ^ ‘^ould kennel for the exi-tiL^f^® ^ system to be the human sewage element, i e P without 9 i.e. can t nook up an apartment to it. ^■or “V!eeLceSent be consi.ered pCb^i ‘^eaUh -H^nalr: con"du?o “s allow a holding tank to serve a nL dwelUnq'^Cniri^''^ where municipal sewers are not pending. a kSiLl « location system serving the propertv nnw c:hr,..i h k . ^ »'®nnel “graywater" determine whether it could be safely e'-oand^H^^'"further to const, uction and use of the Propo::i^k:n^:?‘':^:irSi:r‘' -V. 2 '■• »• 7?*t f 4i: ''Ayr-™ 0 i (■ .R :w \^L^/ -■i^^^ts<--‘-/|j '1^ © © \ /• .mt \ -1^ ►r v V %‘^ <\ y- v-'r, . . ir^,.f)' '^; r ® ,/ii'i:!; /I * */: '- ■-'i* / r I s5 0 f'X'i Ai » • /•'.V © / . . •:' • * V ' ' * -/ ^•**T 7 , ‘•t A ^ y •* * r -^%V-c \ Q * t - / .tASL •f.v a-L // M / '/ •' ^^ <ww/^ ic ■ V - / -* ■"i'/' ? •V: />'S^ } in '0^ Ni''- <V v-=-^: \ \. \I \ • 1 m \ m 1 ^ V s %kr-\'' \ • ; m 1 ■«ji-r.' ! ^ '1 > ■ V« \r*' ..K'' /; '-■7IV: lY y^'*. ., ■© *k_-* *^**Ei. *•»• ©{! 't. »> «W»iv--------- . - V V ,n X iC^i \ I -p-Ad I ■. 1: \ 1^1- " '\ '>•11 • ‘Xr<lf\ ‘•i .. / "I''^-<3 / \ ‘f t I' , «k. i< X •. '' .- r \ /"0 i . < - r i^. X / < § \* * if '*■I ^ / ' * » s i* * ■ I ■ I I V ' t o o m “T3 13^ S5 ■ .'^ X' 0 f TO; f m j mI y. V FROM: DATE: SDBJs Mayor Butler Mark Bernhardson, City Administrator Orono Council Members Planning Commission Members Michael P. Gaffron, Assistant Zoning Administrator July 17, 1986 #1043 Gary Beito, 1169 North Arm Drive ~ Variance - Public Hearing Zoning District - LR-lB setback variance to construct a 3-season ^formation To planning commission - POT.TCV ru»NGP - to tho 1^* 1 ..t ^ ^ "®'' construction is no closer recommendatLn^ by®the^c"ity*’Attornev^" Based onthat policy L Lw chained oh 7k concurrence of Council, List of Exhibits - A - Application B ~ Plat Map C - Property Owners List D “ Survey with hardcover calculations Pertinent Facts - Side Setback Hardcover Existing 6.5*-7.0* 17.0% Allowed/ Required 10' 30% Proposed 7.0-7.2* 18.5% Variance Discussion - tha““mi Project with staff and at woiid be “o cloier to the ®® ^^e por^i survey subsequently proved this^to be trut-^h®" *^*’® has recently changed as noted above, and a ^ari7nce"7s r“equirid7 contractor had obtained the necessary ?hft'he "had not."° xie rorfias "be°en to^i^d^lu^ a permit is issued, a penalty fee will®bi®fsiissid/“°^ "^"'® » ^ Zoning File #1043 July 17, 1986 Page 2 of 2 The proposed porch, deck, and stairway will not encroach on any existing neighbor's views norwill it deprive the neighbor of air or sunlight. The porch continues the line of the existing house, which was constructed less than 10* from the lot line. Staff RecoaBendation - Staff recommends approval of the side yard setback variance based on the following findings: 1. The proposed addition continues the existing line of the house. 2. The proposed addition has no visual effect on neighbor's views, or light or air. ■, IV T • CITY » ^ y V-/ c / ^ • I ^7^ / 0^ ^ c ' ✓* J » .•., ... Arx-r^Cre, ORONO - VARIANCE APPLI - /S' -* ^(ci ‘O m- j il jSb. OT> lIm . Init-ial Application Fee $150.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $75.00 (no change from original application) After-the-Pact Fees (Double application fee) PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address / / 9 f)A/}\c>e.• Property Identification Number (P.I.D k I 4 t *.) on -in - 23 iM ooGo ♦ V . Please check one - Is the property abstract or torrens? Please attach legal description to required survey. application if not included on APPLICANT Name Phone Mailing Address //A^ X/(g> . ->^573^/ OWNER Name CK~^ /Vy_ _t Phone Mailing Address J /k). /0^2f'y\a^. S'- /.S- 7Date Property Acquired _ I i«lffiOdQ_notX^also own the adjacent parcels of land. (month/yea J.*' PRESENT OSE OF PROPERTY Present Zoning District Present Use of Property Residential Other (specify) DESCRIPTION OP REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $ // C^O Describe request in detail:_ _ _3 " VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area Setback Variances ( I Other Lot; Width Front Hardcover Side Rear) f ^ S i ! HARDSHIP Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty resulting from strict enforcement of zoning regulations_ _ _ _ _ _ _ DESCRIPTION OP ONUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code Requirements; _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ T7j> ^ REQUIRED SUBMITTALS 1. 2. Completed Application Form Certified Property Owners List of owners within 150' (you can obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Govt Center 348-3271). 3.Stamped, legal sized envelopes (#10) pre-addressed to each of the names on the above list with no return address. 4. 5. Certificate of survey including hardcover calculations as required. Plat Map. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your variance application is not complete if the above information has not been included. APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay all fees and/or unusual expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that Date 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 ti)is reque Owner's Signature Date Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. h'~2 9’ 0^*' / /. •7* - /. c* -N •A* *• VI-- ! r- i ^1 ^ __» ;ll - I s?- iS » - •! I *« ? * \ -n<» a « . I tn 00 jj2i:l■4ra*w ‘I -, - 2 I ^rt <1^ •. -............... ^.t,->y..=.-..-2'• — »^* * ff — %•[ i::i ...................... \ •cy >'«£r:U A' \ TO^ r^re^^V's.-^6'. •■l'<i», ••S;!!S a •siS'i'J^':- y ^nr 5pt'3 • t |*T • ft >« •• •••••• i,V!?-;r-i-'0=v^ Lrj»S-l. !#■* — ■■^*" i% •• • • \ 4 • • • ■V»«_____L»/ i —"-r^- 1 i t»«^i <• ( m •k ^X* 3^r?i >. I fWiffUWM.ULtf sOi m > w o ir- ss M U U O UM M 09 <0 (/I i* M ^ o _ ^ o ni o m H „ Nl < o m o ut M Ml ^^ o m %J•^J Ml Ml > » O M __ ► H » •O O ^ rv» m m -< > M O > » ^m M H O o 90 o HS -oni > V33 O XI elm n XI |i rti Ml > m m Ml S ^ ^ ^ m r- I M M >JIrv» Mi M M C. ^ O Ml 3S|C* _ ■***3o iS:: 23gS|5 Ml Ml m io S » M > o I- 70 >» X o3 :o rr? H> 70 \ -< I* o XI o XI I M M >J • IN9 Mi M I M ••- %i Irs» Mi M is! ISIHIbit.sfe X o 5 -o r*i U m > XI \ -<gm g|W ^ 2 » XI m M n -o o w M > M 9o> c m M or* 09woo mm ^ 3 C 1Z 3 r- Mm r* m Mr c— ^ 3 •Ml O Z m S fjMl _ r 3 Ml Mi > M Q^ < z a M^ m . < om o M M Im Mi o IM >4 N 9 N. O IM ) i ill • Mi ♦ j 1 CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY Prtportd fofS Bci TO_________________ ^ )(t^T f i r t/p«/jf. Hc*-.»,r - 92;?^ /70 r #1043 i* V •• „ ».'v.‘ * . ^7 SI? -I T-Wc '/v/r^ f 3r>a9 .• X ' /7. c>% rrwr>«. , 2.0 fxC. L-»<'»' ^rfX''’ J £7'^ i”"*. 28'T s^. _ rjs.cy- '-. ic <- r 2«9.95 /V;/- — 289.4/AV«i -- firck •M**’—^ .Tj»fc » "# I; t«k { »<«>/** «*4*r tH>\U»ih«M * /3S./2 iM#««. /Mff -'.4 .K '» ■> 1^.61 t^"f-m.oo rui- ICGM D£SCRIPTI(^^/l io^s 17 Cliff 3(tf and Me /»ryA i/z of let 37, SKARP AHO LINDQUl£T*S f£R^JHILL j according h fht rturded pUi mreoff Hennepin Coonijj Minnesoh. AfifA * IBffBi s^. rr, * 042 Acree GBNBRAL NOTES: • « I ••31.3 Danotas iron aonuBant Oaaotaa croaa chlaalad In eoncrata Oanotaa axisting apot alavation iMirt Oanotaa propoaad spot alavation - - Oanotaa aurfaca dralnaga Oaahad contour llnaa danota propoaad faaturaa Solid contour llnaa danota axlatlng faaturaa Propoaad top of foundation alav. Propoaad baaaxMnt floor alav. ^ Propoaad garaga floor alav. ■ BeNCHNAlUd ALL MBTaO LAMP SOBVBYORS t340 Oaaiato ttraat Uag taka, kNaaaaala S936S Pk: 475-1433 X haraby cartlfy that thla aurvay, plan or raport waa praparad by aa or undar ay diract auparvlslon and that X aa a duly Raglatarad I.and Surveyor urxiar tha lava of tha Stata-of. ifinnaaota. .v_,y •r^.'vy_ _ _ _ _ DATS REG. NUMBKR tCXLC 1" =■■ 40' •OON Mac Z file no. 6i>0 ‘fO-B TO: FROM: DATE: SOBJ: Mayor Butler Mark Bernhardson, City Administrator Orono Council Members Planning Commission Members Michael P. Gaffron, Assistant Zoning Administrator July 12, 1986 #1045 Art 6 Cleo Bloemendaal, Variance - Public Hearing 145 Cygnet Place - Zoning District - RR-Ib atUiched\arage additionsetback variance to construct an List of Exhibits - A - Application B - Plat Map C - Property Owners list D - Survey E - Proposed Floor Plan Pertinent Facts - Front Yard Setback Required Existinq 50' ~33.1'Proposed 27' Discussion ~ g^iLis^ti^n t\°arrerdfii- cSrverany%1.‘t°/„7i"on"of necessarily encroaches closer to the’pr^7ert\%?ner^ the neighLrhood^°" ® significant visual effect on Staff Reconrondation - staff recommends approval based on these findings: iAto® thf 50-^®ront*'h alreadv encroaches existing garig^'i/M^nrSit^the t""' thi closer to the right-of-wav due .house will be at this location. ^ ° ^ curve in Cygnet Place 2. No significant visual effect on the neighborhood, standards were in effect’^for^ this"area^^ restrictive setback MJ g^4 t / CITY OP ORONO ~ VARIANCE APPLICATION rci- £c<r /^JcCo^ Rene«:i V^?ianco'?ee1?5'Jo‘’ino -ch additional variance, application, ^uj<v-<N urK \<e_ :R 113^7 pie.-. Lof (o Block PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address ) 0^^ ^ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - -— Property Identification Number (P.I.d.) ^ 4/„//0^/JL Please check one - Is the property _ _ abstract or torrens? required*Purvey!description to application if not included on applicant J _____ Phone OWNER Tt------------------------—Xi—111 ----- Name /y/ Phone Mailing Address J?)A Date Property Acquired >117 (month/year) _ _ _L!f!!.irrr“^’ adjacent parcels of land. PRESENT USE OF PROPERTY Present Zoning District /{^ —/ 8)_ _ _ _ _ Present Use of Property ^e^sYd ential DESCRIPTION OP REQUEST Other (specify)a Estimated Construction Cost $ Describe request in detail:a Y'cvQ -e c\cXA>4-j C7y\ VARIANCES REQUIRED _ _ __ Lot Area Lot Width Setback Variances ( Front Hardcover Side Other Rear) HARDSHIP Describe undue hardship or practical dif.ficulty resulting from enforcement of zoning regulations; / /-i ^ ern *y^nC.-SL_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ __ strict DESCRIPTIOM OF DDDSltAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning ./J S '^0 ct.n(LcU\jt^ c_ _ _ _ _ _ Code Requirements; "X REQUIRED SUBMITTALS *1. Completed Application Form Certified Property Owners Lis^of owners within 150* (you can obtain this list from Hennepin County^0ep^tt(neht of Finance A-603 Govt Center 348-3271). stamped, legal sized envelopes (#10) pre-addressed to each of the names on the above list with no return address. 4°''- ct. -r:h\fisrtificate of survey including hardcover calculations as required. Plat Map. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your variance application is not complete if the above information has not been included. APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay all fees and/or unusual expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. Applicant's Signature OWNERS SIGNATURE ^—L Date 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. r\ Owner's Signature Date Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. o n N M #1045 • Ul yj I CMN UJ 5;o 5 q: i CM :6 CM II. I < Ul 3 mJ inroinin -J 10 Ul : 2rS3 O o H M -i o ^ CM «i -I O o < ® . >• -J UJ CM CL CM «J m UJ 5 "'SS >- UJo c UJo 5§ IN. •H UJrUJo inro in in I o in CO «-4 Ul oo <c u.ss in lU S:^ a H o < QC -J UJw Ul § •J CM CL O CM CM Z <13$ f!.gS ^ U UJ I ^ o m r m CO o m o UJ < § Ul 3^ Ul < OM Hz in Ul M in K> in in lUz0 >•a i»i£»i UJ U »-• O e CM Oo in X ^ o a X CM a CM m Ulvgr* >- ^ u u. O X Ul M u in S 8 in < oc a in CD UJ S3 CJ <^ a z 2 o < o tn o i: CL I o o Ul 5g o o Ch CL*4 O o CMoo CM CL CM Kl LU CM X I O rs. >. •M u ggM Ma a 55u u ro in UJ in u3 Ul Ul I<ro oo c r in o o in cn Ul uir X < < -) “) o z^ Q mJ o gn 2 nf a X o tf 2 tJQ Z Ul < < >- \ Cj 2 O Z <g ^ Z < Ui Z UJ CL X ^ OfZ tu < ID ^O fL zi z a CL UJ aX <H aaa i •-4o o £ Ki a CM in Ulvgr- >- -• o ul U inKI in in H Ul I<ro o CM CM Oos 53 O CL gO > -1 o ►— tt Uln n o Z QC I o z CM O CM -J O 0 •J KI CL -J CJ < H H m Ul Ul CM X1 o z >- UJ -4 o in < in_ CM H CD O»n o o m in in •J & Ul I o ZUl in in < Ul >• > U H K> in O CM oo K> CM -Ja g g 55 CM I >-u M CL Ul h- >• GO in UJ M CL UJI- Ul o *j m < KIgsUl tocn Ul CL CL I o in CO X zM M > > Ul > < CO K> oo 23 e Z O UJ X3 ozo•J zaa < Ul 5 CL Og zUi u oc o z o UJ < >- \ <C UJz r X < ff- 1 C 1 Ch o o o o <r o I ID i 5gg u. Z Z 2M Ul ^ H cn UJ Ul u. u. M Z O O Ul Z X CJ < z O Z UJ < >- z < Z Ul zn z X ^CL o H za 3 \ < t I* C i Plfit or Survoy for Arthur E, ELoeaendaal of lot 6j Block duan laJco Additloo HofiMpin County f lllnnoaota I r- ■ •<# \ \ k ■ n Certlficat* of Surrey: I hereby certify that thle is a true and correct representation of a surrey of toe boundaries of lot 6, Block 1, ^an lake Addition, and of the location of all hidings thereon, and all risible encroachments, if any, from or on sold land. Inis surrey is made only in oonneetlon with a mortgage loan nov being placed on toe propertyI and no liability is assumed except to the holder of such mortgage, or any other interest acquired by reason of such mortgage. It la understood and agreed no monuments have been placed for the purpose of establishing lot lines or boundary oomers. Seale: 1" - 60* Date I 9-29-67. Gordon R. Coffin Reg, No, 6o64 land Surveyor and Planner Long lake, Ittnnesota I 'nfin I TO FROM: DATE: SOBJ: Mayor Butler Mark Bernhardson, City Administrator Orono Council Members Planning Commission Members Michael P. Gaffron, Assistant Zoning Administrator July 16, 1986 #1050 Thomas R. Browne, 760 S. Brown Road - Variance - Public Hearing Rolling District - RR-IB Application ** Front yard setback variance to construct a 2 story addition and attached garage. List of Exhibits - A - Application B - Plat Map C - Property Owners list D - Survey E - Construction Plans Pertinent Pacts - Prior Required Existing Proposed Front Yard Setback 50' 37.2' 37.2' (replacing old front porch with 2-story addition? new den and garage will both keep 37.2* setback but are considered new structural encroachment into front setback zone) Discussion - Applicant removed his screen porch to replace it with a 2-story addition. However, because the proposed den (an afterthought) requires a variance because it is new structure in front setback zone, applicant also is requesting at this time approval for a new attached garage on the north side of house. Note that applicant put in a new septic system about a year ago and is relocating his driveway further north to a safer location, with the City's and County's blessing. There is substantial vegetation screening along the front lot line. The proposed 37.2' setback for all the additions conforms to the 37.2' setback of the porch that was removed. The additions will have no effect on the existing septic system nor will they encroach on any future drainfield sites. There is a potential that the garage might be moved further to the rear a few feet depending on the exact location of the wetland boundary. h r . y- Zoning File #1050 July 16, 1986 Page 2 of 2 Staff Recoaaiendation *■* Staff recommends approval based on these findings: 1. Proposed additions are no closer to front lot line than the previously existing screen porch. 2. Additions to this house in other directions than those proposed would be limited by the location of the wetland and by the existing septic tank location. 3. Garage location is based on the new, safer driveway access under construction and is limited by proximity to wetlands. 4. The additions are screened from the road by existing shrubbery. W-W . mi? .1 *1 r\\ '«I I I . / \ ' • / / ^/^O Uo^ * / ^ S/A- / - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee $150.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $75.00 (no change from original application) After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address 7/V? C fy/P O'<~C Property'Identification Number (P.I.D.) V'J? ncin Please check one - Is the property (/^abstract or _ _ torrens? Please attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. APPLICANT Name lAcmAb \U /3fioiUil^ i\ ^Phone V7?-915 7 Mailing Address . p /?!,, /I OWNER Name /. /? 4- S /? /)/^ULL' t'\ P Mailing Address 1 & Tj Date Property Acquired^ IR _ _ Phone ^ 1 1'7_ _ _ _ _ _ Pm U. ay. -)-^7.^ J9hL ^S'39 / 4 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ (month/year) I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. PRESENT USE OF PROPERTY ' Present Zoning District Present Use of Property DESCRIPTION OP REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $ /S.OOO Or) Describe request in detail; M l^iL AuT/i... » u s' ^CU-' Oi. 4 t* P\ ^ Alof L-tirrmf 7 c VARIANCES REOOIRED *Y Jc-„y. U'/t-yT lu K/.t/v. “ - /Vrc'.{ ^Krri.^ t u’c Iv Zt Lot Area Lot Width Setback Variances ( X Front Other _ _ Hardcover Side Rear) --sru»ji/e-y i HARDSHIP Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty resulting from strict enforcement of zoning regulations ; .or ^u. U Q-O 'y. __1/ ~ I't'/.'y A tr>// f L V f j O V:’ //l/’/v . 0 7. ~ C/fl Cr* y C /nany /?fCic/a.^Yl »-* Sy.^ t*C</?//y / 7 he LCir\f(>tt r ^ .T/\_ /I . G 7tf^, k>. TK.tt£ DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS tV't/L //>< Zl.// Describe unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code Requirements s Oa^ Tc ^r?<k /AnU c n / £^i^t c../p /. l^^» CkAt\t± t'i 7 l> ft jVjL'lt Ltf*K,ti>A 7~(T K f c\tJ. ' C r\ 7Zv<* /^/\ Kai/£ d it y/ii,'Ay ot{ » L. ust'. REQUIRED SUBMITTALS Completed Application Form Certified Property Owners List of owners within 150' (you can obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A*603 Govt Center 348-3271). Stamped, legal sized envelopes (#10) pre-addressed to each of the names on the above list with no return address. Q)Certificate of survey including hardcover calculations as required. Plat Map. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this^ application. Please remember that your variance application is not complete if the above information has not been included. APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay all fees and/or unusual expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. Applicant's Signature' / /(r ^ A' >1/Date L~ -JC OWNERS SIGNATURE The owner hereby ackowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents. Commission members, and Council members for purposes of investiga tion and verification of this request. Owner's Signature J . A Date /- Xv - // 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. w ,-vr A'" N't fi> V •ji Certificate Of Survey for Thomas R. Browne in the SE'A of Section 3-117-23 Hennepin County, Minnesota <sL4^.7 ■■sT? q ro lOfo.tO (T\Txr u •-N, /\ ^ o *^1 W Cofrxeir* c+ion 5-in-Z ■S"viw Unt »f s.E '/4.~,f seel;o►, 5r,\^Tz^~y the\lSndarIer^f'?h' fill o^'^th^wls^ of the Southeast quarter of Sectloft Southwest quarter the 5th Principal Meridian EXPFP? th^ J ’’^nge 23 best of Of all existing buUdlngrthe^eon U riopfnnP/®®* 5”^®°^- ^he locationprovements or encroachments. ’ purport to show any other im- COFFIN & GRONBERG, INC. Mark S. Groiiberg LiiC No. 12755 Engineers & Land Surveyors Long Lake, Minnesota 5 ^ 1^3 H r<» >k « To:Mayor Butler Mark Bernhardson, City Administrator Orono Council Members Planning Commission Members Proa:Michael P. Gaffron, Assistant Planning & Zoning Administrator Date: Subject: July 17, 1986 #1056 Olai Hanson, 1390 Railroad Avenue Variance - Public Hearing Zoning District - LR-IA Application - Variance to side yard setback to construct a 20* X 24* detached garage. List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Application Exhibit B - Plat Map Exhibit C - Property Owners List Exhibit D - Survey With Hardcover Review Pertinent Pacts Side yard setback Hardcover - 500-1000* Proposed i* - 7.5* 33.6% Allowed or Required Variance 10* 5* 35% Discussion Mr. Hanson wishes to construct a 20* x 24* detached garage on his property. He is requesting a 5* setback from the side lot line to minimise the degree of angle needed to enter the garage. (Note that the gray- colored single garage belongs to his neighbor to the north). Mr. Hanson*s house is connected to the new Crystal Bay sewer system, so there is no potential encroacliment on drainfield to consider. Building/Fire Inspector Tom Jacobs notes that a garage less than 10* from the lot line should have a firewall along that side, i.e. sheetrock on that inside wall along the property line. There would not appear to be any encroachment on neighbors views or light or air. