Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-23-1998 Council PacketPublic Attendance MEEm’G Date /- !<■ □□ Council Planning Commission Park Commission O ther |iRE(mSTEI>MELQW-r^^^ NAME (please print)ADDRESS PRESENT FOR (from agenda) NAME OR NUMBER 2,. 4. ^ /c (-i r>j y'- ' <' <7 ' - X .A /,/(■ '/ K ±) i c L i V C <— I > '■?' t -.Cj V xi . Lcvi’ ,C /'/.. .✓ /H 4 'I !s u ^' A -/ ^ (qc c'f'Auu '^' Hi i-i \ __________7^ (\ iC. O 7-iAn 8. 9. 10, 11-- 12._ 13. _ 14. _ 15. _ 0Q9SJt AGENDA FOR COUNCIL MEETING SET FOR MONDAY, NOVEMBER 23,1998,7:00 P.M. ORONO COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 2780 KELLEY PARKWAY, ORONO, MINNESOTA (♦) Asterisk items are considered to be routine items to be enacted upon by one motion by the City Council under the Consent Item* on the agenda. Memos regarding each cf ihi Agenda items are available In the Public Packet - located on the counter near the sign in sheet. ROLL CALL CONSENT AGENDA ^ Approve/Amend RECOGNITION NOV 2 3 1998 crrYoroRCMO2<^ D.ARE Volunteers - Orono Police Officer Mike Carlson - Resolution - Orono Police Reservist Matthew Hagen - Certificate APPRO^*AL OF MINUTES ♦ JC' Regular Meeting of November 9,1998 /'PARK COMMISSION COMMENTS - Peter Welles, Representative /^PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS - Dale Lindquist, Representative y PUBLIC COMMENTS - (Limit 5 Minutes Per Person) ZOT^G ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT /^. #2395 Brent Bentrott, 1453 Park Drive - Variances - Approval Resolution; Conditional Use Permit - Denial ^ if2399 Muriel Senn, 4448 North Shore Drive - Variance - Denial #2403 Terry Clark, 1575 Long Lake Boulevard - Variances/Conditional Use Permit - Resolution #2411 Paul and Leann Hanssen, 3195 Casco Circle - Variances/Conditional Use Penrnt #2-tl7 ToldDevelopment, 2380 Shadywood Road-B-5 Zoning Amendment ^,^9^ #2426 George Sticlmey, XXXX Willow Drive - Preliminary Subdivision - Resolution #2428 Terry Maurer on behalf of David Hardten, 2515 Kelly Avenue - Variance - Resolution #2430 PaulPhillips, 2140 Sixth Avenue North-Preliminary Plat-Resolution * T2. #2435 Jeff Litzen - Lutz Construction, 3433 Livingston Avenue - Variances - Resolution ^ 43. #243 7 Jeff Marrineau, 2565 North Shore Drive - Variances - Resolution * 44. #2438 Michael Sletten, 4680 Bayside Road - Lot Line Rearrangement - Resolution l^<-^2439 Service 800, Inc., 2190 Wayzata Boulevard - Commercial Site Plan Review - Variances/Conditional Use Permit - Resolution 4c 16^ #2442 Tony Eiden, 345 Leaf Street - Variance - Renewal Resolution Little Orchard - Vegetation Easement Amendment Joe Fiedler - Refund Approval - Resolution Blue Hill Special Lot Combination - Revise Conditions MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT I AGENDA FOR COUNCIL MEETING SET FOR MONDAY, NOVEMBER 23,1998,7:00 P M ORONO COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 2780 KELLEY PARKWAY, ORONO, MINNESOTA ENGINEER REPORT ^ -207 Request for Final Payment - Old Crystal Bay Road Traffic Signal f. 2h Request for Payment#!-Navarre Water Plant Rehabilitation CITY ADMINISTRATOR’S REPORT K 22^ Police Service Contract Rene^^'al3 - Long Lake, Spring Park and Minnetonka Beach 23. Long Lake Fire Department Proposal to Purchase 5 Inch Fire Hose CITY ATTORNEY’S REPORT ♦ 24. LICENSES 1999 Liquor Licenses * 25. BILLS UPCOMING ISSUES AND EVENTS 1922 11/09 11/11 11/16 11/18 11/23 11/26 11/27 12/02 12/02 12/07 12/07 12/14 12/24 12/25 Council Meeting, 7:00 p.m. HOLIDAY, Veteran's Day Planning Commission Meeting, 6:30 p.m. Council Work Session, 7:30 a.m. Council Meeting, 7:00 p.m. HOLIDAY, Thanksgiving HOLIDAY, Thanksgiving Council Work Session, 7:30 a.m. Highway 12 Design Review Committee, 5:30 p.m. Truth in Taxation Hearing, 7:00 p.m. Park Commission Meeting, 7:15 p.m. Council Meeting, 7:00 p.m. HOLIDAY HOLIDAY - t Mill REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION NOV 2 3 1998 ^^rYo:■c■p.o^;o '• November 18, 1998 Item No: Department Approval:Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Name: Gary Cheswick^^l^^^ Title:Chief of Police Item Description: Acknowledgement of Mike Carlson and Matt Hagen for efforts in support of th- D.A.R.E. program - Resolution Exhibits:1. Resolution in recognition of Mike Carlson 2. Certificate of Appreciation for Matt Hagen DISCUSSION In the spring of 1997, Officer Mike Carlson approached the City of Orono, offering to donate his own race car and time to promote the DARE program for a two year project, on behalf of the Orono Police Department. Mike’s offer was gratefully accepted and the race car was customized with the help of local merchants, to visually enhance the DARE program. Mike, along with Matt Hagen, a member of the Orono Police Reserve, contributed many, many hours attending events within the various communities, showing the car and promoting DARE. The car received 1st and 2nd place honors continually, with requests to show the car at additional events. Mike and Matt continued unselfishly to promote DARE throughout the summer months of 1998 until completion of the program. Because of their dedication, the City wishes to acknowledge the contribution of Mike CarLson and Matt Hagen. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED 1. Adoption of a resolution of recognition for Mike Carlson’s support of the DARE program and; 2. Pre.sent Mike Carlsoti with Resolution and Matt Hagen with Certificate of Appreciation. A RESOLUTION OF RECOGNITION FOR MIKE CARLSON ’S SUPPORT OF THE D.A.R.E. PROGRAM WHEREAS, the City of Orono is a municipal corporation; and WHEREAS, the City does take the opportunity to recognize employees for their .outstanding contributions; and WHEREAS, Mike Carlson promoted "D.A.R.E." through the showing of his personal race car; and WHEREAS, Mike Carlson volunteered his time and resources to the "D.A.R.E.' program; and WHEREAS, Mike Carlson has continuously demonstrated a responsiveness to the community through drug awareness education; and WHEREAS, Mike Carlson has received many commendations and recognition through letters of support from citizens. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Orono City Council recognizes Mike Carlson for his outstanding service to the City and its citizens by this resolution Adopted by the Orono City Council on this ___day of , 1998. ATTEST:Gabriel Jabbour, Mayor Linda S. Vee, City Clerk ‘ ■ ;.• •• ■’vcVJ ' ■■ m: feii' 'V WM Liuvra^m b .^•ii:i 7WbM^ mMi, * .♦ ••'JTh . * m U>9^y*r. ■ "■ ■^WM MATTHEW DENNIS HAGEN In recognition of your dedication, commitment and service to the City of Orono as an Orono Police Reservist volunteering your time in promoting drug awareness through the ’’DARE*' custom car program From 1997 through 1998 .1^ '•W'fevimi ■ .V w V^A *•* i.'v • f H*.V.* •* 1*6 •' ■Y- / J.* . yr ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR NOVEMBER 9,1998 NOV 2 3 I9W coYcrcnoNo 5 ROLL The Council met on the above mentioned date with the following members present: Mayor Gabriel Jabbour, Council Members Charles Kelley, J. Diann Goetten, Barbara Peterson and Richard Flint. Representing staff were City Administrator Ron Moorse, City Attorney Tom Barrett, Senior Planning Coordinator Michael Gaffron, Assistant Zoning Administrator Paul Weinberger, City Engineer Tom Kellogg and Recorder Carole Haseman. Mayor Jabbour called the meeting to order at 7:03 p.m. (#1) CONSENT AGENDA Items 9, 13, 14 and 15 v/ere added to the Consent Agenda. Kelley moved, Peterson seconded, to approve the Consent Agenda as amended. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. APPROVAL OF MINUTES i*U2) REGULAR MEETING OF OCTOBER 26, 1998 Kelley moved, Peterson seconded, to approve the Minutes of the Regular City Council Meeting of October 26, 1998. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. (*#3) CANVASSING BOARD MEETING OF NOVEMBER 4,1998 Kelley moved, Peterson seconded, to approve the Minutes of the Canvassing Board Meeting of November 4, 1998. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. PARK COMMISSION COMMENTS Park Commissioner Sherokee Use was present. Use reported that Park Commission members will walk the trail at the Spring Hill Golf Course on Friday, November 13, 1998 at 8:00 a.m. Preliminary design plans have been received from Shardlow for the park pioperty located on Watertown Road. A neighborhood informational meeting will be scheduled in early December. In connection with the Saga Hill area, Shardlow will have a plan ready in January or February. Jabbour explained it is premature for the Park Commission to move forward with plans for the Saga Hill area. Use asked if there was any interest from Council in securing the Eisinger property. Jabbour indicated it was the general consensus of the Council to aggressively pursue purchasing the parcel and requested staff to schedule a meeting with the owner. ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR NOVEMBER 9,1998 PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS - SANDY SMITH, REPRESENTATIVE There were no Planning Commission comments. PUBLIC COMMENTS None. ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT (#4) #2369 JOE FIEDLER, 365-373 WESTLAKE STREET COMBINATION/ACCESSORY BUILDING - RESOLUTION NO. 4192. LOT Joe Fiedler was present. Gaflfron explained that on October 26, 1998 Council approved the legal combination of 365 and 373 Westlake Street subject to removal of plumbing from the building at 373 Westlake Street which convens the structure to an existing non-conforming accessory building due to its location, and subject to the accessory building being removed within two years. Council tabled the request for a refund of the assessment that was paid off for 373 Westlake until a full Council was present. Mayor Jabbour noted applicant was forced to pay the special assessment as part of the purchase agreement. Fiedler agreed with conditions established for the lot combination and stated that all four buildings would be removed. Mayor Jabbour asked if the City had