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the side yard setback for the detached garage, conditioned on the wall next to the lot line being constructed as a firewall, based on these findings: 1. Garage location near lot line will reduce the angle needed to enter the garage. 2. No encroachment on neighbors views, light or air. f S. . 4 » / CITY OP ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION /' ‘S c: Init.ial Application Fea $150.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $75.00 (no change from original application) After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) _ PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address /3? O Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) /O - //3 '*')/ Please check one — Is the property V abstract or torrens? Please attach legal description to application if not included on required survGy« APPLICANT Name /OCA I 4/A^SQ a J_________ Mailing Address f' O !2J^ Phone ^7^- OWNER Name f-__________________ Mailing Address O V^oX / 2-'^ Phone Date Property Acquired / Qn'y (month/year) I (do) (^o not^also own the adjacent parcels of land. PRESENT OSE OF PROPETl Present Zoning District 4- ^ Present Use of Property Residential Other (specify) DESCRIPTION OP REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $ Describe request in detail: ’2.aX’2^tJ VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area Lot Width Hardcover Setback Variances (Front x‘ other ^ ^ Side Rear) O jfArpt (OVER)A HARDSHIP Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty resulting from strict enforcement of zoning regulations; ir^rr> 20' ' DESCRIPTION OF DNDSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code Requirements; ^=^/^T7A/6> ^ -7-0 JH/prE A-i\JLfAJ JA) TTH T7/ f • ^ . REQUIRED SUBMITTALS Completed Application Form. Certified Property Owners List of owners within 150' (you can obtainjthis 3 ai^th-i-fi llgt ^r^-327n) Stamped, legal sized envelopes (#10 ) pre-addressed to each of the names on the above list with no return address.v#. 5. Certificate of survey including hardcover calculations as required. Plat Nap.I The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that yo.tr 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 Adminis '.rator, agrees to pay all fees and/or unusual expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. Applicant's signature OffNERS SIGNATURE 2A /•Date ^ '3 ^ ^ ^ The owner hereby acknowledges 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 investigation and verification of this request. Owner's signature t f Date L O 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. V • it ■-V AlLi ____OR ly) '\ MAXW^L I ^ '< T. ■ > X •% 3 :VI ^ \•L ^t* ^•OArl.<£ .* ^ i OK 4 U'S ADO. •- » li \ ' !S 'A iCiiys Ta C«/►-to L -.y TO. : •; \ ■ill '.. '.' i. '»,,, >.' // <^>-y ^ ’ :^7 :.,7/ J V bay/. V/ J / / r‘ * ' ^ I ^ 4 lilltl - ____ MINNETONKA ' / ;t» - n4V '’■^ ' fik-'-tVd'iiiSi,:::k ■- f 3"!'4 - ' 5 AVg. . '■=('*'* /1.,,, <ORYSTAL >w>-.'b AY /(*» ^‘^■' • - ••i ’'s ?<*‘l i * »• '♦IJV »'MTKAffi/ - 2 '^0 5 3i^] PWOSPgCT i. 3m' nt IK r ■( ‘ -. .V .. iiV. 51 - n _ - V# < ^r*)' <o M:7)G . . -------- .. HJ4._J (s^)h . ,C d I’ll ^ ...........,.\)iJ5 A.-J> Cl) AT I . . ui a t »m 0 •% • > 7T:rT^/#.4v P j ‘'M - ^ ^ ’*• ^ r ^ ^ -if ##* *S^^4 ^OlAfmCitS / 6er4. /(,!> ^ TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJ: Mayor Butler Mark Bernhardson, City Administrator Orono Council Members Planning Commission Members Jeanne A, Mabusth, Zoning Administrator July 15, 1986 ♦1026 M. Hilbilink/J. Vogt/Mrs. H. Peterman, 160 Old Crystal Bay Road - Preliminary Subdivision subdivision application #1026 back to the • K ^ recommendation regarding the need to establish future access and access easements within the subject property* ^ List of Exhibits - A - Hilbilinks letter of 7/11/86 B - Staff's sketch of access corridor within plat C - Staff sketch of future roads D - Staff sketch of future roads E - Blatz memo 5/12/86 In light of Planning Commission discussion at your last meeting regarding future access within the subject plat. Staff has enclosed a memo from the City Attorney dated 5/12/86 that a dresses nj^any of the concerns raised by specific members. Staff review Section 11.01 - Policy and Purpose of e Subdivision Regulations that may also give basis to staff's Co^i\”*fion input or direction from the PlanningCommission on the issue of future access. Council deems the access issue one of great import especially in undeveloped lands that surround the property. The Planning Commission is asked once again to address future access in relation to this property. Ihonfr> types of road acquisition or designation that review. The first is the through road wIZaV aesignating an access easement to the west border of clear - a through road to Crystal Bay Road). Staff would concur that the o « the access corridor for Lot 2 at Old Crystal Bay Road does not meet the safety or use level standards for a suitable Staff would recommend against the acquisition or designation of an access corridor along the northern border of the property. The next consideration would be a north/south link to Watertown ffvK • extension of Woodhaven Drive. Mr. Hilbilink (exhibit A) in his letter of 7/11/86 cites preference for an eastern access for his future homestead and a future lot. Glenn reviewing the southern undeveloped portion of this 1/2 section notes that an east corri«^or access would be at the most Zoning File #1026 July 15, 1986 Page 2 of 2 Watertown Road^would satisfy^a^ll safet access location on centralized access /or "unLleloped immediate west. Staff recommends that Zither an outlor^ ^ along the east lot line be Hec:^ i outlot or road to serve as a nortUoZt\^VnrtTa" f^tuTe^lfttrstZf o^w^^V^ the 30+ acre°parcel*”to th^^ to^b ' learned that plans to be reviewed at developed - preliminary the planning/engineering^staff for^ V^4?‘ Staff has advised City's request foH fuLre nLth^c^ ^^e and Watertown Roads. Staff sent^a ^sketch ^oodnaven locating the east access corriHnr current proposal extension of Woodhaven Drives i c* planner advises that an sketches (exhibits C & D). ^ proposed similar to staff's letter of duly 11, the west lot line of Lot 3 as a1 i f?*. access corridor along will be on the eaL “I''''® P^epert? quadrant section of inte”ectionrof Parcel (northeast Bay Roads) is developed, accZZ^will Zl It Crystal lot line at Watertown Road - safe"dlsta^^Z7rt.m f„tVrre"ctf^ considerati^s^tjverlooked^ by^Ztaff. ^re any other access Staff RecomBendation — along theVa^st /o/linis^of*Lots*2 S^f^/ ~ exhibit B)public road use. 2 S 3 for dedication to City for Preening Commission members do not feel thAt i«- i.. at this time to acquire future accesrcottidort necessary for Council's review and considZrluZn? ' July 11,1986 Re: Subdivision Peterman Farm To: Planning Members and Staff Dear Orono t^epresentati ve. Our plans concerning the portion of the Peterman farm ms are buying, is to build a home for our family as ^ to build a nL^»? ? ?’ towards the back of the property on Exhibit* of 4 to 5 acres. (See attached abiliVw This will give us or someone else the they“o SL?re? *“ The value in this property for us, is beino able to reir * F^^al 1* walkout to the attainoH th^^ purposes, this can only bettained through a driveway entering along the eastern T^nS w The slope and topography of thCland is much more conducive to a drivewAv Ainnn 4-hss 4. boundrary than it is along the west. T^rw^irincUn-* an estimated 13• to IS' feet towards the T»ll anS ITt area?“'^'^°“"‘**"^ property naturally drains through that imorovoH^^Kf requirements concerning P. * black topped roads for larger developements we have no intention of getting involved with th^t kind thirr‘'’“^^'°"* “--‘^inal purpose foT purchasing. rt property would be lost through such a developement ip%nC‘’:nra» «-’=tructlon'^3d ’ rr?;-r"'"ir- in tho i-lZ response to the devel opement of the property on y adjoins this property^ ^ sh^SiS brin«reir-"hat'’;^p:^; ertrr:‘35.^f:J “'^‘"^"=' TeetT^";ur “ra:S."S^en “:hr" tharfs^in g“st"n.‘’" P»P-ty Me hope you will give this serious consideration us and‘*th“''< costly and extremely difficult'onus and the four other familys involved. Thank you for your help in this matter. Sincerely, 7/e< HiIbelink yj{^^/ Mljke an "“ir • ^«a»S 3 f.i ‘ j "TO---- 1 •r: •. «•. ••*: - 1 •*^^ 1 *“T#T-*—^ r Iff®'*. PoPHAM, H aik , Schnobrich, Kaufman & D oty, Ltd . MEMORANDUM m-%• \ ' "' V- •S • . TO: PROM: DATE: RE: Mark Bernhardson Kathleen BXatz May 12, 1986 Subdivision Regulations ISSUES: The City Administrator requested the City Attorney to advisct the City as to the statutory and local parameters pertaining to the subdivision of land. Specifically, the City Administrator asked the following three questions: 1.If the subdivision meets all of the minimum zoning and subdivision requirements, does the City have the authority to require such things as fronting onto another street, a different lot shaped etc? 2.Can the City grant more variances than originally requested in order to facilitate a subdivision plan in line with the City's comprehensive plan? 3.Can the City, short of an official map, design streets to go through several proposed subdivisions or prospective subdivisions? ANALYSIS: In order to protect and promote the public health, safety and general welfare, sound orderly development, and the adequate provision of public services, Minnesota Statutes §462.358 grants municipalities the authority to adopt subdivision regulations establishing standards, requirements and procedures for the review and approval or disapproval of subdivisions. The regulations may contain differentiating provisions applicable to different classes of subdivisions, but must be uniform for each class or kind of subdivision. . i Minnesota Statute §462.388, Subd. 2a clearly states that the scope of a municipality's subdivision control powers includes the ability to set standards and requirements addressing, among other things, size, location, grading, improvement of lots, structures, public areas, streets, roads, trails, curbs, walkways, and the protection and conservation of flood plains, shore lands, soils and water. Finally, the statute states that the subdivision regulations shall require that the subdivisions be consistent with the municipality's official map and zoning ordinances. Chapter 11 of the Orono City Code sets forth the City's subdivision policy and regulations. The language contained in Section 11.02 articulates the City's policy and purpose for subdivision regulations, mirroring to a large extent the objectives and policy statement set forth in Minnesota Statute 5462.358. The City's regulations emphasize the need for consistency between the City’s Comprehensive Plan, sound, orderly development and the need to provide for the public health, safety and general welfare. Against this framework the answers to the three questions outlined above are as follows: 1. 2. The City can require that more than minimal zoning and subdivision regulations be met before approving a subdivision application. Minnesota Statutes, and Section 11.02, Subd. 9 of the City Code clearly recognize the City's ability to attach reasonable conditions to the subdivision of land. The conditions must not be arbitrary and should promote the general purposes upon which the subdivision regulations are based. For example, if a particular proposed access presents traffic hazards, a danger to the general welfare, or is not consistent with future development plans, the City can require that an alternative access be used. Obviously, personal taste cannot be a guiding factor as the regulations must be related to the scope of the powers granted to the municipalities by the legislature. Nothing in statute or the City Code prohibits the City from granting an applicant more variances than originally requested. Section 11.02, Subd. 10 of the City Code outlines the conditions upon which a variance may be granted by the City in the instance of a subdivision request. Subdivision variances may be granted if extraordinary hardship or practical difficulties would result from the strict enforcement of subdivision regulations, and if the variance would in fact serve the purposes of Chapter 11 to a greater extent. Variances cannot be granted if such a variance' would: a.Vary the provisions of the Comprehensive Municipa* Plan. -2- # • / f' r ' 0 b.Vary the minimum requirements for a lot as set forth in the Zoning Chapter as applied to the entire subdivision; and, c. Vary the procedural requirements of the Chapter. VJhile the City is somewhat limited in what variances it can grant, the language is clear that variances to promote the purposes of subdivision regulation are acceptable. The City should be advised, however, that it would not be appropriate to "trade" a variance to leverage a developer to make another change in the proposed subdivision. All variances should be based on hardship, justice, etc. as outlined in Section 11.02 and should not be used as means to accomplish ends that while acceptable are not directly tied to the granting of the variance. 3.The City may plan for the development of streets without adopting an official map setting forth the same. While Minnesota Statutes recognize that official maps are tools to effectuate the implementation of a comprehensive plan, the statutes do not require their use for the planning of streets. Should the City choose to address future traffic patterns and their effect on the City by adopting plans laying out streets and roads, it would be advisable that the plan be adopted in an orderly, schematic way. Specifically, the City should avoid the appearance that the requirements for roads are simply piecemeal decisions for the City, and not based bn any coherent plan. CONCLUSION: The Legislature has granted municipalities considerable discretion in regulating the subdivision of land within their respective jurisdictions. The discretion is to be guided by the goals of sound development and the protection of the community. Because the relevant statutes, case law and city ordinances do not specifically define what "sound developent" is, the City should be mindful that its regulations must have a rational basis and be enforced in pursuance of legitimate ends. KAB/jk 4675e -3- July 15, 1986 y /. UL 2 11906 iU Jeanne Mabusth Building and Zoning Administrator Orono City Offices P*0. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Dear Ms* Mabusth: It has recently come to our attention that plane for the development of Woodhaven sub-development are undL It Is fli* ^ Building and Zoning Administrator and the City Council llntl the plans considered, are proposals toannex the Woodhaven Drive cul-de-sac, and convert It to a "thru" street via new connecting roads to Old Crystal Bay Road and/or to Watertown Road! petition, we the undersigned members of the Woodhaven Homeowners Association wish to notify both you and the Cltv rnifn/»4i t-u *■ would Include development of V.’oodhaven Drive as a "thru" street^^^ woodhaven Homeowners’ Assoclatl^. limited access currently afforded by the cul-de-sac provides added security t^a thr.^ r ^or our children. Conversion of Woodhaven Drive from Wool'S »ot Only destroy these benefits, but would also detract PM^rUe”” oe“l»8 of the Woodhaven development and surrounding decision to locate in the Orono area, and speclflcallv ««terp;ov?L3“°Sf"^ l;fluanced by the safety, security and «ral-llL" s ttlng provided. We believe that conversion of Woodhaven Drive to a thru street would not be in our best Interest, would not be c“slst«t with «^ess arrangements of surrounding properties, and would not confl™ wUh CUv objectives of maintaining Orono as a semi-rural resldentlaJ™oIminlt“ rele«nt*io thTd‘'“,‘ »* consideredDrlvl Surrounding properties, and that WoodhavenDrive be permitted to remain as a cul-de-sac. Respectfully, e-mj. %cc: Orono Cl' (Ual / RE; Subdivision of Petermann Fann. July 17, 1986 s Dear City of Orono Council Members; ^ wife, our 5 week premature baby and our other two children are living in the basement of my parents house because we were un able to move into our new home as scheduled...can you please help! In April of this year I signed a purchase agreement to purchase the house at 160 Old Crystal Bay Rd. in Orono. At that time my under standing was that all the requirments for the successful subdivision of the Petermann Farm were being meet. It was also my understanding that the city had said there would be no problems with the subdividing plans as proposed. After looking at all of this and scheduling a closing date of July 1, I proceeded to put my present home on the market for sale. I sold my house and we scheduled a move-in date on my house of July 1st also which was the time the people buying my house had to be out of there home, ^erything was done that was required to make this a smooth transition for all parties involved. Due to swe very shocking and unforwamed decision, or lack of a decision, by the City of Orono, my family ended up on July 1st without a place to live for a month or longer. As you can probably imagine it is not the most comfortable thing for my wife who just had a C-section and had her leart set on bringing our last child home from the hospital to his own nursery, and our children to live out of a suitcase for a month or mere. There has been alot of undue emotional and physical strain on alot of people th^ all of this, like what do you tell a 3 year old when he keeps asking to go home, and the thing is,this should never have happened. The purpose of this letter is to make you aware that there are some real people*, effected by your decisions and if you could please take this into consideration and make a quick and understanding decision so we may be able to go on with our lives as planned. Thank vou very much. David W. Will /J-C ht^ai. S 4-lr I'l^h /utAx m i<^Ai /!/'iu^ly,y. ^ / ! ^ Ip//}nA-*^^{ nZ 4 -/^ /JAtl 'fZ'^ i i/) ^/h c^, UX^ 'Ai i ;?r o)pvi'c|i ot;./ ^oeri^ M<%\. t4 ■uxli/i^'t lu^r^ dfS//^ 1^^- [uU't "/k tii^i p''‘>pA/<-4 n£/X' oli^hnxi. /^t'AviL. /U4c) Iti:^i7t/? •"/'//v. (, PffKpA 2. /^VK7 /!>/7f/< 4.^<L 0 /I ' ^6h M ;l-^^yp^iurc i,v uiifcf-f/ kti.'U, 4>iCVT% ^^(- 0/Ul 6^/'</''*'<-'J-..........-^ ■ ^lu. liL Xi h Eflci^ 4ku ftMj kc^^TZ' AiC-^AO- L\0A'fe^li^ "jiOfirs 0-^i^ \ 1^ V-/ ^ I ^1A iJ HfXi,\ louWt-' I * r r X \l ^, A ^ ,\j ^,1 ,^ ^ 0 P5'l ()V .-A ^ . [\ (J c'L Wlcc’/j' i/\ 01,0/MM J,U Ctulivy'tl^Ct/,[/)/ V;'^ * tui'! ,pfrVl>r y-|^^ "l]^ __cU/e'-J /U I AC ^>V^eii Kc/itiv ■'IL')7 f\f^ tKVMTt, > '*(J^ cic^trVii pd/Um. >>' :? M\^ £>U/ \J i^m,iCA i^ Pr J/}.. • <1 ^0^- •'ll'' /ul^U-tl h\(]Clir UmT tul'ly, :>- \K / (cur^*.