ever waived a sewer assessment under similar circumstances. Gaffron responded that in a small number of cases the City has allowed the unpaid assessment to be waived. The Fiedler situation is different because the assessment has already been paid which can pose a future problem for the City in determining how and when refunds are handled for past assessments. Kelley noted the original principal amount of the assessment levied in 1992 was approximately $8,900. The payoff balance incurred by Mr. Fiedler was approximately $5,300. Sewer was only used for about three years during the time the house was inhabited. Barrett explained that if the sewer assessment is not refunded, in the future the property owner could challenge the City for the right to construct a second residence on the property because of the existence of and payment for two sewer stubs. f ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR NOVEMBER 9, 1998(#4) #2369 JOE FIEDLER, 365-373 WESTLAKE STREET - LOTCOMBINATION/ACCESSORY BUILDING - RESOLUTION NO. 4192 - continued Peterson felt 3 time line should be estsblished for future sewer refund requests. After discuasion, members felt circumstances were unique to this property and by allowing the lot combination the property would be closer to meeting the zoning standards for the area. No precedent would be set for future assessment refunds. Kelley moved, Jabbour seconded, to adopt Resolution No. 4192 granting the lot combination and to direct staff to draft a resolution to refund the amount of the paid sewer assessment in the approximate amount of $5,304.02. Vote; Ayes 3, Nays 2. Peterson and Goetten voted no. (#5) #2422 RICHARD GAY, 2735 SHADYWOOD ROAD - VARIANCE - DENIAL RESOLUTION NO. 4193. Applicant was not present and application will be discussed later to allow time for applicant to appear. (#6) #2424 GREG KLOHN, 4455 NORTH SHORE DRIVE - VARIANCE - RESOLUTION NO. 4194. Gregg Klohn was present. Weinberger explained applicant has requested an after-the-fact variance to complete a deck located on the lakeside of the home and a variance to construct an 8'xl7’ addition within the 250-500* setback area. The deck would encroach 24* into the average lakeshore setback area. The proposed development is consistent vrith the area and would not impact the sight lines for neighboring property o>^ers. The addition would result in an increase of hardcover to 136 s.f (35.1%) where only 30% is allowed. Mr. Klohn is undecided at this time v,'hether to replace a storm damaged garage on the property which has been subsequently removed. Mr. Klohn stated work was stopped on the deck when he realized a permit was required. He has not decided whether to rebuild the garage in the same location or as a tuckunder garage. It is his understanding no variance would be required to build a garage damaged from the storm in the same location. Mayor Jabbour noted confusion with comments he has received from residents regarding the Building Department's procedures for handling storm damage. ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING _____minutes for NOVEMBER 9,1998(#6) #2424 GREG KLOHN, 4455 NORTH SHORE DRIVE - VARIANCE - RESOLUTION NO. 4194 - continuedlakeshore. Kelley inquired if there was a timeframe in which to replace the structure. Weinberger said it would be one year. Mayor Jabbour asked if there could be a conflict of interest because he once lived in the house. Barrett responded that he could see no conflict. 0. (#7) #2428 TERRY MAURER ON BEHALF OF DAVID AND CHRISTINE HARDTEN, 2515 KELLY AVENUE - VARIANCE. Terry Maurer, Christine Hardten and Jeff Lambrect were present. Weinberger expto^ hri"tnd°sS”tt^^^^ ‘he Planning Commission submitted removing a portion reduced to 27% in the 75-250 ’ setback area. A n,494 s.f (26.6%) to of the driveway. The overall ® ^ received from neighbors for the current plan. 8,798 s.f (20.3%). TTiree letters of support “^cture to remain; 924 s.f With the new plan, applicants request varmc allowed' 6 113 s f (26.9%) hardcover (f> 3%'l hardcover in the 0-75' lakeshore setback where none is allowed, t>, n . \ ^ ^ .o/.\ setback area to meet the 30 ^ requirement. Mr. Maurer noted several problems existed with the shape of the lot and driveway but revised the plan to accomplish the reduction in hardcover. ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR NOVEMBER 9,1998iSl^^AVTWE BEH^F of DAVID AND CHRISTINE HARDTEN, 2515Kelley inquired if the applicants were aware of the hardcover ordinances before the house was designed. Mr. Maurer responded in the affirmative but felt the house needed to be representative of the neighborhood. Kelley asked what hardship exists within the 75-250' setback area. Mr. Maurer stated the pie shape of the lot. Mayor Jabbour felt there is a wide-range of property values in Orono and the argument of neighborhood demand is an irrelevant issue. After discussion. Council felt it important not to exceed 25% bedcover limitation within the 75-250' setback area for new construction. The applicants were asked if they wanted the application tabled to give them an opportunity to revise the proposed plan Mr. Maurer stated they would do their test to meet the 25% requirement within the area. Mayor Jabbour moved, Peterson seconded, to table Application #2428, 2515 Kell> Avenue, until the November 23, 1998 Council meeting. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. (#8) JOINT USE DOCK LICENSE - KELLY COVE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION John Bessessen (representing Brad Hoyt), Austin Evans and Todd Jones were present. Gaffron explained that on July 13, 1998 this application was tabled and ultimately denied on July 27, 1998 with the stipulation that applicants could reapply at no charge providing an agreement could be made regarding the Hoyt property. At this time the Kelly Cove Homeowners Association proposes to move the dock approximately 20’ to the east with a reduction from 56' to 48' in total length from shore. No change has been made to the 4 individual slips of 13'x32'. Mr. Hoyt has agreed to restrict the use of Lot 3 to 2 slips whether or not a duplex or single family residence is built on Lot 3. This will not result in an increase of the number of boats using the lagoon but a change in slip location. The proposed dock situation does meet the City's code standards and there will be no negative impacts on the wetland. Mr. Evans indicated they are in agreement with the plan. John Bessessen, representing Brad Hoyt, stated Hoyt was in agreement with limiting the property to two slips. ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR NOVEMBER 9,1998(//8) JOINT USE DOCK LICENSE - KELLY COVE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION - continuedMayor Jabbour reflected on what the original developer's intentions might have been for the area and noted that life in 1999 is slightly different than 1979. He indicated the City should not be in the business of controlling the activities on that site and that a covenant be drafted in favor of the Kelly Cove Homeowners Association to be in control. Outlot A would be added to Lot 3 which would eliminate any easements placed on that lot Barrett suggested that an easement be placed on Lot 3 restricting the number of slips on that lot. Bessessen felt that could be a problem. Mayor Jabbour asked if anyone from the neighborhood was present. Mr. Edwards appreciates any consideration made to the habitat of the lagoon in trying to preserve the navigational areas proposed. Kelley moved, Goetten seconded to direct staff to draft an appropriate resolution approving a joint use dock license to Kelly Cove Homeowners Association per the conditions set forth in the staff memo dated November 5, 1998. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. (*#9) ADOPT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT #7 - M.AXWELL BAY MUSA - RESOLUTION NO. 4195. Kelley moved, Peterson seconded, to adopt Resolution No. 4195 approving Comprehensive Plan Amendment #7. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. (#10) COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL PARK FEE - ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE This will be discussed following Item #11. (#11) LITTF.E ORCHARD - REQUEST TO AMEND EASEMENT DESCRIPTION Dan Anderson, Kyle Hunt and Ted Kemna, surveyor with Schoell & Madson, were present. ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR NOVEMBER 9, 1998 (#11) LITTLE ORCHARD - REQUEST TO AMEND EASEMENT DESCRIPTION - continued Gaffron explained that on October 26, 1998 Council tabled this application to give the developer an opportunity to stake the site in relation to the top of bluff Due to a different method of computation, staff does not agree with the top of the bluff determination made by applicant's surveyor. The surveyor's version is closer to the lake. A compromise can probably be made regarding the top of the bluff. The City's goal is to preserve trees. Based on the 30' setback, a 36" oak tree and two maples would be removed. Technically the top of the bluff needs to be defined before a determination can be made regarding placement of the house. Hunt presented options for the house location. Anderson, as developer, expressed concern that the house follow the contours and not tear up the bluff He indicated the lines were very close and pointed out an area which could be given back to the easement. Mayor Jabbour clarified that the request is to revise a legal description for an easement granted to the City which was mutually agreed to for preservation of vegetation. This does not affect the City's ordinances, standards nor does it require a variance. Kelley inquired how the property would be protected in the future if a homeowner wanted to make additions such as a patio. Anderson explained all design plans would need to be approved by an architectural committee. Mayor Jabbour noted that the building envelope is already being pushed to the limit. Gaffron explained