^ 1/5^7 * TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJ: Mayor ButlerMark Bernhardson, City Administrator Orono Council Members Planning Commission Members Michael P, Gaffron, Assistant Zoning Administrator July 18, 1986 #1037 John Busse, 1951 Concordia Street - Variance/C'^nditional Use Permit - Second Review List of Exhibits - A - Memo and exhibits of 6/12/86 B - City Engineer letter of 6/13/86 C - Applicants further submittal of 6/16/86 D - Notice to applicant 6/19/86 Discussion ~ tabled at your June 16th meeting, at which time applicant submitted an additional letter and sketch from his Cook, City Engineer, has reviewed this additional information, and has stated that he feels the new information does not change his original recommendation. (Glenn s written comments have not been received as of this writing). Note that the sketch submitted, showing the cross-section of the lakeshore yard, shows apparently the same slope as existing but does not show the new steep banks created on either side of the walkout excavation. Staff Reconnendation — ®9ain recommend denial of the requested variance and conditional use permit for grading in the lakeshore yard, findinq of bej^oflt to the quality or quantity Date: Planning Commission Members Michael P. Gaffron, Assistant Planning & Zoning Administrator June 12, 1986 Subject: #1037 John B. Busse, 1951 Concordia Street Conditional Use Permit - Public Hearing Zoning District - LR-lC Application ~ Conditional use permit and variance to regrade lakeshore yard to create a walk-out basement configuration. List of Exhibits Exhibit A ' Application Exhibit B - Plat Map Exhibit C - Property Owners List Exhibit D - Survey With Proposed Grade Changes Exhibit E - Hardcover Review Pertinent Facts - Half of the existing house is in the 0-75* setback zone. Total 0-75' hardcover existing is 21.4%, 0-75' hardcover potentially could decrease under the proposal, however, applicant has not indicated what items would remain or be removed. Slope of existing bank is approximately 70%, rising 18' ® horizontal 25' distance. This area is currently well-vegetated. ^ f - Relatively flat area, slope of 0-3%, is about 2500 s.f. (not including hardcover) in 0-75' zone. This area currently provides relatively good run-off absorption. - Flat area (5% slope or less) in 0-75' would be reduced to no more than about 1250 s.f. under the proposal, an approximately 50% reduction in effective run-off absorption dlTGS • - Regrading would destroy most of the vegetation currently helping to support the lakeshore bank. Neighboring properties on both sides have a uniformly flat lawn and a steep bank leading to the lake. Regrading to create a walkout would not be consistent with the immediate neighborhood. - As with most other steep lakeshore banks in the City, the bank is not readily mowable. Zoning File #1037 June 12, 1986 Page 2 of 2 Discussion The City Engineer has reviewed this project and verballv sees no benefit as far as run-off and sediment comments have not been received as of this writing. The applicant has not demonstrated any hardship or presented annlicani-^i' support of his application. You should request brfnV reasons for his proposal and perhaps ^ hardships to the property which have escaped this i w w JL w Vr • Staff Recomniendation of JCity Engineer's written comments, but as finding no demonstrated hardship nor benefit to find^^ifef^f^ or quantity of run-off to the lake, staff fails to v»>”iancl^ requ^st^^ approval of the conditional use permit and /^fPUCA-^T ’TO /^Pceu<uC prjt-QU'i^ 'AJ T ./'Cdc sj rc /T- .. / . A ^ A-1 T?, '^j/LC ir- nZoPeiUV /‘J Tt> ^ l^g cc .; T/%’ 7 - C’— TO /^tyr L /aj^Co •. r«rv ^Vud/f/ut«*Re. TO GENERAL LAND USE APPLICATION PROPERTY LOCATIONSite Address /<7^ J //.^ /•/ IT- \J Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) /3-//^- ^ j / Please check one - Is the property abstrso^- .^r- (for Conditional Use AppliLtions^ofTIT)— -- - - - torrens? description to application if not included onrequired survey. APPLICANT Name Mailing Address ^ Phone _fj 7' /v7/- OWNER Name.Phone ^ ^ Mailing Address ///^ , (month/year)Date Property Acquired / / I (do^^_(do_not.)-also own the adjacent parcels of land. y V FEES - CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS Residential^Gl^ssoM Institutional (church, school, etc.) Duplex Credit/Bldg Commercial/Industrial Use Land Alteration $100.00 a) $150.00 b) $150.00 c) $250.00 d) $200.00 f) r- Grading and filling - 101 cu. yd. or more Seawall, retaining walls within 75' of lakeshore PRD/PID - see fee schedule other applications - - -- $150.00 Commercial Site Plan Review (+ consultant fees) _ _ __ $250.00 Vacation $150.00 Easement Vacation $ 50.00 Easement Vacation With Subdivision OTHER APPLICATIONS - CONT. _ _ _ _ $250.00 Rezoning _________ $200.00 Appeals _ Other - see fee schedule PRESENT USE OP PROPERTY Present Zoning District Present Use of Property _ __ Residential Other (specify) DESCRIPTION OP REQUEST REQUIRED SUBMITTALS 1. Completed Application Form. 4. Certificate of survey. 5. Construction plan, if applicable. 6. Flat Map. The applicant and Property Owner must reme'iber that your not been included. reme4er tharyo^u"^pp!rca\7onT^^ ^PPli<=ation. pTe'a4;nni- hoon Complete if the above information has APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE ieque%4V/'lTVe®?on^ino^Admln information required or unusual expenses incurred in reviev/nf °th • P®V nli fees and/or \ Applicant's signature \ OWNERS SIGNATURE Date investigation and v^ication of 4is r4"uest. purposes of ^PP^^cant must have all suhm. , , Planning Commission Meetino pi • offices 25 days before th third Monday of each mo4h^‘ Commission Meetings are^held on thn * ✓ « If' BonesUoOf Rosene, Anderlik & Associates, Inc. Mil Otto C, Bofiestroo. P,E. [t H. Hoirne. /»£. 2335 IV. Trunk Highway 36 St. Paul, MN 55113 612 63&4600 Engineers & ArchitJca I ■ , 1 June 13, 1986 City of Orono Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Attn: Mr. Mike Gaffron Re: File No. 139-1037 Busse James C. Oison, P.E. • ’ '**1161986 Ctenn R. Cook, P.E. ketth A. Coftion, P.E, Thomas t. Noyes, P.E. Ruhard IP. Poster, P.E. Robert C. Schumcht, P,E. Marwm L. Sorvala, P.E. Donald C. Burgardt, P.E. Jerry A, Bourdon, P.E. Mark A, Hanson, P.E, Ted K, Field, P.E. Michael T. Raatmann, P.E, Robert R. PJeJJerte, P.E. Daeid O. Loskuta. P.E. Thomas IV. Peterson, P.E. Michael C. Lynch, P.E. Karen L. Wilid, P.E. James R. Maland, P.E. Kenneth P. Anderson, P.E. Keith A. Bachmann, P.E. Mark R. Rolfs, P.E. Robert C. Rasaek, A.i.A. Thomas £. Angas, P.E. Scott L. Young, P.E. Charles A. Enckson Leo M. Pawelsky Harlan M. Olson Susan M. Ebertm Dear Mike, We have reviewed the proposed grading plan submitted on the Busse property. The proposed grading would not significantly change the quantity or quality of runoff from the lot. Disruption of the bank could result in a negative impact grading of this type or projects in the past and we would not recommend approval of the grading plan. Yours very truly, BONESXROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC. Glenn R. Cook GRC:li 5752d 30 Year Anniversary * > COFFIN & GRONBERG, INC. SURVEYING. ENGINEERING AND LAND PLANNING 482-A TAMARACK AVENUE LONG LAKE. MINN. 65356 •• • C4AJr A--T- ^ - s>c» 473.4141 6-16-86 Planning Commission City of Orono P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Re: John Busse Property Grading & Drainage Plan Mr. Busse desires to create a walkout toward the lakeside of his house in ord er to help eliminate runoff water collecting against the foundation wall and I basement In order to have positive drainage away ??om the hlse a slight slope to pe lake is proposed, with the main portion of the bank re- ,P''0P0sed slope would be at a more gentle slope than nL exists which would allow water to percolate easier into the soil Also thp inirthe lake removed to reduce hardcover’and runoff During construction, a Silt fence would be Installed to prevent erosion into the lake, and all disturbed areas would be sodded right after construction. Sincerely. COFFIN & GRONBERG. INC. Mark S. Gronberg, P.E.«^S L.S. 1 .1J - i . • « 4 L ... CITY OF ORONO P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 ZONING PIIB 11(^0 37^ NOTICE OF PLANNING CONMISSION ACTION 473-7357 Date of Notice: 6/19/86 TO: John B. Busse 6300 Carslon Drive Eden Prairie, MN 55344 COPIES TO: • Variance/Conditional Use Permit Date Of Meeting: e'/H/ii Planning Commission recommends the following; Tabled; For reasons noted below NOTES AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS: ISformati°on*'rs%?p^poirSl p"r\"po^\7'‘’cit^ini!nti *>y??:?“li<=/hy<Jrologic information (please submit additional inforLtion by'^Monday/July ”,® Applicant's next scheduled meeting is confirmed as; Planning Commission - July 21, 1986 “nt\« X'zoningadditional information, please they are*availab^^Vi^^ official Planning Commission minutes. Wanning cX^issVon. approval by th^ TO: srf-. FROM: DATE: SDBJ: Mayor Butler Mark Bernhardson, City Administrator Orono Council Members Planning Commission Members Michael P. Gaffron, Assistant Zoning Administrator July 16, 1986 #1042 Thomas Maxwell, 3685-3725 Watertown Road Conditional Use Permit - Public Hearing Zoning District - RR-IA, 5-acre Rural Residential Application - Recjuest for conditional use permit for guest house use of second existing residence, in conjunction with combination of 2 parcels of + 5 acres each into a single parcel. F^rceis Exhibits - A - Application B - Plat Map C - Property Owners list D - Survey E - Letter from Arlie Thorpe F - Staff memo of 6/12/86 fisting Situation - Please see survey, exhibit D roperty A (Maxwell) is 4.58 acres including roadways, 4.39 acres excluding roadways. Property B (Thorpe) is 5.63 acres includina existinq'houses^^Tho roadways. Both properties contain^ houses. The house on property A does not meet front yard iC setback requirements. The house of property B not meet the front yard setback requirement. There is an existing barn/shed straddling the two properties, which is used by property A. Maxwell and Thorpe are r^elatives. Original Intent - and or enlarge the existing barn to be suitable for housing 6 horses. Code Requirements -* 1. Horse barn must be 150' from neighboring properties. Currently there is no setback with the existing barn\ 2. Allowed number of horses on Parcel A is 2 (3 acres for 1st horse, 1 acre for each additional horse). 3. Allowed number of horses on Parcel B is 3. 4. Allowed number of horses if A and B are combined into a single 9.82 acre lot (excluding roadway) is 7 horses. 5. Minimum lot area per residential building - 5.0 acres. Zoning Pile #1042 July 16, 1986 Page 2 of 3 guest houses: ®"y "R-lft” One Family used for thi ®^*^“°ture or land shall be permit” following uses except by conditional use G. Guest Houses. A separate dwelling constructed an existing undivided lot for the sole use of the occupants of the principal buildinos including their domestic employees or their non- regular lot requirements shall be met by the guest house. Discussion ~ Thorpe will deed property B to Maxwell in condit'ionaT uVe ^p^eTmi^ .linos^^^°d'’ a°Aow ''T^hAsirm'axlmum? ^Ihe H - /t-f- is currently s^L^nda^d*" in^^som'^e ^r\%p^^ houses^could n^o/like%^ bt'^don separate'" the^'^wo width, and setback^ without variances to lot area, gues°t houte!^^’' ® guest house use does not allow rental of the gues“hSuUicrarfo!°:hfch s°e“ems"fo'b"e 'a T^' ' rlnA^ed^^ut TunLs'l'the'yt*’"" "id residence"LHev^r"": Staff ReccHBBiendation — approva"l”o/AhV auest®above, staff would recommend follo°w?ng cind" tions? *'°“®® '=°"<3-tiona 1 use permit with the parcel.””^^ * ®"^ ° shall be combined into one single tax 1 Zoning File #1042 July 16, 1986 Page 3 of 3 2. The residence at 3725 Watertown is considered as a quest house, may not be rented, and is for the sole use of the occupants of the principal residence at 3685 Watertown and employees or non-paying guests, including Arlie Thorpe as a life-estate tenant. ^ J^PPlicant is placed on notice that a future re- subdivision into two separate building sites might not be approved by a future City Council because a number of variances would be required under current zoning code lot standards. ^ s W|pW /OO.CZ^ C llR \ CITY OP ORONO GENERAL LAND USE APPLICATION ## PROPERTY LOCATION /# <%r> ■ U/afprfnwn RnaHSite Address 43Lf Property Identification Number (P. I.D. ). Please check one - Is the property x (for Conditional Use Applications only) abstraiot-iM torrehs? \ Please attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. APPLICANT Name ThomAQ A - Maxw#>1 1 Phone A71-1<909 Mailing Address 1689 So. Watertown. Road. Maple Plain. Mn. Name Sami Phone Mailing Address Date Property Acquired 1968 (month/year) _ _l' l^l^kdjacent parcels of land. FEES - CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS V! $100.00 a)Residential accessory Use — $150.00 b)Institutional (church.school, etc.) $150.00 c)Duplex Credit/Bldg $250.00 mmmmm d)Commercial/Industrial Use $200.00 f)Land Alteration Grading and filling - 101 cu. yd. or more Seawall, retaining walls within 75’ of lakeshore PRD/PID - see fee schedule OTHER APPLICATIONS __ _ _ _$150.00 Commercial Site Plan Review (+ consultant fees) $250.00 Vacation $150.00 Easement Vacation $ 50.00 Easement Vacation V/ith Subdivision •V { OTHER APP r other - see fee schedule PRE ^ uPresent Use df Propertyi Residential Other (specify) DBSCRIPTIOM OP REQUEST Describe reque^ in detail: Permission to build stable to hQu<^«» 6 Rare Horses. //)>£• “r/r/J^ 7Jl ^ REQUIRED SUBMITTALS 1. Completed Application Form. 2.Certified Property Owners List of owners within 350* (you can obtai this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Governmen Cernter 348-3271) 3. Stamped, legal sized envelopes (#10) pre-addressed to each of the name on the above list with no return address. 4, Certificate of survey. 5. Construction plan, if applicable. 6. Plat Map. The applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your application is not complete if the above information has not been included. APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay all fees and/or unusual expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. Applicant's signature OWNERS SIGNATURE A Date ^ 3 The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorized reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents, commission members, and Council members for purposes of investigation and verification of this request. Owner's signature Date have all submittals into the Citv offirr^cj oc j i. <- Planning Commission ni . ^ne ^,ity offices 25 days before the third Monday of each month?* nning Commission Meetings are held on the 1 > ll 1 1 \ S CJ 01 ^ -o o —* o n> 0 o01 OJ ri- r*- “Q 0> —- rt- oi n> ^ o 1=“ 50 CL PI PI "S n n> rD o o •1 n 01 3 Oi 3 cn CJ1 u>cn VO O 90 Mn m 3!;; nf SB ni W H M nl m M S S M § H =tfc ' C a 3 09 CaJro 1 09 Iro CO oo 5 X o 3 5 CJ ni > »feSxS 3 »” H XI SB m Ti m r* f Nj r" M M r\> m ra m m vn 04 r# ti w ^ O I fZO^S><S=3 c*- S m 3 ni fv> n* H Uf Ml 04 Ml si s»issSS wi > 04 04 O $ I *"S3ra5S o m r» C > Z 04 S ^ Ml Zvn o 04 >^ o ^ z omoo 01 Ml ooo rn > XI > ni Z S§*is 3 fN» > Ml rn o M Tl Ml !il S o ^ Q O 9 rsi M »n 04 Z fB r* I fit •-•^35 ^ C I ^ g M ^ S 04 01 MIg Is* Ml H K -o rs c. u « ® S S ®u.iS m ^ 5" m m a o 04 IN» I IM 04 vn Ml Ml s SiiijgSS *0 09 Q Qr- Ml 3 5 o> ni _ > ► M3 04 _ * Ml 0> IN9 TJ > •r- H u u _gsisss a|aa»- ggiiSgs'> m z a a XI ? a3 S» W M WO *•*m r- m m ►-• ®S55§? S^KK M 04 O fV> 09 m m Ml XIXJ ^ ► ^ ® r- XJ o O IM SSinr-m •n M (/I o ^ssg^ r- 01 M M XI XI 55 I r CP XI XI I► oi>>c/i*- a ^ o; a H 01 s: ? 3 3 £i I^ > C C g fM3 -< 0) 3 S 04 Z _ Ml 01 Ml XI m m 04 Ml Ml OJ Ml z o a 04 3 Z Z O M > Ml HI o 5 ^ C •• 2r* Z XHi > > mi 04 01 z tJ z H o ^ I r- C Z > 0 61 O 01 M 0 m H 09 Z 01 2 O C I z m a fv» i5S»8‘^ ‘ t-< 61 m z z Ml O Ml 04 Ml a ^ z mSI23'" > m z 6 a z S a z S ” 55 SS ?oi55Srn z Ml I S^oogt;Zg--’ 3 §1^IM 04 m ^ H CD IM y*Ml 04 Ml z o o SSm’SS :?:3:3 8 > X o o or- _ r- -n z ^ m o Ml Q ^ z g -< 1 I rv> 04 Ml 04 oo 9» C ^ Q O iiss m 01 G1 61 m Z 3 f- 23332 m Ml Ml I! 3 f ro 04 CD5 Zs o Ml Ml Nfs» § Ch rni §3m • M ^ 04 Ml ■- f .. '1 ■■ c tt cc M f ^ il! Ill ;' 4'"f / / •' ,• * i! I I i '3/-<?£. ^ f, i / V A >' /» r/ tA^ ”A-a«-, i3, . -^LridtU-. -Z^X. / 9</y - ">vty ^ /V/-^ '~^t>^2^ -£-/• ^c^uJ/yie^&^ iAA~t:ht VVJA-^ . 'H - j2tJt^ ^ 'to 4UJL Ct^nyt!cJ^ CP- r^F(?[^DW[f fr^ JiK^e i I y To:Planning Commission Members Date: Michael P, Gaffron, Assistant Planning & Zoning Administrator June 12, 1986 Subject: #1041 Thomas Maxwell, 3685 Watertown Road Variance - Public Hearing List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Exhibit B - Exhibit C - Exhibit D - Exhibit E - Application Plat Map Property Owners List Survey Letter From Arlie Thorpe This application was originally Intended as a setback variance application to construct or enlarge an existing horse barn. After the public notice publication deadline date, Mr. Maxwell brought in a survey indicating that the existing barn is located partially upon the property of his aunt, Arlie Thorpe. ^ order to resolve this problem, Arlie Thorpe is planning K®"" Mr. Maxwell, and he will combine them, ^ life estate. Then, the barn construction will be able to meet the required 150' setbacks. But, there will be 2 residences on one property of 10.21 acres in this 5-acre zone, requiring a conditional use permit. Mr. Maxwell has made conditional use permit but not in time to be June Planning Commission meeting. The conditional use permit will appear as application #1042 on your July agenda. The applicant should be advised that if he formally withdraws the variance application #1041, we can refund a portion of the variance application fees. Staff would recommend tabling of this item, or accept applicants formal withdrawal if such is forthcoming. '1-0 ^ Toi Mayor Butler Mark Bernhardson, City Administrator Orono Counci1 Members Planning Commission Members Dates Michael P. Gaffron, Assistant Planning & Zoning Administrator July 17, 1986 Subject: #1044 James Erickson/Vicki Rizzolo, 115 Luce Line Ridge - Conditional Use Permit - Public Hearing Zoning District - RR-IA (Painters Creek - PRD) Application - Mother - In - Law apartment at walkout level of new home under construction List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Application Exhibit B - Plat Map Exhibit C - Property Owners List Exhibit D “ Survey Exhibit E - Floor Plans Exhibit F — Letter from Applicant Pertinent Code Sections 3(A) (7) "The Board or Council may permit as a dw^lUng^ temporary use of a one-family dwelling as a two family - Subdivision 3 (B), "The Council may impose conditions in I^jacent propertTe?." compliance with this chapter and to protect “ Definitions - 10.02. 19. "Dwelling" - A building or one or more portions thereof designed or intended to be occupied exclusively for residence purposes, but not including rooms in motels, hotels, nursing homes, boardinghouses, nor trailers, tents, cabins, or trailer coaches. A dwelling shall not be interpreted to include lodging rooms. 20. "Dwelling-Attached" - A dwelling which is joined to another dwelling at one or more sides by a party wall or walls. 21. "Dwelling-Detached" - A dwelling which is entirely surrounded by open space on the same lot. 22. "Family" - An individual, or two or more persons each related by blood, marriage or adoption, living together as a single ousekeeping unit; or a group of not more than four persons not so related, maintaining a common household. 23. "Family Dwelling-Multiple" - Any structure made up of two or more attached dwellings. Zoning File #1044 July 17, 1986 Page 2 of 3 including their domestic employees or their non-paying °guests” of following uses except by conditional use permits ^ ^ undivided”lot^Vr^v dwelling constructed on an existing occupants of the orincioal gSests^'All" domestic employees or their non^pSying houle!' regular lot requirements shall be met by the guest Discussion ho../’'.u";K a"ir t: 'iS’,S"sis‘a“T«r,' Specific Floor Plan Review would have tl travel thrif.„h%h apartment occupantapartment ai i>’’® “^ility room and basement to enter the with the Scherven application^^'^® "alkout door to remain would be consistent limi/iM“^se\"o\Te"cu°rre*;'l® "'^^’'P^^ry•• use variance, the City couldtne current owners (requring a new CUP for any future ed on ants, s, of e met mi ly IT the sting :ipal lying juest -law Udge ered lot uest were in a iting on a Zoning File #1044 July 17, 1986 Page 3 of 3 owner wishing the same type of situation). Or, you could impose an even more restrictive time limit if you feel there is a basis for it. Staff Recoomendation »ii would recommend approval of a temporary use variance and CUP to mother-in-law apartment to be created, finding that under the ^.onditions specified below, the mother-in-law apartment is in keepinq with the intent of the Zoning Code. Those conditions are: 1) The main entrance to the house shall remain as an open foyer, forcing the apartment occupant to *=»nter the apartment from within the mam house, as shown on the proposed design plans. 2) The direct access door from the garage stairway into the apartment shall be eliminted and replaced with a solid wall (consistent with Council action on previous applications). 3) This use variance is a granted on a temporary basis and shall expire at such time that the applicants no longer own the property. Any new owner would have to reapply for the mother-in- law apartment use. 4) The mother-in-law apartment shall not be rented out and is intended for the sole use of the occupants of the principal residence and their non-paying guests or domestic employees. n even CUP to er the ,g with foyer, within :o the I wall shall rn the er-in- ' ind is icipal i. % OFORONOGENERAL LAND USE APPLICATION fl I PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) ^ 5/ ~/ / ^3 torrens?Please check one - Is the property _______ abstract or (for Conditional Use Applications only) ----------- description to application if not included on APPLICANT /'L nri- 7^>r. phone OWNER S/ A"yy 7/ny /} Phone __ Mailing Address Date Property Acquired (month/year) I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. PEES - CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS $100.00 $150.00 b) $150.00 c) $250.00 d) Residential accessory Use Institutional (church, school, etc.) I Duplex Credit/Bldg f Commercial/Industrial Use $200.00 f) Land Alteration Grading and filling -- 101 cu. yd. or more Seawall, retaining walls within 75' of lakeshore PRD/PID - see fee schedule OTHER APPLICATIONS —-- - $150.00 Commercial Site Plan Review (+ consultant fees) __ _ _ _$250.00 Vacation $150.00 Easement Vacation _ $ 50.00 Easement Vacation With Subdivision s OTHER APPLICATIONS - CONT. __ _ _ _$250.00 Rezoning $200.00 Appeals Other - see fee schedule PRESENT USE OF PROPERTY Present Zoning District /f/f /y? Present Use of Property Residential Other (specify) DESCRIPTION OP REQUEST Describe request in detail: _/h <L ^ ^^QUIRED SUBMITTALS '^^1^ Completed Application Form. ^f2] Certified Property Owners List of owners within this list from Hennepin County Department of Fina Cernter 348-3271) /?//7? 350'\ ar^e A>( you can obtain 603 Government! \3 stamped# legal sized envelopes (^10) pre—addressed to each of the names on the above list with no return address. To ’ ( 5.' Construction plan, if applicable. ^6^ Plat Map. The applicant and Property Owner must sign this applicc\tion. Please remember that your 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 all fees and/or unusual expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. Applicant's signature OWNERS SIGNATURE y Date ^ / 7 // The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorized reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents, commission members, and Council nydljibers for purposes of investigation and verification of jthijTVeques^ Owner's signature Date U>\\{ Cl / Applicant must have all VCbmit^als int^ the city office, -r CommissT "tnira Monday ot each month. days before the on Meetings arc held on the t ')ll I 1 o o•n m •H O >r- CP m CP > 0 1 cc 4 c occ — O 3 -o m m > » S35 3 ^ Tl :o O "0 > a a 30 M CD M I 0» I f\> 04 CM O o r- OJ 3> HI O X 0^ I o o o o o o .•^wpr,«T* sr Sj. r*v*» » H s.. I ‘i .ts. \".l iJ 1Hz > > X 3 -0 m > \ -< > m o X o X O 73r: 73 z o m Tl 73 i"m CD > Hn X 73 § O 73 O o o > H m o c^ E ^ >• ro H vj N Oi > M E X O O 03 09 m m X X H H 0» io § 73 01 o 01 o 04 X O *- o X r- X X m m m m o o O) Ut fD 04 o o o n X Mn >oo Ot Ol n 73 c. >n X 01o 01 c m m »-« X f\) Tl O CM > O 0»M O Z 4> H 01 04 m 01 ►- cz Cl m m iM G S » n I CD mm 04 X f- m 70 Mo r-M CM M Ss§a z ^ m m< om 73 o f- M O O ^ O m 01 3 M § 52 H m 3 m •— c. o m M3 m =^Km 5m2 > X O M O Ssi m o o 3 o 73 O > o H »-• o> § m 73 0) no 01 S 01 H 4> 73 M N N O 0» I m m r3 m 04 X r- M 04 o Z ^ m m < om 73 o r- M o o o o m 73 mi H o o m • Tl M 4> H 04 g O L=- i 2 c m Q 5 woG q -z zSoS 5>°2«i2 - ^o52"* r: L- O CJ 35 2 W^.oi ’igs ^P1ipm Jf y/o 7otSr. <2<r___ /*<5 - C, »? _joK/i._____:ik " 0 e. •f '*' 'iL il\A' ii' i‘iil'“ E. ;>•! :. •: 'I til!" ■: icIm; ih - • • - -I-' ii-' .m I. 1*1 »t •it li Mii • ♦ rV ' li:u i!|''’! ;:!i l '-febi -i : I- :; r \ ■ 5', ! --I’!''y .;' 'sr 1 ' ■ •ii:-' -J ‘ :'/ ' i ! •: * ■*-;t i;i I ;• ;tii. ( i;:;:!’!•»:*• ii'=*|, .!» ; I • t I ,ir'- ' * » i:j>> '''V- i\S' ? • \^2pr . i:: 1' I f, r-. ♦rk •* t • f I t!i•••‘■iiM:!'- nN ' 5? as *■•^ S E sr V «. fl=! t.r- I •T • M0r VT V I t ( 11 ( I; %IL^,.i^i to 0^0'^?'" • MM f ^U* 2? ^ V -o ni ^ X •^1 • ' rl IH ’So ‘ c 1>zo- o 2i /O5tn> U' ■ 00 • ■-------f > '- --'!si;rr 0 ?, K ^ § i J V icky A. Rizzoi.o AT roRNCY AT l.AW 6131 Bl.un CIRCLE DRIVE EDEN PRAIRIE. MINNESOTA 55344 (612) 933-4H84 July 17, 1986 . \JUL 1 8 1986 City of Orono P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Attention: Mike Gaffron -3 ' Cii. Dear Mr. Gaffron: This letter is in response to your request for a written statement concerning the intended use of the residential property located at 115 Luce Line Ridge. As you know, my husband, James Ericson, and I, have purchased the property located at 115 Luce Line Ridge and are in the process of building a large two story home P'^®"’ises. The general contractor is Paul Walentiny, and he has applied for a building permit and been granted a conditional use permit to begin construction. My husband and I, along with our two children and my mother, plan to occupy the home under construction as a one family dwelling. My mother has resided with us since August 1985 when she moved to Minnesota from New Jersey, and in April 1986 we purchased the property in question specifically to build a larger home to accommodate our growing family. I understand you have in your possession a copy of the proposed building plans. You can see that the floor plan IS that of a traditional two story home with a finished walkout level. The walkout level incorporates a fifth bed room and bathroom, a small kitchen and recreation room. Tn6 S6cond kitchsn will bG usGd by both my mothGr and mysGlf for many purposes, for example, canning, entertainment, etc. We have also included direct access from the garage to the lower level to avoid having to enter the main level of the home to access the walkout level. In sum, we intend to build a single family home and occupy the home as a single family with accommodations for my 4 i L 1 ■ ^0'": 'W k. t ::"i^r’' j ! TO: PROM: DATS: SUBJ: Mayor Butler Mark Bernhardson, City Administrator Orono Council Members Planning Commission Members Michael P. Gaffron, Assistant Zoning Administrator July 18, 1986 #1046 Douglas Eumbusch, 1535 Long Lake Boulevard - Variance/Conditional Use Permit - Public Hearing Zoning District - LR-IA Application - Construction of retaining walls and new stairway to lake. List of Exhibits - A - Application B ~ Plat Map C - Property Owners List ^ “ Site/Landscape Plan with hardcover review E - Composite site plan with neighbor's survey P - Staff sketch ^ Pertinent Ordinances “10.22 Subd. 2 - -10.55 Subd. 8 - “10.03 Subd. 19- No structures or hardcover in 0-75' No structures or hardcover in 0-75' Reguires Conditional Use Permit for retaining walls on lakeshore property Discussion - requesting the variances and Conditional Use Permit necessary for construction of retaining walls and stair«s lakeshore yard. There are two old railroad tie walls lair andthe lindens on the east side near Ul f and one higher up, on the west side. There is a rail now along both sides of the lot near the lake. ® ora^rrriiirf/d °r" sloped lakeshore yard consistrailroad ties, 6' long, placed every three feet with gravel/grass between them. These ties are starting to de^v so to replace them is understandable. The tie wa ’lls intended to be about 1^-18" ° «’'isting drop-off near the fence which is dangerous to mow when the grass is wet (see exhibit ^1). n enclosures around the linden trees are starting to rot and appear necessary if the trees are to remain thlre proposed to be constructed using stringers and thf sLifwn 1 «hat po??“n of are no^ f l landings 4'xl6' and 8'xl2', landscan#. surface material, according to thelandscape planner. This would have an effect on the percentage Zoning File #1046 July 18, 1986 Page 2 of 2 4*x4^ltndina if iV’isVon* normally allow a maximum as these. ^ ^ hardcover for lakeshore stairs such There is a concern that the stairway and upper landiro wi i i drainfield linesf We k^ow th" t"t genera? location of the drainfield lines is downhill from the house and running across the slope, but we don't know how deep or how lonq iS ^19 7^ with ^ ^0-22 acre!with a varianc0. Th© ©xistincr undoubtedly less than 75- from the lake and are currently wirkina seepage or discharge, but no possible way to oclu?? ® other than a holding tank if future problems Staff Recoomendation — It appears that the proposed walls are intended for necessary for) either safety purposes or to preserve exist?ng features such as trees and slopes. The slope is steep enouah reces%itt''’^of^th®e®r’'®®®?'’® request. Staff does not'^see the obiteri ° but would find them lessObjectionable if they are constructed with a permeable fill to minimize the hardcover. Approval might be conditioned upon; rean^r^d^^hl/’r^*. erosion protection measures asrequired by City Inspector during construction. hr ^construction to be at shallow depth only, to he"a°vy e"qufpm^"n\r^^" drainfield lines. Strongly^recomme'nd no surv^e"v ® has not provided an actual certificate ofsurvey, and because this is adjacent to City fire lane and lake access, which has had encroachment problems before, a survey should be required in order to verify thi lot lines and keep all improvements within the property boundaries. or Inspector (Oman drainfiled line location and depth. ^ i »CITY OF ORONOGENERAL LAND USE APPLICATION PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address 11 9CTO- (iLy^P —-------------L535 I>0NC_T,AKE BL\T3.. T.0NG LAKE,MN 55356 Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) 26-118-23 33 QOU Please check one - Is the property x (for Conditional Use Applications^onT^j— ^ description to application if not included on torrens? applicant Name Otten Bros, Nursery & Landscaping» ^^h one 473-5^25 P. 0. Box 268 Address 2265 W, Wayzata Blvd> LAKE,MN OWNER Name OOUGLAS J.ZUMBUSCH Phone ^73-8080 Mailing Address TAMARACK DR., LONG T,aiCE,MN 55356 Date Property Acquired 8/85 (month/year) _ _ _adjacent parcels of land. FEES — CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS $100.00 a) vlSO.OO b) $150.00 c) $250.00 d) $200.00 f) Residential accessory Use Institutional (church, school, etc.) Duplex Credit/Bldg Commercial/Industrial Use Lard Alteration --------- C,rading and filling - loi cu. yd. or more -- - -- Seawall, retaining walls within 75' of lakeshore PRD/PID — see fee schedule O-THER APPLICATIONS S150.00 Commercial Site Plan Review {+ consultant fees) $250.00 Vacation $150.00 Easement Vacation $ 50.00 Easement Vacation With Subdivision ens? d on 1 OTHER APPLICATIONS - CONT.__ _ _ _ $250.00 R'^zoning__ _ _ $200.00 Appeals Other “ see fee schedule PRESENT USE OP PROPERTY Present Zoning District Present Use of Property description op REQUEST i^'_ Residential Other (specify) Desorifarr^esfin detail ^ walla J.7 turf mowing safety. REqu:^hed submittals 1. Completed Application Form. 4. Certificate of survey. 5. Construction plan, if applicable. 6. Plat Map. rememb^r^that\o^ur^applicat/on°i^^^ application. Pleasenot been included. * ompxete if the above information has APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE reque\'’te“°bTthe®?on^inFa^^ to provide all information required or unusual expenses incurred in reviel"oFt"h- and/orthe information suited i 5®^ 1 aPPlt^ation, and certifies thatknowledge supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her Applicant's {signature OWNERS SIGNATURE Date investigation and verification of^this requeU. purposes of owner's signature ^ate ..../fr. Applicant must have all suhmi+-f Planning Coinmission Mcetino pi,„ ^ity offices 25 days before the third Monday of each month?' ^°""rng Commission Meetings are held on the = ' • : I ·• • . . • • t LiJ -x:: Q C � t- • 2 ( 1} '), /" . / • . s. s. I(� ~ N NO. 13 79 ,.. . -- >0 •-H Mpou> K» -J lA o ZtQ lA K>o ^ UJ ro a 2 lA --,,,... - -- R� DATE 06/24/86 BATCH 003�OP ADORO�'N ER NAME TAXPAYERN�E/AOOR PR OP AOOR:t:�ER NAME 38 35-11 8-23 22 00 0201S2SLONG LAKE BLVDL W CAPR ON ETALL W CA PRON1S25 LONG LAKE B L VD LOt--lG UKE MN 55356TAXPAYE�TOTAL BATCH 003 00021�t.\HE/ADDR HE tl-lEPIN �TY PROPERTY INFOR HATION SYSTEH PROPERTY OWNERS LIST REPORT NO. PI43S40138 35-118-23 22 000301509 L�� LAKE BLVDJAMES E COPLIN & WIFE JAMES E COPLIN1509 LONG LAKE BLVD LONG LAKE >1N 55356 38 3 5-118 -23 22 0004 01505 LONG LAKE BLVDJAMES D WEYHE ETALJAMES D NEYH E 1S05 LONG LAKE BLVD LONG LAKE t1N 55356 PAGE 7 I CERTIFY ntJ,T THE FACTS �EFRESENTEO A�E AN ACCURATE i,t•:'O TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INF OOMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECO�DSOF THE HENNEPI N COUNTY DEPARTMENT o;: srfOPE RTY TAXATION, T�E BESTOF t1Y Kt!m.!LEOGE AND BELIEF./ _,,../ - � ./ ./.,,, ' D A TE � , '2j -. , ,,,. ,,.. .. - - - - .. ; '"'! . . . � . .. : ...... ,. • ··•!. .. . ..... .. . ... . . . .. , . . .... ,1 •.)n l 1 o !'.u, ·,est ;.1:. .. t of :Jl.1 in • .... . . • I • -. .. .! I • • -. . �--�, '--....,... ..- .. --- t .• -. ...-, .. . . --. -..... , .. -; : . ... . . . .. . .... -.. .. ---· •-·· -..... ,-... ....... --- --.. -- ... . . . ... r' ,:.. ,-r-1 f, tJ,i/.AfJ � I I 1 ., I f r :, • •,. :! I \HI .., t I I : I I 'f ��) . ' t • . , , • I I j . ' '! Li ltC Ad .i t.i 1:", vi:,itlo cncr-..·c!,�.r:nt , .)111 v! ,e-·:th'l! n 1 ' .. � t t un1 � r e l> of i! any, vf a;; id �o l.:J Lot Lot 1 1 l f-. .· "T ......_ --. • .. I I I < I ......... �. . , _.., -... - � .. I - I .. ·-•. I I . I I .. I --, . .---- '' ·-.-.... ·J• t .. ... 1'-•�f o fl c,r 1q ,t,LII. ••• u,. �, A. i t �:, r ..C • t C L 1,._; L-'•'•�• 'L11D. !.I.,�. ) II�::,. f".J.:>l!-:11 •:, E/ 0 • IJ�, C� .,.Tlf'>n':,. tl1"1 fJ •:c [\f•.-itlJ . ' I ••f I, ,. ., 1,• J 11 'I f °f"I' I � I"!. t -. t , ... I �-,, . ,, •. 75 + 1.' ,, Mayor ButlerMark Bernhardson, City Administrator Orono Council Members Planning Commission Members Thomas Jacobs, Building Official July 17, 1986 Subject: #1048 & #1049 Whasington Scientific , 2605 Wayzata Blvd. - Conditional Use - Variance - Commercial Site Plan Review List of Exhibits “ Variance/Commercial Site Plan Review Exhibit B - Application - Conditional Use Permit Exhibit C - Property Owners List Exhibit D - Plat Map Exhibit E ~ Survey Exhibit P - Notice of Public Hearing Exhibit G - Site Plan Exhibit H - Building Elevations Exhibit I - Floor Plan - Proposed Building The applicant is requesting the following; 1)Commercial site plan review. 2)Variance to Orono Municipal code Section 10.50 Subd.5 (F) 2 - All subsequent additions and out building constructed after the erection nL structure shall be of materials comparable to thoseuse in original contruction. to use a finished Metal exterior, rather than a Brick finish which is used on the principal building, permit - Orono Municipal Code Section 10.50 Subd. J(A) 1 to allow an accessory building be constructed as a loading dock and storage, ^ Area: Zoning District I - Industrial Existing building size - approx. 134250 s.f. Proposed accessory building - 2531.31 s.f. Use: Industrial Scientific is proposing to add to their complex a 25'-3' x accessory building for the purpose of storing chemicals and facilities^^^^^^ which are presently stored outside and loading Setbacks: follcws^^^^^^ structure meets all setbacks from property lines as Front Side East Side West Rear Exist Bldg. 150' 250' 50' 510' Proposed 825 '■ 270' 500' 420' Bldg Required 75' 22.5' 22.5' 100' Zoning File #1048 & #1049 July 17, 1986 Page 2 of 3 Parking Parking has been provided for existing building, is not required for proposed structure.Additional parking Loading Facilities The proposed accessory structure is designed as a loading facility and storage area therefore the following items have been reviewed pursuant to Orono Municipal Ccdo Section 10.50 Subd. 5 H 1)Amoui^ Required - The existing structure has a loading facility which IS located on the east side of the structure - its main purpose IS for unloading raw materials and shipping finished materials. The proposed structure will be used for both loading of waste materials to be transported and unloading some raw materials. The added loading facilities is needed for the operation of the principle use. 2)Dggj-gn - The design of this type of use includes traffic patterns of the transport vehicles. The traffic pattern will be through the parking lot. The vehicles used to pick up waste are approximately 30' long and will cause no problems. 2).Location “ The proposed facility is located at the rear of the principal structure and will not encroach on required setbacks. The berth is separated from off street parking by a fence. Access: Access to the property is existing, and will not change. Access to the proposed accessory structure is through the parking lot which is allowed by Orono codes. Landscaping: In talking with Mr. Pallansch, the proposed structure will be cleaning up a storage area which has been an eye sore in the past, and ^ past violation of the City Ordinance (Orono Ord. 10.60 subd. 14 Waste Materials). Exterior storage of pallets should be screened form the public. Building Plans: Zi£2£ ~ A floor plan has been provided (Exhibit G) it reflects somewhat how the structure will be used. Elevarti^i^ - Are provided (Exhibit F) applicant is requesting a variance in the material used on the exterior. Orono Ordinance require that all structures and additions be of the same material as the principal structure (Orono Ord. 10.50 Subd. (5) F 2. The applicant is asking if he can use a finished metal instead of brick/concrete block etc.finish which is used on the principal structure. Building Code Plan Review Per Appendix E the structure will system.be required to have a sprinkler Zoning File #1048 & #1049 July 18, 1986 Page 3 of 3Fire Code Plan Review1)Storage of Hydrogen is required to be outside in a fenced area and posted to prevent entrance by unathorized personal. 2)Existing Hydrant locations are accessible and in good condition. 3)Washington Scientific must provide Material Saftey Data Sheets on all materials to be stored in proposed building to assure proper 4)Existing principal building does not have proper openings for fire department access and should be sprinkled. 5)Company has up to date permits with Hennepin County Hazardous Waste Department. This permit must be kept up to date. Staff Reconmendations approval of the conditional use/variance/commercial site plan review based on the following findings. 1)Location of the accessory building is to the rear of the principal building and will not be visible to the public. ^ 2)Purpose of the accessory building is to clean up exterior storaqe area, and comply with Orono Ord. 10.60 Subd. 14 Waste Materials. 3)It is more cost effective to build a finished steel building vs a concrete block/brick building. ^ 4)The location of the structure and fire sprinklers provided will lessen the fire hazard of the principal structure. facilitiesstructure needs more area for loading and unloading If approved, staff further recommends the following conditions; Pallet storage and all materials stored in exterior yard be screened from the public. ^ 2)Applicant to resolve fire sprinklers in principal building. 3)Applicant to submit M.S.D.A. Sheets to city on storage of materials in building. 4)Existing metal shed in fenced area be removed within 6 months. $100,00 a}Residential accessory Use $150.00 b)Institutional (church, school $150.00 c)Duplex Credit/Bldg $250.00 d)Commercial/Industrial Use $200.00 f)Land Alteration is? on OTHER APPLICATIONS - CONT.__ _ _ $250.00 Rezoning__ _ _ _ $200.00 AppealsOther - see fee schedulePRESENT USE OP PROPERTYPresent Zoning District Present Use of Property Industrial Residential X____ Other (specify) Industrial DESCRIPTION OP REQUEST request in detail: Request to build steel storage building on site, to store materials presently outsidp. —-a_ a--------- REQUIRED SUBMITTALS 1.Completed Application Form. envelopes (#10) pre-addressed to each of the namel on the above list with no return address. 4.Certificate of survey. 5.Construction plan, if applicable. 6.Plat Map. The applicant and Property Owner must sign this application™ pTmsZ norbeen included! complete if the above information has APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE ®9rees to provide all infoimation required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay all fees and/or the"TnfoTm'’ltfFn ■review of this lpplicatio^n,^nd certifies tha! knowledge^ ^supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her Applicant's signature OWNERS SIGNATURE Date UcaJZx authoracknowledges and agrees to this application and further entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, 4.- ^ ® ® ^ ° ^ ^ ® ^ ^ ® ® , and Council members for purposes of vft^fieation of this request. ^patdc l-Jl'SL______ hclVG 3X1 S Ubmi tl t cl 1 irvhn r» ' a.-• Planning Commission Meeting Planm'nrr r •otfices 25 days before third Monday of each monthf* Commission Meeting the s are held on the obtai rnmen i name ease i has 3 or d/or that /her w • 1 1 • CITY OP ORONO general land use application PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address Wayzata Blvd., Orono,MN Property Identification Number (P.i.d.) 331182313Q0Q1 Please check one - Is the property X (for Conditional Use Applications 0HT5O abstract or torrens? description to application if not included on applicant Name Mailing Address Phene OWNER Name Washington Scientific Inc.Phone 286-2151 Mailing Address 2605 Wayzata Blvd,, p.o. Box 340, Long Lake, MN 55356 Date Property Acquired .. ' ^^^52 ~ _ _ _adjacent parcels of land. FEES - CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS _ $100.00 a)Residential accessory Use _ $150.00 b)Institutional (church, school, etc.) , $150.00 c)Duplex Credit/Bldg _ $250.00 d)Commercial/Industrial Use -$200.00 f)Land Alteration Grading and filling - 101 cu. yd. or more Seawall, retaining walls within 75' of lakeshore -see fee schedule OTHER APPLICATIONS - - - - $150.00 Conanercial Site Plan Review (+ consultant fees) $250.00 Vacation _ $150.00 Easement Vacation _ $ 50.00 Easement Vacation With Subdivision ns? on OTHER APPLICATIONS - CONT. _ _ _ _ $250.00 Rozoning _ _ __ $200.00 Appeals Other -- see fee schedule PRESENT USE OF PROPERTY Present Zoning District Industrial Present Use of Property DESCRIPTION OP REQUEST _ _ Residential Other (specify) Describe request in detail: Conditioned use permit for accessorybuilding - - --—-- - - - - - - - -—- -—- - - - -£ REQUIRED SUBMITTALS 1.Completed Application Form. 2.Property Owners List of owners within 350' (you can obtai Cerntir 348-3°27fr""®^^" County Department of Finance A-603 Governmen envelopes (#10) pre-addressed to each of the name on the above list with no return address. 4.Certificate of survey. 5.Construction plan, if applicable. 6.Plat Map. The applicant and Property Owner must sign this aoDlication piaaco “en fnflurd!complete if the a"b"ove APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE reoue%^teV ^11 information required orrequested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay all fees and/nr ?h^Tnformation in review of this application,'^and certifies that kUlwledge! is true and correct to the best of his/her Applicant's signature OWNERS SIGNATURE Date author acknowledges and agrees to this application and further agents property by City staff, consultants, ■i n\7Act i «a+-•Sion members, and Council members for purposes of i‘'i® i°quest. Owner's-eigiidTure Date 7//J?' Plannilg'^Co^iosioil Meoting"'^''piann|"*'°c*'’°'offices 25 days before the third Monday of each nionthf' ^ Commission Meetings are held on the btai nmen name Received CITY OP ORONO p.o. BOX ee CRYSTAL BAY, MN 56323 TELEPHONE: 473-7358 GENERAL RECEIPT ly' Fund Object Program Div.Amount __________$ DOLLARS ■ ase bas •i •'.T — — —' W •for John JJors & ConnIn S 1/2 of a: 1/4 of ErcUon JJ, 7ua;), r.23wy{jjj j,j^^ QggM1//MiCHOFra •.** r' .T- k. .1 I**/ f /40i*‘ y. • **•' 'r »/iC/ o 2 . • •• kk f « y- ^, ^ B . .L. f _ 'T»—J» \’9.-</«!•.. Ccrt.ificnt.c of Survey; We hereby certify that this is a true and correct plat of a survey made by us of all that part of the S 1/2 of the NE 1/4 of Section 33, TlldN, R23W, described as follows: Commencing at a point on the ^ line of the said NE I/4 at its point of intersection with the W line of the E 66 .. rods thereof; thence N along the W line of t!ie said ?: 66 rods to the N line of the S 1/2 of said NE 1/4; thence W along said N line 460*5 feet; thence S to a point on the S line of said NE I/4, 4^.5 feet W of the point of beglnnlngx thence E 460,5 feet to the point of beginning, all according to the U.S.Gort. Survey thereof, containing I4 acres of land, more or less; subject to the right of the pjbllc to USD all pnibllc roads thereonj and also subject to a reserva tion in the sellers herein, their heirs I and assigns, to reserve forever the ^^£ht to use, for drainage purposes i./..'.. their premises, the existing tile or drainage line or tile line now situated on the IQ,y 18 feet of the above-described premises which lies Immediately S of and adjacent to the present U.S.- Highway No, 12j prqjrided, further, that the purchasers, their heirs and assigns shall always rvilntain and keep in repair that portion of said drain* age or tile line which is situated upon the above premises and that adequate and sufficient outlet for said drainage or ^^*^6 shall be provided and nciintaioed at all times by the purchasers herein, . their heirs and assigns. - ^ KELI£7 & KELLEY, Engineers Long lake, Minne^ta Kiy^ itoTsTKelle^jS^ Scale: 1"= 200* Date : >fey 9, 1957 o « Iren marker i \ I Reg,No.1342 f'i f w wCITY OP ORONO NOTICE The Planning Commission will hold oublic hparinnc ^ Chambers at 1275 South Brown Road on^Monday, Julv^21 itflfi matter of the following land use applica?E ^he iu 51«L tJrr,S.f ’hC.“' - Conaill„„l ron,qVi’<‘'^ '^1®'"®® Erickson/Vicki Rizzolo, 115 Luce Line Ridae - Cleo Bloemendaal, 145 Cygnet Place - Strf»t*+- setback variance to construct an attached garage addition. Douglas J. Zumbusch, 1535 Long Lake Boulevard - in laUshoL^yard!'"”^’' variance to construct retaining walls • Scientific, Inc., 2605 Wayzata Boulevard - <=°"®truct a commercial accessory storage buildino with siding material dissimilar to existing pr^cipal^structure" knualrcHl Boulevard - Thomas R. Browne, 760 South Brown Road - Street set- nance to construct an attached garage and room addition. Ronald L. Glesne, 1475 Cherry Place - Lot area and variance to construct a residence on a substandard lot. 2040 North Shore Drive - Variance and laktsho?e*yardf ^®‘=°''«truct fence and storage shed in conditi^on^J^ Eaymond J. Kosak, 3265 Carman Road - Variance and itkesho^e yarif construct deck and retaining walls in Schnebly, 2555 Countryside Drive - Height variance for construction of fence/wall in front yard. ^ Lee Bragg, 500 Orchard Park Road - Variance to strur^.®» ® occupation to take place in a detached accessory structure on residentially zoned property. uessory mal City of Orono - Public Hearing Notice Meeting of July 21, 1986 Page 2 of 2 ♦loss Olai Hanson, 1390 Railroad Avenue variance to construct a detached garage.*” Side setback ack All persons wishing to be heard will appear at this time comments are solicited. Plans are available for retiew i’n the citS by appointment (call 473-7357), City City of Orono By: Planning Commission eet Michael P, _ _ _^ Assistant Zoning Administrator Slw^paper^®*'®’’ Pioneer e. 3 md ht J ck CITY OP ORONONOTICE The Planning Coiiunission will hold a public hearing in the Council Chambers at 1275 South Brown Road on Monday, July 21, 1986, at 7.30 P,M. on the matter of Dennis Kumlin's application for a proposed 3 lot residential subdivision of property located at 2665 Fox Street. All persons wishing to be heard will appear at this time. Written comments are solicited. Plans are available for review in the City offices by appointment (call 473-7357). City of Orono By: Planning Commission Micnaei P. Gaffroi>/^ Assistant Zoning Administrator Sewspaper“®'’®‘^ Pioneer \C*1* \« • k ’ J ‘« f' • Jh\ *!^ f.y ■ '^ « f M • - • r * « 1 1 I • » •*' ii' »'• •:’*T^.f.r..v.-.’: ... I- .i.-r/n --i'- :y \ \ /* ' • • /! i.v’ •r‘♦Jr V • T \ 9 :sn \\ \ \ \ f^U 'L.». \\ r Xi A. \ *vl I, 1^ V rl t\KiC*X ■jn V tiuii !-V » ■ • • T * ) 1 •; • 5 r|k. , .i. *• ^ I vf« ♦‘v.r # ^4 •j / w / fciA- l?'Ci^rufF4v w rn riLu. kjr-r F=r 'ft fUJ^L L>l»sUit. 4 - - ». ^ir». 2.I,* 1- ♦ »£./< r ^ n 4 PiA U i' 4JL*'7] ff- /" t ifsJC: ♦ •»■- preliminary site plan 1'. ir.-’’.c>* NiPTa: »>*'. ct<rn.icr^ it^ -ruff rvi^fcf.. 1 "s< ; < » r « f { j ^U<7KTH • A ^ '4 * TO:Mayor Butler Mark Bernhardson, City Administrator Orono Council Members Planning Commission Members FROM Michael P. Gaffron, Assistant Zoning Administrator DATE:July 17, 1986 SUBJs #1051 Ronald Glesne, 1475 Cherry Place Variance - Public Hearing Zoning District - LR-lB, 1-Acre Application - Lot Area - Lot Width variances to construct a residence on a substandard lot. List of Exhibits - A - Application B - Plat Map C ~ Pr^.,perty Owners List D - Survey E - Council Minutes of Fall 1971 Pertinent Facts - Existing Lot Area 0.64 acre Lot Width 125' Required 1.0 acre 140' Variance 0.36 acre 15' (existing lot area excluding 33' right-of-way of Cty. Rd.151) Discussion - In 1971, Arthur Ahlm subdivided his property on Cherry Place into 4 lots, each of about 2/3 acre, as noted in the Council minutes of October & November 1971. Ahlm had been previously assessed 3 sewer units for the entire property, hence the minutes state that a 4th unit would be assessed with the division into 4 lots. In 1972, three of the four lots were built on, leaving the fourth lot (at "1475" Cherry Place) vacant. Glesne bought his home at 1470 Cherry Place in about 1972, and bought the vacant lot from Ahlm in 1976. The Glesne house is connected to sewer at Cherry Place. The vacant lot, which Mr. Glesne now wishes to sell as a building site, has a sewer stub available at North Arm Drive. Staff as of this writing has found no record that the 4th sewer unit was ever paid. It was customary at the time to collect the $1270 sewer unit when the building permit was issued. This apparently remains to be collected. The subject lot is 0.64 acre or 64% of the required 1.0 acre, 125' wide or 89% of the required 140' width. This lot remained as a separate tax parcel since 1971. and has i Zoning File #1051 July 17, 1986 Page 2 of 2 Cherry Place has been partially vacated and functions as a private driveway serving the last 3 houses on the south end. The vacant lot would logically access onto this private roadway, although its legal access is to North Arm Drive. Glesne's existing house at 1470 Cherry Place is on a lot of 0.68 acres. Although no survey was submitted for that property, a site inspection notes no apparent encroachments into the 0-75’ lakeshore setback, and a 75-250' hardcover of about 13.6%. Comparison of Nearby Lot Areas - Twelve of fifteen existing developed lots on cherry Place are 0.60 acre or smaller. From the 1984 Common Ownership study: -43% of lots in LR-lB district exceed 0.80 acre -56% of lots in LR-IB district exceed 0.60 acre -79% of lots in LR-IB district exceed 0.40 acre Staff Recommendation - Staff would recommend approval of the lot area/lot width variances based on the following findings: 1. This lot was created and approved as a buildable lot by the City Council in 1971, in effect granting a variance to the 1 acre zoning code in effect at that time. That variance is deemed to have expired as of the Janurary 1, 1975 zoning code, necessitating granting of a renewal variance at the present. 2. The lot area and width is consistent with existing developed lots in the immediate neighborhood, and is not inconsistent with other lots currently developed within the LR-IB zoning district. 3. The lot has remained as a separate tax parcel since it was created. 4. Sewer is available to the property. 5. The property has legal access to County Rd. 151 (north Arm Drive) and potential secondary access over vacated and unvacated portions of Cherry Place. Staff would suggest the following conditions of approval: 1. $1270 sewer unit assessment and standard $225 sewer connection charge and $390 Park fee to be collected with building permit. 2. Total hardcover on property not to exceed 30% or approximately 8350 s.f. 3. Access to property shall be via Cherry Place presuming that the abutting owners of the vacated portion of Cherry Place will grant an access easement. ■t 1 J fkfZ. . IQ ^ Cri\AJCiL. /icr7r-.'\f ^.rrrrB HARDSHIP Describe undue hardship or practical^ifficulty resultinq, from strict DESCRIPTION OP UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS • * ^ cldrRequir^entsr°'’®"''^. cations preventing compliance with Zoning JgQqgUBD-SUBMITTALS' ~ Completed Application Form ’ 3. Certificate of survey including hardcover calculations as required. 5^ Plat Map. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign remember that your variance application is information has not bfeen included. APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE this^ application. Please not complete if the above ®5rees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay all fees and/or the^Tn\o:n?ftion application, and certifies that knowledge ^ suppli^d^is tru^^ and correct to the best of his/her Applicant's Signature OWNERS SIGNATURE Date (fjisj/p-Z Owner ^— Date Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the third Monday"*of^each^m^ Planning Commission Meetings are held on the strict ioning to Jwnl Tcstou.4,L / / t^ta/ ii , A - (LJJ r>jv.« c RUrik < Cfji'i Siibenture, .V,.,/* ;;„-4 ..........eth .....Arthur £. Ahlm and Dolores J. .Ahlm, husband and wife,------...r—l.y. Septerter 'finm iiK,!.. » j i'<rii i btain ^ Center' f the lease above id or id/or that 3/her of the County of Hennepin ............. .......and SM» of Minnesota ies of the fird part, and Ronald L. Glcsne and Gloria Glesne, husband and wife, ___-........ o„= „.%zf}sKo;ranroS”,o^d'::"/.'xsjVo'^^^^^ j T r « u A<rf/:v orJtnoir;. edged, da herdaj Orant, I.argain, .Srll, and Carney unto the taid parties of the second p^rt as joint stu" as tenants In eammon, their assigns, the survivor nf said partUs, and the heirs and assigns ^ **^HemioD[n "" /; hing and being in the Count,, of part Of Lot 7. lying Southerly of a line hereinafter referred to tl ? drawn Westerly from the midpoint of the Easterly line of said Lot 7 through wtfh"’!h'’? ‘’’®/“terly line of said Lot 7, Block 5. “Crystal Bay View”, together with that portion of the Westerly half of Cherrry Avenue vacated lying Southerly of the Easterly extension of said "Line A", and Northerly of a line drawn from the Southeast Bav"v'iP^" ® the Soutliwest corner of Lot 9, Block 4. All in "CrystalBay View . according to the map or plat there of on file and of record in the office of the Register of Deeds in and for said Hennepin County, Minnesota. Subject to restrictions, reservations and caserients of record, if any. STATE DEED TAX DUE HEREON S4.40. - y' - V r EFT, Of - ^ 0 4. 4 0 J f-p _______ ;S * ' • . a . . . ■ • « flllb to To^<thfr with nil the hereditaments and appurtenances thereunta helon^inif or in nnyu lse appertninin^, to the said purtirs of the secemd jtttrf, their asd'Sns, the eurviivr of said tHtrtirs, tintf the hnrn mid of the survii ur. Forever, the said thirties of the second part t-akint! tts Joint ferionf^ and nnf, a • tenants in ccmtruyn, sdmlihesaid /Arthur T. Ahlm and Delores J. Ahlm. husband and wife, ...................... pari of the first pirt, for thcmsclveS, their heirs, cxccutt.rs and atlminisfraiors do cov enant with the mid pirt rs of the second part, their tusi^ns, the st.riitvr of said thirties, and the heirs and assigns of the survivor, that they arC g^ised in fee of (he lands and premises a,'or^mid and ha^Q fjoad ri^ht to sell and r‘^nvey the same in manner and form afavemid, and that the some are free from all incumbrancers, except :ther ants, tiga- 2 the i the inirnn-n I.... , —. Uic Ucn vf till asxmntnrof.n and intt-rr j thereonj ofnd the alnne bargained and granted lands and premises, in the quirt and pcaceahte po.tension of the said parties of the vreond pirf, thetr assti^nit, the survivor of said pitrfies, and the heirs and assign* of the turvivor, a(Juinsf all f^rsans lawfully claiming or to rlnim the whole or any pad thereof, subject to ^^ff the first fHir! will U*arranf. andincuml/ranee Defend, herfinlfc/ore mentioned, the said part Jn (fMtfmonp ffibertof. rsc s,tiJ p,,rl <<>S of the first ha ve hereunto se^thpir hand ^the day and year first nKwe written, y ,y , >• - (Arthur E. Ahlm) • •••*• »• •#••• ' ...^I^lorps J. Ahjm) UyLJ re ^ rr..t a ? w t ^ nJ ^ rt tl 13m 4 tu u o n < <y mJ tn ro <7: ol in no in V* V CsJ 1 UJ ■X * . m. » . • «i * ' . irth • ‘ *• . ' k _ ' r I 1 ’ ;. • • w « .V ■4 f /•» .*, k 4. . ■ - V. \ •' i ,* '--M :14.' k > ‘ u'f % ^• » f' ':> ^Ti* fTTjm iiujij iiy c/is m ;nCJ!ir'?0 :*•■•■ V' TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Ralph Martin * j • : Mike Schellor $ November 2, 1971 Division - Arthur Ahim ‘ * c- ? Pyt* V * V S 14S0 North Arm Drive .* ' * ^ Arthur /Jilm owns Lots 6-7-8»9, Block 4, and 5-6-7-8*9, Block S, Crystal Bay View. He proposes to rcarranco this into four trrxts. Tract A to be 5-6-and S-1/2 of 7, Block 5, 30,500*; Tract B to bo Lots 6-7, Block 4, 27,000*; Tract C to be Lots C-9, Block 4, 29,000*: end Tract D to be 8-9- and S-1/2 of 7, Block 5, 30,000*. . 'V ' r-y The area is in the R-IC tone and serviced by sewor. Ho is acscascj for three units. T ; » •• *:• ' S* */•.-* i:. • I • » . • I ^ - * • »■ • ' f" V-."' *. % * ^ • r i‘ ■ 'S » ♦. ^ ; I r- V •* y I .-.S' t . . '5 r i. i•• /'• »t ;f » .. M t *• t »« 4 . } ‘ ] mt •»' MV«>o r . TOi* * t V *Ralph Martin ' Fnciii Mllco Schaller DATDi OctOtar 8t 1971 ♦ • • * . ' - / ‘ *; • TO: FROM: DATS: SOBJ: Mayor Butler Mark Bernhardson, City Administrator Orono Council Members Planning Commission Members Jeanne A. Mabusth, Zoning Administrator July 16, 1986 #1052 John T. Spence, 2040 North Shore Drive Multiple Variances Pertifient Ordinsuaces - a) Section 10.22 Subd. 1 & Subd. 2 - lake^jfo^e^ hardcover proposed within 7 5 feet of 1. Setbacks: Shed - proposed = 30' variance «= 45' Fence - proposed 56' of replacement at 43' variance *= 32' 2. Hardcover: Allowed =s 0 Proposed = 48 s.f. b) Section 10.23 - Street setback variance required for reconstructed shed. Required « 50' Proposed « 16' Variance *=34* or 68% c) Section 10.03 Subd. 6(B), Section 10.03 Subd. 9(A) - Accessory structures on a property that does not contain cri^i\”‘vtf/ ft-^ucture. (Subd. 6(B) will not permit Road 1^5^ principal structures on west side of County List of Exhibits - A - Application B - Property Owners List C - Plat Map D - Legal Description of Property E *■ Sketch of lakeshore Review of Application ~ multiple variances to build a new shed 8'x6* and lakeshore oortion o/^ 3-1/2'+ privacy fence within the of the like var^ f ^ property. The original shed and section within the* nil. fence were damaged in an automobile accident b«n the th.% , >"°nths. The application notes that this has to hil prlptrty! ' accident since 1968 involving major damage Zoning File #1052 July 16, 1986 Page 2 of 3 sassssESSH™ Applicant wants to rebuild the shed in the same location. IiL!'’®The%h%"d"m^"st "'be' rebufl t® l"o" VeeVTrom"\he°“lo\ expansion in size if applLanrhuilTs"* a\^ m:jfLr-dc “-^ to^^reduce%lru^?\:p^:?\« w\"lt r^s^u^^!^ Staff Recowaendation - to non-conforming^^^^^^^^ major structural repairs s^vera/^ears'!'"®® l^'^eshore property for r;ad?ay'"by\Vsub:j'e?t*st/u"ct^^^^ conforrning°res^^^ structures are recognized as h. ;tt:’slsrSJt °,:sr,; sssszshas responded within reason. puniic roads and Zoning File #1052 July 16, 1986 Page 3 of 3 higher elevations of the adjacent road bed provide a vision barrier for structures on applicant's lakeshore. o; lllicTltt users’*"/ Pedestrian surro^nlrnTlaTeshort 1“ Approval subject to the following conditions; the*^s2me ®*'"® building material and attne same height - applicant must specify. ^ southern side lot line feet or 72 8’*6' but may not exceed 6leet or 72 inches in height measured from exiai-ino n-Ks./i^ based on elevation of adjacent road bed. existing grade oa. OM "I ^/uu1 ' \ V cm OP ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION 6-,p 7-5-^5ft " liyp??S<Hi “ES"£'S,°“ PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address _ 20^0 /Q^ n/.^ Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) ~7/7S / ^ Please check one - is the property __ abstract or . torrens? re^"u?red" survey'"""' description to application if not included on applicant Name J O i-WO Phone __i/7S^ /1 '? _ _ _Mailing Address . 2-0 VO Al . Name Phone Ay— V:<r Mailing Address adjacent parcels of land. PRESENT OSE OP PROPERTY Date Property Acquired I (do) (month/year) Present Zoning District jS. - Present Use of Property Residential Other (specify) DESCRIPTION OP REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $ Describe request in detail: VARIANCES REQUIRED __ _ _ Lot Area Setback Variances^'T^ Lot Width Front ^ Hardcover Side Rear) )C €T -^7S ' f / a. 5d on / HARDSHIP Describe undue hardship or practical diffirnl-hv r-oemi+.* xr regulations: DESCRIPTION OP UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS -Pliance _with Zoning required SUBMITTALS 1.J Completed Application Form r2. 3., Stamped, legal sized envelopes (#10) pre-addressed to oaot, of ft names on the above list with no return address. ^ ® / • Certificate of survey including hardcover calculations (^5^ Plat Map. as required. reLmber'thrt your‘’va?!anL°aooT 10^^- applic"atT;;:"7re ‘a ’;; information has not been included!^ complete if the above APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE re|ue%^‘’e“77\he®7on^int^Adm^ information require^ or unusual expenses incurred in review^of °th • P®i’ fees and/or the inforiS^ation supoutd is true and 00 certifies thatknowledge. scppned is true and correct to the best of his/her Applicant's Signature OWNERS SIGNATURE Date authoriVe^s application and further Owner's Signature 7^- D3te C -P-7- FC PlaiifnaVo™®^ have.4ll submittals into the City offices 25 days~befor7the third Monday of^tach”mlnth.^‘ Commission Meetings are held on the ^A\ • 9 i s 2 £ ■ zH ■ St £ S ns • B7& G S 87 S 815 176 r* c-0 H X -< m -i -!j> ..-j !-i z: 2; “n ?-•r~ z !3! m fTi i*: 1^5 i~n —i ni Z Gi 2>2: ni b 2: x>G m m 2? _ q u *H i "H •H t''!Z0 ni 0 ?-H d -i- ^ z: z>m ;x5 t—4 *s^ -i nr X-s: X •••*a X •H3> rn 0 X iMi-i —i n -i K rn Ci X X -L. 0 0 r—rHr* i> 0 Cj f—I nCi 2?z in i*iH r- rn n H ^ X X, 0^ Z G 2>H C.-5 rn f 1 ‘0 X G•H -H X X N. X X r- z X X 2-1> 0 m Z X ^ X**G GX rn !ji -H X X •-<•HI •-H<r- CJ CM CM CM CM11111 (^C^a*O'CM CM CM CM CMoOoOO1»1 1 1c><^ •-H r-a •H •-4 ? • PROM: DATE: SDB J • ^2 Mayor ButlerMark Bernhardson, City Administrator Otono Council Members Planning Commission Members Jeanne A, Mabusth, Zoning Administrator July 17, 1986 #1053 Raymond Kosak, 3265 Carman Road - Variance/Conditional Use Permit List of Exhibits - A - Application B - Plat Map C - Property Owners list D - Adjacent Property Owners acknowledgement E — Nelson letter F - Anderson letter G - Gruss letter Gl- Additional letters H - Planner's report i “ Hardcover inventory mapping J - Survey K ~ Elevations Applications ~ a) Conditional Use Permit for construction of new retainina wall anri = ‘ Section iO.oVslU. c) Lakeshore setback variance for deck. Required = 75' Proposed = 61' Variance =14' or 19% Section 10.21 Subd. 1. requirea within 0-75' s 75-250- setback area - f-‘^D?rvl„rf=7?2l haracover review) B - Stairs in front yard = 217 s.f. C - House = 1579 s.f. D - Lower deck already constructed = 617 s f ’ lake aireaay constructea = P - Lowest level deck not constructed = 439 s.f. - Upper deck over F deck not constructed = 188 s.f. H “ Upper deck partially constructed = 182 s.f. I ” Retaining wall - existing = 46 s.f. , « ^ proposed = 27.5 s.f.J “ Proposed wall = 27.5 s.f. K - Steps on lakeshore = 95 s.f. ted a ~ Zoning File #1053 July 17, 1986 Page 2 of 50-75' Hardcover Area = 7,208 s.f. existing = 141 s.f. or *1.9% (I & K) proposed existing = 855 s.f. or 11.8% (E + I/3 of H) (constructed without permit) proposed = 608 s.f. or 8.4% (F+J + 2/3 of G+**l) Total proposed variance *= 1463 s.f. 20% ♦Hardcover existed within the 0-75 setback area in the form of patio area - this has all been removed and replaced with decking. ♦♦Please note new retaining wall construction provides less hardcover. Existing (I) = 46 s.f. Proposed (J&I) = 45 s.f. 75-250' Hardcover Area = 12,777 s.f. allowed = 3194 s.f. or 25% existing = 2821 s.f. or 22% (A+B+C) Total proposed = 3583 s.f. or 28% Proposed existing = 678 s.f. or 5.3% (D + 2/3 of H) (constructed without a permit) Proposed = 84 s.f. (portion of F + 1/3 of G) not yet constructed Variance *= 389 s.f. or 3% Review of Application - i °°'"prehensive program of remodeling both the interior permits loathe worl Unfortunately, his contractor failed to obtain improvements involve the removal of lakeside porches/decks and Th^ replacing them with various levels of spaced wooden decking. to instfll^'a needs to be replaced and applicant wishes of new section of retaining wall (J) all located within 75 feet a. structures removed within the lakeyard were porch/ rear^^Th^^^^ areas that extended from the two grade level doors at the a • ® made structural alterations at the upper story P ° egresses to proposed deck area H & G. Deck H has been area^V^^nnA^^^/^^v®r‘ D & E have been completed. Lowest deck faJf, V 4?^ ^ ^ upper narrow connecting deck above Deck Dadjacent to structure liave not been completed. proposes to place rock mulch over a geotht*^! ^filter fabric Mr areas allowing rainfall to filter through. wil/rotn^^^® effect the proposed lakeshore improvements nr>+- r»or-tr- Idss oversll hardcover because the original hardcover wasnot pervious to runoff. Z;.ning File #1053 July 17, 1986 Page 3 of 5 Staff v:ill very briefly list the planner's findings for your consideration (review exhibit H). 1. Steep sloping topography adjacent to house requires retaining walls, flat area for safe utilization of pool and rear yard and need for access steps to lakeshore. 2. The adjacent yards do not have steep slopes as these found in the applicant's lakeshore yard. 3. The improvements create no viev/ barrier nor do they pose hazards for neighboring properties. 4. The proposed improvements are similar to the types of improvements found in the same Carman Road neighborhood where lakeshore yards have severe slopes to lake (lots on main lake). 5. The improvement does not alter the character of thr neighborhood. 6. The decking is an acceptable conforming use within a residential district. 7. The proposed improvements will have a positive effect on the surrounding property value. Staff's inventory of recent applications that involved approval of structures and hardcover within the 0-75' setback area: #1033 Dossett, 2795 Pheasant Rd. - approved 100 s.f. or 1% of structural hardcover and 280 s.f. or 3% of innovative grade decking based on location of house to 75 feet setback and no visual impact on lake. #1006 Palm, 1710 Shadywood Rd. - approved additional structure in place ol existing patio hardcover, not to be any closer to the lake than existing hardcover. 0-75' hardcover 17.5%. #983 Pemberton, 3580 North Shore Pri/e - approved new structure and hardcover in 0-75' zone. 0-75' hardcover 20%. #943 Purdy, 1975 Fagerness Point Rd. - approved additional 72 s.f. of structural hardcover with concurrent major removals of other 0-75' hardcover (reduction from 24.3% to 13.9%). #932 Edwards, 2474 Carman Street - approved variances for a new residence to be constructed partially within the 0-75' setback area based on 1) surface drainage naturaJly graded away from the lake, and 2) lakeshore at both front and rear of property so that neighbors requested that location of new house conform to the existing houses for view purposes. 0-75' hardcover 15.8%. 4 i Zoning File #1053 July 17, 1986 Page 4 of 5 #920 Pegers, 3590 North Shore Drive - approved variances to allow a deck and screen porch of 123 square feet in 0-75' setback area with concurrent removals of 0-75' hardcover resulting in no net 0-75' hardcover increase. Approval 0-75' hardcover 3.2%. #907 Bigham, 1545 Long Lake Boulevard - allowed to increase 0-75' structural hardcover from 1.9% to 3.3% due to location of existing house. Issues for Consideration - 1. Can Planning Commission make similar findings in order to approve a 20% increase in new hardcover within the 75' setback area? 2. Should the second or upper level deck areas over lower deck areas be included in hardcover calculations? Applicant has included them in these calculations. 3. Does the proposed grade level deck fall under the "innovative type" decking classification recommended in these reviews? 4. What alterations or amendments can be suggested to the applicant if members feel the request is too excessive or extreme... a) What deck areas can be altered? removed? E, F, G or H - G & H are upper decks - applicant will require landing area at rear door where patio block remain (under G & H) - alterations of house now provide egress via G & H. Staff Recommendation - To approve a conditional use permit and variance to allow the installation of a new retaining wall and replacement of existing retaining wall within the lakeshore protected area resulting in an increase of 45 s.f. of hardcover based on the following findings and hardships: 1. Steep slopes within lakeshore yard required to provide stability of banks. 2. Slight decrease in hardcover with new construction. To approve hardcover and lakeshore setback variances of 14' or 19% for deck within lakeshore subject to the following amendments: Alternative A 1. Applicant to alter deck C so that there is no encroachment within 75' setback area. 2. Applicant must replace deck F with pervious ground cover - egress door under deck G is limited to 20 s.f. of hardcover for landing. 3. Deck areas D, E & H to remain in addition to walking deck over deck D resulting in an increase of 835* s.f. of hardcover or 11.5%. ) 1I ! i Zoning File #1053 July 17, 1986 Page 5 of 5 Approval is subject to the following conditions: 1. Geothermal filter fabric covered with rock mulch must be installed under deck areas D, E & H. 2. Erosion control must be employed at the time the lakeshore retaining walls are installed. ♦Staff has not included upper deck H as hardcover since deck F was not approved and a pervious surface exists below on grade. Alternative B 1. Reconstruct deck E (see exhibit I slashed lines) providing minimum of 10 feet of deck along east side of pool for safety concern reducing hardcover from deck E to 385 s.f. 2. Alter proposed deck F along sl?ished line (10 feet reduction) allowing now for increase in hardcover from deck F within protected area of 338 s.f. 3. Allow upper deck areas G & H to be constructed as proposed with an increase in hardcover within protected area for a total of 72 s.f. - portion of G deck that extends beyond lower F deck within protected area. Total ha*'^cover within 75* protected area of 795 s.f. or 11%. Same Conditic apply as in alternative A. Staff would add the following supportive findings or hardships to the applicant's planner's findings noted on pages 2 & 3 of this memo: 1. Location of 75 feet setback line in re3ation to rear cf house. 2. Visual impact of structure within 75' setback area is decreased because property is located on a lagoon and not visible from main lake. Staff Addendum - A hardcover variance increase within the 75-250' setback area of 3% must also be granted (total proposed 3583 s.f. or 28%). Please note a side setback variance has not been addressed by staff because it is their opinion that a side setback variance is not required per Section 10.03 Subd. 15(C): C. Fences which do not exceed 3-1/2 feet in height, fences not over six feet in height along the street lot line of lake frontage lots which front on a major thoroughfare, if fill is required, the total combined height of both fence and fill shall not exceed 6 feet above the height of the crown of the road, terraces, steps, uncovered porches, stoops or similar structures, which do not extend above the height of the ground floor level of the principal building and extend to a distace of not less than two feet from any lot line. 4 • w - V V If / i c > ric'r-(/-'^vi-L. ^.oo S fC=/o Derri^ (T fSO A'IFV J CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION .nitial Application Fee $150.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $75.00 (no change from original application) After-the-Fact Fees (Double applicati<»i#fee1 PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address 3265 Carman Road X ti Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) 20-117-23-14-0011 Please chec)c one - Is the property _ _ _ abstract or X torrens? Please attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. APPLICANT Name Raymond J. Kosak 332-7000 (W) Phone 471-8324 (H) Mailing Address 3265 Carman Road; Cxcelsior, MN 55331 OWNER Name Same as Applicant Phone Mailing Address //W fJo L'i? Date Property Acquired // /I y / ‘7 y (month/year) I (]dcx) (do not) also own the adjacent par*7els of land. PRESENT USE OP PROPERTY Present Zoning District Present Use of Property LR-IB Sinj;le family Residential I Other (specify) DESCRIPTION OP REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $ /c -- /? <.’« ^ Describe request in detail: Construction of a dock and reconstruction of a rotaininR wall — sco attached narrative and plans. VARIANCES REQUIPRD Lot Area Lot Width Hardcover Setback Variances (Front Side Rear) Other uJoJlL. i i p y - ,•) . 4 »•> ^ ’. r i'/ \/ ^\ .♦0 \ •si.sarf' HARDSHIP Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty resulting from strict enforcement of zoning regulations; See attachrd narrative;_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code Requirements; Seo attnehnd narrative_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ REQUIRED SUBMITTALS 1. 2. Completed Application Form Certified Property Owners List of owners within 150’ (you can obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Govt Center 348-3271). 1 3.Stamped, legal sized envelopes (#10) pre-addressed to each of tlie names on the above list with no return address. 4. Certificate of survey including hardcover calculations as required. 5. Plat Map. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your variance application is not complete if the above information has not been included. APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay all fees and/or unusual expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her Icnowledge. Applicant's Signature OWNERS SIGNATURE u n i)Date > /r c i/ The owner hereby acJcowledges 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 Av'-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. o in Ma • Hiss iU cui in \%oo <o oo u 5 !5 CO 4 ( oo •J < H UJ k .5<M rI tK N < U 2 2 O O (O 10 mro in in lUz •H a 0. I o CM in CM <0 to Kl O CO <i:o <0 CJ X oi! 3S U lO in uj o CM X ro Ui 2 in uj X CM u O CM X n to UJ ctoa < d ; Q a.on:o. Uir < a Q 2 Ui ^ a < u5 ivj a ji KQ2 O H ( oo .rg fO ^ CM 2 I K < •-4 o H H lO to IM Ui 2 2 toro inin II a q: o CM in O' CM CO ro ro o =.J H* M M II (X O M 10 in O' CJro lAjuX UJ oo CO CO 3 txu> au roro inin ro CM I §o o CM in <0 CMcp ro ro o < q: (O tJ CO o mD a *8 o o «• a rig o zt $ q: < u g M lO in<o CMro UJ U X Ui UJ UJo <x < CM in r CM K aCO ro o a lO o to U) “5Os = cl K O 2n; U i\. o o: Ui >- -<a X H o:a § Ui € f » J r> in CM O O UJ UJ ^ > 01 < to o Kl >- U CM -J ur I -j o h*. UI i-i X C UJ to (Oou UI o ro roinin UJ > < I o CM CO lO inino CJo <cr. < COtx CO < UJ DC X < CO in q: in < o CD CM d:o M to UIo X UI o 0 UJ ^ >^ <z M ro >- rc C m -J IK 1 -J UJ UJ •-« X -i roro inin UJ 2 > HC < 2 q: > UI -J I o CM ro «o t> •O < CO CM ro o H O <UJ X >- OK ro DC o UI H CJ M 10 UIu X UJ 2 UI to UJa r o 3-re n. lu on: Ic a. o tt Ui >- a X < H o;oo < \ Ui O' o o o o oo Xo < CD -J < or- reoa < Ui*— •c Oc UI ao fK fL re III fi. d ;no -X \ UiX C; • •• Cl X -t to a ►- to O UI U CD to H O <U. reou. 2 M UI Ui O IH l- Ul CD UI H- <a u.o 3 u 5 9 >.? u. 2 M UJ H '/) re Lj UJ re u a UiM re z Mre Ui 2 UJoc: Ui ijj X 29 UI X H >•C U. luo o 1 kJBt * u THOMAS P. NELSON3346 CABMAN ROAD EXCELSIOR, MINNESOTA 6B33I ■'varv.yu..J JUN 2 7 1986 June 26, 1986 nfa City of Oiono Building & Zoning Office P. 0. Box 66 Crystal Bay, Minnesota 55323 Gentlemen: I understand that my neighbor, Mr. Ray Kosak, 3265 Carman Road, Excelsior, Minnesota is applying for a variance for construction of a sundeck addition to his home. We live next door to Mr. Kosak and have resided in our house for over 21 years. Over the years, v;e have watched owners come and go in Mr. Kosak's house and have felt in recent years, until Mr. Kosak's arrival, that the property had become somewhat run down. The purpose of this letter is to tell you that v;e heartily endorse and support Mr. Kosak's deck project and his overall ettorts to improve the appearance and value of his property The proposed deck project, which is in full view from our home greatly enhances the appearance of the house, improve- the functional use of the steep hill that is a characteristic of the property, and provides additional privacy both for Mr. Kosak and for us. In general, it will n6lp upgr^do tho cippcar^nco of tliG whol© circa., I hope Mr. Kosak will receive early favorable consideration tor his variance request. Sincerely, 'I.. J L r«Tira VY€z: rfiiPfnsM •]A1 r , / FREMONT INDUSTRIES, INC PHONE: (612) 445-4121OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT July 9, 1986 Mr. Michael P. Gaffron Assistant Zoning Administrator City of Orono Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Dear Mr. Gaffron: As a neighbor, residence 3285 Carman Road, I am asking that your pant the variance #1053 to Mr. Raymond J. Kosak of 3265 Carman Ro-'’.J. Basically he is improving and updating an older house, which has a positive effect on the neighbor hood. If you have questions feel free to contact me either at work^or at home. RespepfullyT^ \ Mark/Gru/s, PresrLdeht, pk CC:Raymond J. Kosak 3265 Cu*rman Road Excelsior, MN 55331 \ y ! i- JUL 10 1986 ■ 1 J 4400 VALLEY INDUSTRIAL BLVD. N.SHAKOPEE MN 65379-9990P.O. BOX 67 OFFICES- Denver Los Angeles Kansas City Chicago Milwaukee EauCiairo Indianapolis Detroit Cleveland Sioux Falls Dallas El Paso Chattanooga Sii-v'- AND Joan Nielsen 3300 CARMAN RC'AD EXCELSIOR, MINNESOTA 55331 July 18, 1986 To I Rd I City of Or one Plemnlng Coiniiiiagion Land use application #1053 Property of Raymond J. Kosak, 3265 Carman Road The proposed deck and landscaping for the Kosak property would be a welcome addition to our neighborhood. We have seen the plans for the proponed improvements and totalJ.y support the pre lect. It is esthetically pleasing and will enhance our area. 6 W. B. VAN NEST COMPANY 3295 CARMAN ROAD EXCELSIOR. MINNESOTA 55331 PHONE 612-471-7881 July 16, 1986 City of Orono Planning Commission P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 • L'• 1 • . . •‘ n- < r — i^/ \ \i JUL I 81966 RE: #1053 Raymond J. Kosak Variance and Conditional U-^e Permit Dear Planning Commission Members: 1 would like to submit the following comments for your July 21, 1986 public hearing pertaining to Raymond Kosak, 3265 Carman Road. I have reviewed the plans for the wood deck and retaining walls being constructed around the existing swimming pool by Mr. Kosak. I understand that the deck extends into the 75-foot setback from Lake Minnetonka and therefore requires a lakeshore setback as well as a sideyard setback variance. I would like to point out that the deck is above the ground and is constructed such that it will allow the drainage of water through the deck between the deck boards draining to the ground underneath the deck. The project also included the removal of a considerable section of concrete padio and porch area which will no longer be i impervious surface and therefore the project will actually increase the amount of absorption area in Mr. Kosak's yard for protection of Lake Minnetonka. Mr. Kosak's lot is a pie-shaped lot as are most of the lots on Carman Road. It is not uncommon for these pie-shaped lots to require sideyard variances at the building line. In fact, our house as well as most of the houses on our street, have had sideyard setbacks which were necessary in order to build on these lots. The hard ship is due to the shape of the lot making it impossible to meet the performance standards of the zoning code without a variance. I was a member of the City Council at the time the city granted a variance to the previous owner of Mr. Kosak's house to allow them to build the concrete pool and deck, which required a sideyard setback at that time. From my review of Mr. Kosak's deck, it is not increasing the sideyard variance which has already been granted for the pool. From my perspective, I feel that this Variance and Conditional Use Permit should bo approved for the deck and necessary retaining walls as it will actually reduce the amount of impervious yard which existed and generally improve the absorption ability of Mr. Kosak's yard thus improving the quality of the storm water run-off discharging to Lake Minnetonka. C o m p ! 9 t e Materials Handling S y s t e m s i 4 . __ W. B. Van Nest Company Page 2 July 16, 1986 I will not be available for the public hearing of July 21 and therefore have taken this opportunity to express my support for the approval of this Variance and Condi tional Use Permit. Thank you for your cooperation in this matter. *' / * * w.> mm ► i, if'*'w 3225 Carman Road Excelsior, MN 55331 July ,18, 1986 City of Orono Planning Co .mission 1275 South Brown Road Orono, KN Re: //1053 Variance for Raymond J. Kosak Dear Planning Commission; Regarding i'.r. Ray Kosak's request for a Variance for deck construction at 3265 Carman Road. We live two houses away at 3225 Carman Road and have absolutely no complaints about the construction and, indeed, view it as a definatc plus for the whole neighborhood. We would therefore urge you to grant the requested variance and conditional use permit. Sincerely, M/M Jolm T. Farnham 1 ..A . (X - T City of Orono - Public Hearing Notice Meeting of July 21, 1986 Page 2 of 2 14. #1056 Olai Hanson, 1390 Railroad Avenue - Side setback variance to construct a detached garage. All persons wishing to be heard will appear at this time. Written comments are solicited. Plans are available for review in the City offices by appointment (call 473-7357). City of Orono By: Planning Commission ■MmMMimpihiiimr : ', - .i p-.'PmtltllHL oa:»r« r«r«H»ru a‘-»iTTT7n: Ms. Jeanne Mabusth June 27, 1986 Page 2 It is our contearion though that decks, by nature of their construction are no£ conslde;:ed impervious hard surface. The surface decking is * constructed with about 3/8 inch spacing between planks. This spacing allows a downward movement of water to the natural soil after runoff travels only 2-3 inches across the decking surface. This cannot be considered comparable with roofs, sidewalks, driveways or other similar rain-impervious surfaces. The area under the deck will be covered with a filter fabric. That will allow the rainfall runoff to paaa thru to the natural soil and slow the rate of runoff while also acting as a weed barrier. The calculations for hard surface, with decking considered a pervious surface, actually show a reduction from existing, pre-deck conditions. This is due to the removal of a porch and concrete block patio adjacent to the house and a narrower reconstructed retaining wall. In summary, the site and zoning regulations have offered limitations to site utilization. A hardship exists in that the conditions and slope of the land requires the use of a retaining wall for stabilization and steps to move thru yard is flat enough to be effectively utilized, especially adjacent to the house and pool. The slopes that were ^ adjacent to the pool had created a safety problem with people tripping and falling dom the hill. Therefore, the deck solved a safety problem aid allowed wo^rb! utilized. At this point, a hardshipwould be created should it be required that the deck be removed. The deck does not create a situation that would be Injurious to adjacent property. It does not alter the character of the area. The neighboring acceptable addition. A deck is an acceptable and typical accessory use within the zoning district and is felt to be consistent with the spirit and Intent of the zoning code. If you have any questions or require additional Information, please contact me. Respectfully submitted, WESTWOOD PLANNING & ENGINEERING COMPANY Greg Kopischke GK:jms cc: Mr. Raymond J. Kosak enclosures j 1 n CO Hi (Pcr ' cn (n Ctl 1 .0* 0 £; CP oi> P i ^ Mb r* B n Hi CO Hi ij I $ « «^ 0 li PROM: DATE: SUBJ: TO: Mayor ButlerMark Bernhardson, City Administrator Orono Council Members Planning Commission Members Jeanne A. Mabusth, Zoning Administrator July 17, 1986 #1053 Raymond Kosakr 3265 Carman Road - Variance/Conditional Use Permit List of Exhibits - A - Application B - Plat Map C - Property Owners list D - Adjacent Property Owners acknowledgement E - Nelson letter F - Anderson letter G ~ Gruss letter Gl- Additional letters H - Planner's report I - Hardcover inventory mapping J - Survey K - Elevations Applications ~ a) Conditional Use Permit for construction of new retainina wall S%"ct?o*n “roT3 TuM. “9 protected c) Lakeshore setback variance for deck. Required = 75* Proposed * 61 * Variance =14* or 19% Section 10.21 Subd. Sect"ot!^"/s “Mrequired within 0-75' a 75-250' setback area - ^-‘'Drlvewrfrf^zl i?f! hardcover review) B - Stairs in front yard « 217 s.f. C - House * 1579 s.f. D - Lower deck already constructed = 617 s.f. ^ 8 3^5^^ ^®ck area within 75 feet of lake already constructed >= P - Lowest level deck not constructed = 439 s.f. G - Upper deck over F deck not constructed = 188 s.f. H - Upper deck partially constructed = 182 s.f. I - Retaining wall - existing = 46 s.f. , „ , ,, proposed = 27.5 s.f.J - Proposed wall = 27.5 s.f. K - Steps on lakeshore = 95 s.f. L„ Zoning File #1053 July 17, 1986 Page 2 of 5 0~75' Hardcover Area = 7,208 s.f. existing = 141 s.f. or *1.9% (i & k) proposed existing = 855 s.f. or 11.8% (constructed without permit)(E + 1/3 of H) (D + 2/3 of H) proposed « 608 s.f. or 8.4% (F+J + 2/3 of G+**i) Total proposed variance = 1463 s.f. 20% •Hardcover existed within the 0-75 setback area in the form decking? ~ an<3 replaced with ••Please note new retaining wall construction provides less hardcover. Existing (I) = 46 s.f. H^-oviaes less Proposed (J&I) = 45 s.f. 75-250* Hardcover Area = 12,777 s.f. allowed « 3194 s.f. or 25% existing «= 2821 s.f. or 22% (A+B+C) Total proposed = 3583 s.f. or 28% Proposed existing * 678 s.f. or 5.3% (constructed without a permit) Va???n?e : constructed Review of Application - and ertlriof ofTi"s ®V'® remodeling both the interior permits foTthe work “"^°-^tunately, his contractor failed to obtain improvements involve the removal of lakeside porches/decks and The Pvifttin replacing them with various levels of spaced wooden decJcino to insiftl retainrng wall (I) needs to be replaced and applicant wishes o? the lake retaining wall (J) all located'^Sithxn T^feel ?la? Thf®an^??r%'K^^ extended from the two grade level door^s Tt thi D?ovidino%i^ structural alterations at the upper stor? two egresses to proposed deck area H & G. Deck H has been area F, uppe^^ <f^ck%"and*^th?> D & E have been completed. Lowest deck adjacent /o"stru?ttre ha"ve not t^L"^o"m “le°t:d?°''""""'"" """" untetThtTpac'’e7w°otd%rd^^r^ ^ "^Iter fabricM?: LptlchC allowing rainfall to filter through. will result in l#aees proposed laJceshore improvements ntt pervious tt rtnoff hardcover because the original harLover was Zoning File #1053 July 17, 1986 Page 3 of 5(revLw^^hiMt^ findings for your consideration for access steps to lakeshore. ^ Applicant?ri\\\sK%lrd".°" f;r^nli&Tnrp?op%rt7e\^" "° P°- hazards fimprovements are similar to the types of improvements severe^sllp:s"ro%?hr(Lfs"on":if^1rh:K 5. The improvement does not alter the character of the neighborhood. district!°^^"^ conforming use within a residential 7. The proposed improvements will have a positive effect on rh«. surrounding property value. posicxve etrect on the based on locatxon of house to 75 feet setback and no vis^ual impact ol piact of^^xAs^’ina ~ additional structure in?h=n X • X f P®^^° hardcover, not to be any closer to the lake an exxstxng hardcover. 0—75* hardcover 17.5%. #983 Pemberton, 3580 North Shore Drive - approved new structure hardcover in 0-75* zone. 0-75* hardcover 20%. structure and s?tLtura ’^l ■ ®PP>^°ved additional 72 s.f. of harToVer" (redJct7o?frr24??%\^^^ °-”' ^ llkrshore“ft^both’'f^'’®^x® ^’^^^ed away from the lake, and requested that and rear of property so that neighbors for view Du^rnotr^c 7.T. °u ^^use conform to the existing housestor view purposes. 0-75' hardcover 15.8%. Zoning File #1053 July 17, 1986 Page 4 of 5#920 Fegers, 3590 North Shore Drive - approved variances to a 1 i ^ deck and screen porch of 123 square feet in O-vl' setback h!rdcn';f®"^ removals of 0-75- hardcover resulting in no nero-75' hardcover increase. Approval 0-75' hardcover 3.2%. “ #907 Bigham, 1545 Long Lake Boulevard - allowed to increase n-7>;' hou7e°.'“""' locatio^"°o7""istZng Issues for Consideration - 20%7ncrefrr^"^ Commission make similar findings in order to approve a 20% increase in new hardcover within the 75' setback area? 2. Should the second or upper level deck areas over lower deck areas thes7calluli?io7s‘=®^‘=“l*tions? Applicant has included them in decking cllssi?icl?lo77ecoi^lnded7^ th^^ “renews? 4. What alterations or amendments can be suggested to the anolicant if members feel the request is too excessive or extrem".: a) What deck areas can be altered? removed? E, P, G or H - G & H are upper decks - applicant will require landing arL at rear door where patio block remain (under G s H) - alterations of house now provide egress via G s H. alterations Oi Staff Recomniendation — of a‘*new7etainina’'i,7lV “7 Permit and variance to allow the installation the lake7ort replacement of existing retaining wall within. j O2T0 piTOtGCtod ^TGQ ITGSUXtiriQ in an inclT0aS6=» of o -F hardcover based on the following findings and hardships: ’ bank7^^ slopes within lakeshore yard required to provide stability of 2. Slight decrease in hardcover with new construction. hardcover and lakeshore setback variances of 14* or 19% for deck within lakeshore subject to the following amendments: Alternative A 75'*setba7k are°a.^^'"°’' ° encroachment within 2. Applicant must replace deck F with pervious ground cover - eqress door under deck G is limited to 20 s.f. of hardcover for landing! d'D, E s H to remain in addition to walking deck over deck D resulting in an increase of 835* s.f. of hardcover or 11.5%. Zoning File #1053 July 17, 1986 Page 5 of 5Approval is subject to the following conditions:1. Geothermal filter fabric covered with rock mulch must be installed under deck areas D, E & H. 2. Erosion control must be employed at the time the lakeshore retaining walls are installed. ♦Staff has not included upper deck H as hardcover since deck F was not ^PP^oved and a pervious surface exists below on grade. Alternative B iV deck E (see exhibit I slashed lines) providing minimum 10 feet of ceck along east side of pool for safety concern reducing hardcover from deck E to 385 s.f. 2. Alter proposed deck F along slashed line (10 feet reduction) allowing now for increase in hardcover from deck F within protected area of 338 s.f. 3. Allow upper deck areas G & H to be constructed as proposed with an increase in hardcover within protected area for a total of 72 s.f. - portion of G deck that extends beyond lower F deck within protected aiTGa. within 75* protected area of 795 s.f. or 11%. Same Conditions apply as in alternative A. would add the following supportive findings or hardships to the applicant s planner s findings noted on pages 2 & 3 of this memo; 1. Location of 75 feet setback line in relation to rear of house. 2. Visual impact of structure within 75' setback area is decreased because property is located on a lagoon and not visible from main lake. Staff Addendum - A hardcover variance increase within the 75-250' setback area of 3% must also be granted (total proposed 3583 s.f. or 28%). Please note a side setback variance has not been addressed by staff because ^ setback variance is not required perSection 10.03 Subd. 15(C): C. Fences which do not exceed 3-1/2 feet in height, fences not over u height along the street lot line of lake frontage lots which front on a major thoroughfare, if fill is required, the total height of both fence and fill shall not exceed 6 feet above the height of the crown of the road, terraces, steps, uncovered porches, stoops or similar structures, which do not extend above the height of the ground floor level of the principal building and extend to a distace of not less than two feet from any lot line. y f^.,. ^ > 1 . -- . . ./ SOr-x'.-r^ -rlt-»A^c_ pi»^/,ci^*=r ^oo ^0 S DePos (T ^i"0 ^ S's-TD CITY OP ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION *“ •• W r-» mm mm mm mm 9^ PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address l^iOS 3 Property Identification Number (p.i.D.) 20-117-23-14-oon_ _ _ _ _ _ Please check one - Is the property _ _ abstract or X torrens? re^®uTry“urvey!®^^^ description to application if not included on APPLICANT Name Raymond J. Kosak 332-7000 (W) Phone 471-8324 (H) Address 3265 Carman Road; Excelsior . MN 55331 OWNER Name Same as Applicant Phone Mailing Address // 3-W Bey Date Property Acquired /*//? X / 9 s y (month/year) _ _ _not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. PRESENT OSE OF PROPERTY *” Present Zoning District LR-lB Present Use of Property single family Residential Other (specify) description OP REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $ /c-/? o. ^ reconstruction of aretaining wall VARIANCES REQUIRED __ __ Lot Area Setback Variances ( Lot Width Front _ _ Hardcover Side Rear) y .' V rx HARDSHIP Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty resulting from strict enforcement of zoning regulations 5 SeeaCtachcd narrative DESCRIPTION OF tJNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code Regurrements S Sgg attached narrativG ________ ^_ _ REQUIRED SUBMITTALS 1. Completed Application Form 2. Certified Property Owners List of owners within 150' (you can obtain Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Govt Center348—3271)• 3. Stamped, legal sized envelopes (#10) pre-addressed to each of the names on the above list with no return address. 4. Certificate of survey including hardcover calculations as required. 5. Plat Map. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign remember that your variance application is information has not been included. APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE this application. Please not complete if the above The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay all fees and/or unusual expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. Applicant's Signature OWNERS SIGNATURE ^ i ^ . r- V / i) C—-) -7*^-- - - --Date The owner hereby ackowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents. Commission members, and Council members for purposes of investiga tion and verification of this request. Owner's Signature - -‘ _ _ _ _v'4^Date Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. oc ui a Q n: r atn o o -X a oUJ <O 2 lU>" N < >- \< lU C3i < UJ f’ oO oW'' Adjacent Property Ovmers' Acknowledgement Form I (we) have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the property located at Z'O also referred to as Land Use Application No. /052 . 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 that the pro posed neighbor's project or use requires City Council approval. Property Owner - -1-Date '' l!-review^orthis'^Land’^Use^Appl^Mtiln^^oT^ assist the City in the to the Building s Zoning'^Of f ice at l^e^st ^ comments scheduled meeting date. days prior to the THOMAS P. NELSONsa4B carman road excelsior , MINNESOTA 6E30I r “JUN2 7 1986 June 26, 1986 tf' rjL : . w oCity of Orono Building & Zoning Office P. 0. Box 66 Crystal Bay, Minnesota 55323 Centlemen: I understand that my neighbor, Mr. Ray Kosak, 3265 Carman Road Excelsior, Minnesota is applying for a variance for construction of a sundeck addition to his home. We live next door Co Mr. Koeok and have resided in our house for over 21 years. Over the years, we have watched owners come and go in Mr. Kosak's house and have felt in recent years, until Mr. Kosak's arrival, that the property had become somewhat run down. The purpose of this letter is to tell you that we heartily endorse and support Mr. Kosak's deck project and his overall efforts to improve the appearance and value of his property The proposed deck project, which is in full view frorour home gieatly enhances the appearance of the house, improves the functional use of the steep hill that is a characteristic of the property, and provides additional privacy both for Mr. Kosak and for us. In general, it will help upgrade the appearance of the whole area. I hope Mr. Kosak will receive early favorable consideration cor his Variance request. Sincerely, / July 10, 1986 DSIDESIGN STUDIOS INTERNATIONAL 575 SHELARD TOWER - 600 SOUTH COUNTY ROAD 18 MINNEAPOLIS. MINNESOTA 55426- (612) 546-0983 Planning Commission/Orono City Council Box 66 Crystal Bay, m 55323 Dear Council Members: I am writing in regards to the residence of Raymond Kosak, 3265 Carman Road. As an interior designer I have done work with Mr. Kosak within his home Being a lake resident, ny husband and I boat regularly and were ve^ by the improvements made on his home exterior. ^ pressea to find that you had stopped progress due to city regulations. The irony is that in my mind Mr. Kosak was doing great things for the overall improvement of the neighborhood. y i- e uvenai-x and the project wilLbe Sincerely, (Z/ Suzy ‘^derson Interior Designer 1720 Bohn's Point Road Associate Member ASID SA/mk cc: Ray Kosak 71 IINDUSTRIES, INC PHONE: (612)445*4121OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT July 9, 1986 Mr. Michael P. Gaffron Assistant Zoning Administrator City of Orono Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Dear Mr. Gaffron: As a neighbor, residence 3285 Carman Road, I am asking that your grant the variance #1053 to Mr. Raymond J. Kosak of 3265 Carman Roaa. Basically he is improving and updating an older house, which has a positive effect on the neighbor hood. If you have questions feel free to contact me either at work or at home. Respe^fullyT^ Mark PresI pk CC:Raymond J. Kosak 3265 Carman Road Excelsior, MN 55331 9 *- \ \ r-?r^ JUL t 019R6 ________ I,. • •^ __’ P.O. BOX 67 4400 VALLEY INDUSTRIAL BLVD. N. SHAKOPEE MN 55379-9990 OFFICES: Denver Los Angeles Kansas City Chicago Milwaukee Eau Claire Indianapolis Detroit Cleveland Sioux Falls Dallas El Paso Chattanooga 121 AINU JUAN T^IELSEN3300 car ;.ian road EXCELSIOR, MINNESOTA 55331 July 18, 1986 City of Orono Planning Commiaalon Land use application #1053 Property of Raymond J, Kosak, 3265 Carman Road The proposed deck and landscaping for the Kosak property would be a welcome addition to our neighborhood. We have seen the plans for the proposed improvements and totally support the project. It is esthetically pleasing and will enhance our area. Sincerely, Stave as Joan Nielsen W. B. VAN NEST COMPANY i<^ 3295 CARMAN ROADJuly 16, 1986 EXCELSIOR, MINNESOTA 55331 PHONE 612-471-7881<---,k/ [siJUL I 81966 City of Orono Planning Commission P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 RE: #1053 Raymond J. Kosak Variance and Conditional Use Permit Dear Planning Commission Members: I would like to submit the following comments for your July 21, 1986 public hearing pertaining to Raymond i:rsak, 3265 Carman Road. ^ ^ I have reviewed the plans for the wood deck and retaining walls being constructed around the existing swimming pool by Mr. Kosak. I understand that the deck extends into the 75-iOOt setback from Lake Minnetonka and therefore requires a lakeshore setback as well as a sideyard setback variance. I would like to point out that the deck is above the ground and is constructed such that It will allow the drainage of water through the deck between the deck boards draining to the ground underneath the deck. The project also included the removal Of a considerable section of concrete padio and porch area which will no longer be an impervious surface and therefore the project will actually increase the amount of absorption area in Mr. Kosak's yard for protection of Lake Minnetonka. Mr. Kosak s lot is a pie-shaped lot as are most of the lots on Carman Road. It is not uncommon for these pie-shaped lots to require sideyard variances at the building ine. In fact, our house as well as most of the houses on our street, have had sideyard setbacks which were necessary in order to build on these lots. The hard- shape of the lot making it impossible to meet the performance standards of the zoning code without a variance. I was a member of the City Council at the time the city granted a variance to the previous owner of Mr. Kosak's house to allow them to build the concrete pool and deck, which required a sideyard setback at that time. From my review of Mr. Kosak's the pool increasing the sideyard variance which has already been granted for From my perspective, I feel that this Variance and Conditional Use Permit should be approved for the deck and necessary retaining walls as it will actually reduce the amount of impervious yard which existed and generally improve the absorption ability Of Mr. Kosak s yard thus improving the quality of the storm water run-off discharging to Lake Minnetonka. ^ ^ Complete Materials Handling Systems ._J W. B. Van Nest Company Page 2 July 16, 1986JThank you for your cooperation in this matter. /n /'I 'YoUrs truly, // / /_ _ _ _ _/* \ Brad Van Nest m City of Orono - Public Hearing Notice Meeting of July 21, 1986 Page 2 of 2 14. #1056 Olai Hanson, 1390 Railroad Avenue - Side setback variance to construct a detached garage. All persons wishing to be heard will appear at this time. Written comments are solicited. Plans are available for review in the City offices by appointment (call 473-7357). City of Orono By; Planning Commission Michael P. Gaffron,^ Assistant Zoning Administrator To be published the week of July 7, 1986 in the Laker and Pioneer Newspaper. rJoiCY /G SC Ct 7Y / 0 9AIC PBop^E^iyy Oba /L S7« s : 77t£.€ i/tQt TSO 77^ Tlhr C,£SAT ^ TO /5£ C.O/^^77^ucr€D ^ Ste€ HO P^oSls.u^I^ P.7V€ Ao . [ V OLf / / JCyi^\yCf , i^yC^U^ 3/C-C'y } i\\ f.O.*. », .**>* j|.ivr > V isswi«RasRR~^aB»sas?^^ WESTWOOD PLANNING & ENGINEERING COMPANY rfJ.t-n /;■ *> W June 27, 1986 •/r -.UWij r»J 1*' h A^-n 7^ Ms. Jeanne Mabusch City of Orono P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, Mn 55323 Re: Raynond J. Kosak Residence 3265 Carman Road; Excelsior, MN 55331 Dear Ms. Mabusth: On behalf of Mr. Raymond Kosak, we are submitting the following request for consideration by the Orono Planning Commission and Council. 1.A conditional use permit to replace an existing retaining wall that Is approximately 55 feet long and 3 feet high. The wall Is in a deteriorated condition and requires replacement to adequately retain the existing slopes of the site. It Is proposed the existing 10 Inch deep wall be replaced with 6 Inch deep treated timbers and be the same length and height. This will reduce the hardcover surface of this wall in the 0-75' lakeshore setback zone by 402. 2.A variance for hardcover within the 0-75' and 75-250' lakeshore setback zones due to construction of a deck. The deck In question had been, until recently, under construction without the necessary permits from the City. The owner was not aware of the need for a building permit or hardcover variance request. The deck Is presently about 75Z complete with another 92 rough framed (see main and upper deck as shown on the attached certificate of survey). Existing Impervious hardcover, prior to construction of the deck, was 2.612 In the 0-75' zone and 37.382 In the 75-250' zone. Both represent a variance to allowed hardcover. The calculations Included roof, driveway, walks, steps, retaining walls, etc. A porch has since been removed and an area of concrete patio blocks Is planned to be removed. The deck Is a multi-level structure. Interconnected with stairs and tied to the various levels of the house. Since there is 17-20 feet of drop to the lake from the house, the design intent of the deck was to create flat activity areas adjacent to the house and pool without altering the existing steep slopes and ground form. If con lered hardcover, this deck would represent an Increase of impervious surface. 741S WAYZATA BOULEVARD. MINNEAPOLIS. MINNESOTA 5S426 «6l2i &4A01SS •' 4 Ms. Jeanne Mabusth June 27» 1986 Page 2 It Is our contention though that decks, by nature of their construction, are not considered Impervious hard surface. The surface decking Is constructed with about 3/8 Inch spacing between planks. This spacing allows a doimward movement of water to the natural soil after runoff travels only 2-3 Inches across the decking surface. This cannot be considered comparable with roofs, sidewalks, driveways or other similar raln-lmpervlous surfaces. The area under the deck will be covered with a rock mulch over a geotechnical filter fabric. That will allow the rainfall runoff to pass thru to the natural soil and slow the rate of runoff while also acting as a weed barrier. The calculations for hard surface, with decking considered a pervious surface, actually show a reduction from existing, pre-deck conditions. This Is due to the removal of a porch and concrete block patio adjacent to the house and a narrower reconstructed retaining wall. In summary, the site and zoning regulations have offered limitations to site utilization. A hardship exists In that the conditions and slope of the land requires the use of a retaining wall for stabilization and steps to move thru the property. Very little of the rear yard Is flat enough to be effectively utilized, especially adjacent to the house and pool. The slopes that were adjacent to the pool had created a safety problem with people tripping and falling down the hill. Therefore, the deck solved a safety problem and allowed the area adjacent to the house to be better utilized. At this point, a hardship would be created should It be required that the deck be removed. The deck does not create a situation that would be Injurious to adjacent property. It does not alter the character of the area. The neighboring landotmers find the deck to be an acceptable addition. A deck Is an acceptable and typical accessory use within the zoning district and Is felt to be consistent with the spirit and Intent of the zoning code. If you have any questions or require additional Information, please contact me. Respectfully submitted. WESTWOOD PLANNING & ENGINEERING COMPANY Greg Koplschke GK:jms cc: Mr. Raymond J. Kosak enclosures L p i i r* ^ ca 01 |H» it if S F' Jj o 5< o »ozo X > Dr5D t LAND SURVEYORS 1 • ■4 3 Z UNe CO c 1 < rt> o •1 C-»m 50 o o CO o -e hereby certify that this is a true and correct representation of a survey of the I ®n?/ described and of the location of all buildings, if any. Iheroon and all visible encroachments, if any, from or on said land. Dated this 29th day ----------------------------Majj ________19 M_* ‘ -------------- ‘ TO: 9ROM: DATE: SDBJ: Mayor Butler Mark Bernhardson, City Administrator Orono Council Members Planning Commission Members Michael P. Gaffron, Assistant Zoning Administrator July 18, 1986 #1054 Steven Schnebly, 2555 Countryside Drive - Variance - Public Hearing Zoning District ~ RR-IB Application - Variance to construct entrance walls in front yard (after-the- fact ) List of Exhibits - A - Application B - Plat Map C - Property Owners list D - Survey showing proposal E - Staff sketch of wall construction Portinent Code Sections — 10.03 Subd. 15 (C)(D)(E)(P) 10.03 Subd. 9 (D) Discussion - Applicant constructed a fence on his property which uses 18" square brick pillars as fence posts; the pillars are all 3*6" high dnd although somewhat massive, do meet what we consider the definition of a fence and not requiring a permit. The items of concern are the ornamental walls at either side of the driveway entrance. These are constructed of masonry and at the peak are 6* above ground, technically requiring a variance because: a) fences or walls along a front lot line may not exceed 42". t*) this is considered as an accessory structure, no accessory structures are allowed in front yards. The walls are within the property boundary and do not obstruct access views, so they are not a safety hazard. I am told that the neighborhood homeowners association is aware of and in approval of this. You might ask the applicant whether he intends to place any lights, spheres, or other ornamental feature on the highest pillars. ^ Zoning Pile #1054 July 18, 1986 Page 2 of 2 Staff Reconmendation - Staff does not have a problem with these entrance walla anri recoiranend apprpval p£ this application. Conceptuai piscpseion'— Does \he Planning Commission wiah specific performance standard"'m"igr It t^pr^oTriattr"'*"^ u ■ CITY O]ii i n.l5fif^ONOJ-j VAHI^L-/ so ;^CVU.O- 'n cx PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address CcUhvl^fZU Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) / </ DOOL Please check one - Is the property ^ abstract or torrens? % re|u\re/Vurvey!®^^^ description to application if not included on APPLICANT Name hj Sci^ac Riy j Phone H?3 OWNER __Arry,^ ^a tp s<r?' Name Phone Mailing Address mr\ ^ Date Property Acquired JSj SC<_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ I (do) ^o no^ also own the adjacent parcels of land. PRESENT USE OP PROPERTY Present Zoning District If^ ^ \ S (month/year) Present Use of Property ^.XTResidential Other (specify) DESCRIPTION OP REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $ t> .. Thl|+ r>-. ji; uj^uDescribe request in detail; ia 'V C* ^mll ' ^ VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area Setback Variances ( Lot Width Front Hardcover Side Other l^Ccnfi> . f/J Vi?cvtj> Rear) nCLC HARDSHIP Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty resulting from strict enforcement of zoning regulations: DESCRIPTION OP UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS CoirRequ^rementsf”^^''*'^ conditions preventing compliance with Zoning ed on SS3: REQUIRED SUBMITTALS 1. Completed Application Form Certified Property Owners List of owners within 150' (you can obtain 348-3271? Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Govt Center Stamped, legal sized envelopes (#10) pre-addressed to each of the names on the above list with no return address. Certificate of survey including har'^c^^rjGa'lrcuI^ty^ons as required. Plat Map, 3. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign remember that your variance application is information has not been included. APPLICANT * S SIGNATURE this, application. Please not complete if the above The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay all fees and/or unusual expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information suppMed is true and correct to the best of his/her Knowleage. ^ Date (g/0,1 / yC,Applicant's Signature^ OWNERS SIGNATURE The owner hereby ackowledgei 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 investioa- tion and verificati*^ t' Owner's Signature V c5h of this request. Date Applicant must have all submittals into the offices 25 days before the third SlndaroriaVml^thf' Commission Meetings are held on the :ict 2*13. Z6 408.61 260 2 ‘0 • >• (y') t <4 • 0 ^ 2 ^•I rr\ 4 'J 1 2 0 tr r •’! 1! it , • u r'i I. I^l! 'i' 4 i; !l t i! 1 ; •* ► \ '!! :l Hi . ( 'TOP I//CTO (s — 1 I V / 1. , > 1 ^ 1 ' r *1 ■._______# - I ... ------- - X jaiMk •t '? - -j TO:Mayor Butler Mark Bernhardson, City Administrator Orono Council Members Planning Commission Members FROM: DATE: Michael P. Gaffron, Assistant Zoning Administrator July 16, 1986 SDBJ:#1055 Daniel Lee Bragg, 500 Orchard Park Road Variance - Public Hearing Zoning District - RR-IA, 5-Acre Residential Application - Request for variances to conduct a home occupation in a detached accessory structure - alternative (less desirable) is request for side setback variances to add studio to house or to existing barn. Pertinent Ordinance - Section 10.20 Subd, 4(C) - C. Home Occupations. Any gainful occupation meeting all of the following requirements when engaged in only by persons residing in their dwelling, when there is no employed assistant, when that occupation is conducted within the principal structure only, when evidence of the occupation is not visible from the street, no signs other than those permitted^ in R* Districts are present, no excessive stock in trade is stored on the premises, over the counter retail sales are not involved , the entrance to the home occupation is gained from within the structure, and the use does not adversely affect the character of the uses permitted in the district in which it is located. A profesional person may use his residence for consultation, emergency treatment or omr*snce of religious rites but not for general practice of his profession when such general practice will involve the need for more than three off-street parking spaces for the occupant and visitors. List of Exhibits - A - Application B - Plat Map C - Property Owners list D - Survey E - Home Occupation License Application Pertinent Facts - Required 50' 100' 10* Existing 20.6' 42.1' 16.5' Side Setback - Existing House Front Setback- Existing House Side Setback - Barn Building (not for animals) Accessory Building-Max. Floor Area (Non-animal housing) (Note floor area includes second stories, i.e. a 20'x20' 1000 s.f 960 s.f. ^ ^ ^ ^ W 'W M ^ m building with a second story floor is 800 s.f. total) 1 #■ Zoning File #1055 July 16, 1986 Page 2 of 3 Discussion - ifailowW a if he of the existing house is'such that nla^ property. The location be needed to expand the house Aonlicant variances would studio with plumbing facilities ® detached near the drainfield area. ' *=he rear of the lot be g|^eral\°y°centereVon th\'"s 4^^ would be located so ?hal ft would L-V hh“® “ would have to be a problem: lneciflc de«,^fi although this would not elimiLte any clay%ni'^wfsfes from anv"t necessary to sSbatandard^fortM^^s!"^^ line, quite would require setback variances^^^^* addition to the house reouiffm^f% i®“0 s-i- maximum floor area ^ffordlng ”fy". " "" -c®®sory structure and wouirde^ign Hone Occupation Standards - »co^Pciai"°use^tf t^Ves^^d®en^^^^^^ : L°mr^:-rti‘rtrdul^7d fr^c%"ff ^itructure 3 nA must be gained from within the structure L- stored^n^-^emises. 7. Must not adversely affect neighborhood. street^sffcef.’' P''°^®®®i°"® 1" occupation limited to 3 off- applicatfon ^®^'1®P® apparent stumbling blocks for this home occupation dff Pt®5®d®nt-setting in Orono to allow a distr?^?'^ Vn°"accessorv s^r'’ I'^tucture in residential zoning council-, deta'ched" strrturrs“^^^^ras“g?r7g\f,Ta°v?inly^e ‘^n" 1 L smr ■! - ■.—4Ata Zoning File #1055 July 16, 1986 Page 3 of 3 allowed to contain vehicles and/or stored materials hnf- ^ Totlvtty: Plu-bing and essential!®; no\usine|s If the alternative of a studio addition +-r» k Staff RecoBBendation — 1. Since approval of a home occupation within a to the driveway location , the most logical choice wluld be to add on directly east. If applicant wishes to pursue this Specificallt^°“At ‘’®.*^®‘3“?®ted to describe his proposal this point, you could a)table oendino on to Cotn^"ilTi^ra variances outright; or c)pas! vari?nce"s°?re\Ui^oVed%®;^rgr"a1f^^^^^ specifying what 3. Although the Municipal Code does not specify that Planning Commission review is needed for a Homroccupation License where no variances are needed, in this case ^here wm^^hrifllnn^rtvlew.’'''® “ necessarily con'current 7\V’J HARDSHIP n iirn 'Mr ^ i^/ao ^ ^ DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS ’ ?lirRequ^re:^nt^r°""""" conditions preventing compliance with Zoning - -^—y-g- ^±JLrh:„^ Ml JL^ REQUIRED SUBMITTALS 1. Completed Application Form Certified Property Owners List of owners within 150' (you can obtain 348-3271? County Department of Finance A-603 Govt Center \ envelopes (#10) pre-addressed to each of the names on the above list with no return address. 4. Certificate of survey including hardcover calculations as required. 5. Plat Map. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign uriV"aDoTiTa~tion""’pTrrri Sa\i^ co^^^e?l^?rthe^^-- APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE - - ®9rees to provide all information required or quested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay all fees and/nr- t{le®?nfo®rml??on s"unnf application/and ce^riies thatknowledge! S“PPlxed is true and correct to the best of his/her Applicant's Signature OWNERS SIGNATURE ^0 Date Owner's Signature Date r ■I'M i:j;w mm [•fsT#T3 [•Kira SIS INFORMATION ITEM ONLY A Planning Cominission Orono Council Members From: Michael P. Gaffron, Assistant Zoning Administrator July 7, 1986 Subject: #983 Marilyn & Walter Pemberton, 3580 North Shore Drive - update Regarding Variances Granted per Resolution #1903 The Pembertons have revised their site plan and house clans to accomodate a front-loading tuckunder garage. The entire house will now meet the 10* side setback from FegLs' property. The front yard same a driveway and garage on the Hardcover allowed in the 0-75' zone was 20% or 836 s.f. This 10.9%. Hardcover allowed in the 75- s^f The h ®*i5’ proposal calls for 54% or 1,703 thVn hardcover therefore is 2,159 s.f., or 310 s.f. less than that originally allowed. Staff feels this meets the intent of Resolution 1903, hence no application revision will be forthcoming. TO: PROM: DATE Mayor ButlerMark Bernhardson, City Administrator Orono Council Members Planning Commission Members Jeanne A. Mabusth, Zoning Administrator July 14, 1986 SUBJECT: #1057 City of Orono — Zoning Amendment that would permit attached dwelling units with a PRD mode of development within specific sewered zoning districts Pertinent Sections of Code Section 10*20 Subdivision 3(H) Conditiona3. Use Permit Required for PRD Section 10.32 PRD Code Section 10.21 Subdivision 3(A) Attached Dwelling Allowed in R-lB District Section 10.25 Subdivision 4(A) Attached Dwellings Allowed in LR-IC District Section 10.26 Subidivision 3(C) Attached Dwellings Required But Limited to Four Units The enclosed public hearing notice suggests a single amendment of the PRD section of the Code (10.32) in order to allow duplex units in zoning districts under a PRD mode of development (Conditional Use Permit) where attached dwellings are not allowed. The City Attorney has advised that in light of the structure or format of the zoning code that it is perferable to amend each specific zoning section rather than the PRD code if the City approves an amendment that would allow attached dwelling units in zoning districts where none are allowed. m The current code allows attaciied dwellings in R-lB, LR-IC and LR- lC-1 districts. The LR-lC-1 district is limited to four attached dwellings. PRD's within the R-lB and LR-lC districts have no limitation as to the number of attached dwellings allowed. This would appear to be subject to the discretion of the Council under Section 10.32. Please note this amendment does not seek a density credit via the duplex unit. Each unit must satisfy the minimum area requirement as required with all pro's. The amendment has been proposed by staff in light of past discussions with specific developers who question the reasoning or purpose in limiting PRO'S in sewered 1 acre or 2 acre zones from attached dwellings where the intent is to preserve open space and in lakeshore districts limiting hardcover. Issues for discussion: 1. Is the intent of the PRO code sacrificed if medium . . . low density sewered areas are permitted attached dwellings? 2. Is the intent of the specific medium/low density district sacrificed if attached dwellings are permitted? 3. What negative or detrimental findings ---- characteristics ---- effects ----- are associated with developments that provide attached dwellings? 4. Is it necessary to limit the attached dwelling to two or can this too be left to the discretion of the Council as in districts R-IB and LR-IC? 5. Should the question of attaching dwelling units with PRO'S be based on sewer availability and access to highways rather than high, medium or low densities? 6. Is the issue of attaching dwellings more the developer's concern 1 and costs, pattern of surrounding neighborhood, market demands etc? Alternatives of Action A) If sewer availability and immediate access to highways are more relevant in matters pertaining to attached dwellings with pro's, the Planning Commission may amend the code as follows: 1 “ Amend Section 10,20 Subdivision 3 H to read as follows: dwellings where sZ °T"''\ detached sinole;rs:L-rk“ —' - .r.-.:;];:;: stricts amend the code as follow^: Anend Section I0.20 Subdivision 3 H to re d^ ^ ^ to read as follows; attacLng%Vrelung°7„^^^^^ finds there is a need to li„it the -d.um denisty districts. sL^ th7 c7d7i"s iriiL^'^^^^ district ".»-v —r .trL“4:r..rf “ CITY OF ORONO notice “™" .. . . =.“:r“r~r~ aupzex ..JZ ’ ,uJZ V•>th*(wi*« allow,d_ * ** ^“Pl*»es ars not «■ P.r.oa. ...t.„ a„ rltten consents are solicited. City of Orono By* Planning Commission will «PPv-ar at this time. ‘ I Mewepaper!*'*’®*’ *"**® "®®’' °f July 7, iggg ^inistrator the taker and Pioneer