standards presently in place protects the zone closest to the house by prohibiting structures except for a lake access stairway, prohibits removal of any tree that is over 6" in diameter without City approval, it allows trimming or topping of trees without City approval, requires that there be a ground cover maintained, it doesn't allow any topographic changes without City approval, and prohibits fences, play stru tures, decks, and accessory buildings. Gaffron said the revision would do a better job of protecting trees than the prior proposal. Mayor Jabbour noted, for the record, that on Saturday the Council was not present on the property in a form of a quorum, members visited individually and no decision was made nor action taken in advance. Kemna questioned whether or not the term vegetation meant natural. Gaffron stated it could be rewritten to be natural. Gaffron wanted Council to understand that in some areas the City would be gaining but losing in areas which are not as critical. Changing the existing easement places the house closer to the trees instead of 20-30' back into the pasture. Flint moved, Peterson seconded, to direct staff to revise the legal description for the easement and redefine vegetation as discussed. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR NOVEMBER 9,1998 (#12) EXTEND MORATORIUM ON DWELLING UNIT DENSITY CREDIT IN LR-lC-1 DISTRICT - ORDINANCE NO. 180, 2ND SERIES. Gaffion explained the ordinance was adopted May 11, 1998 to establish a moratorium for 190 days on the granting of applications that use the 50% increase in dwelling unit density in the LR-lC-1 zone which is basically a few properties in the Navarre area. The moratorium expires November 16 and it is recommended that it be extended for an additional 180 days because the study has not been completed. Goetten moved, Peterson seconded, to adopt Ordinance No. 180, 2nd Series extending the moratorium established in Ordinance #175, 2nd Series. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. (#10) COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL PARK FEE - ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE Gaffron explained in April 1998 Council adopted a new park dedication ordinance tnat established a maximum and minimum park fee which is used whenever the City decides to accept a fee rather than land in residential situations. Commercial property needs to be dealt with in a different manner to establish a connection between the impact that commercial property has on the park system. The City by Resolution No. 4067 established that 10 employees are equivalent to one dwelling unit. The problem in defining 10 employees is that at the time of subdivision it is not always known how that property might be developed or used. An office use would have a different population of employees than a retail use. The ordinance does not establish a method for determining how many employees to use for calculation purposes. Some of the ways suggested for making a determination is through the parking requirements, an acreage basis, highest use basis or a combination. Moorse noted that other cities use a basic percentage of property value in determining the park dedication fee. Flint said using the 50 employee determination calculated too high and felt 30 employees an acre for this kind of usage would be more appropriate. He suggested collecting the fee at the time a building permit would be issued. Kelley stated it would he better to collect the park fee at the time of subdivision. Moorse suggested using a percentage showing a connection between the park usage and employees. After discussion, it was decided that staff reexamine the methods for determining commercial park fees by either using 25-30 employees an acre or a basic percentage of value. 8 L ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR NOVEMBER 9,1998 (#5) #2422 RICHARD GAY, 2735 SHADYWOOD ROAD - VARIANCE - DENIAL RESOLUTION NO. 4193. Applicant was not present. Peterson moved, Kelley seconded to adopt denial Resolution No. 4193. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. M.VYOR/COUNCIL REPORT Mayor Jabbour felt it is unfair to charge public facilities such as schools for responses to false fire alarm calls in the same manner as single family residential properties. Moorse explained presently throughout the City the first false alarm call is free, the second is $100, third is $250 and thereafter it is $500. He explained there are costs associated every time a fire truck is responding to an alarm. After discussion. Council asked the City Administrator to research the matter and suggest possible ways to handle charges for false alarms at public facilities. Flint sugg'^sted that Orono establish a method of communicating and tracking complaints between the Council and the City Administrator by using a written complaint form. Kelley reported he met 'vith two members of the Long Lake Fire Department and Chief Cheswick regarding the relocation of the fire station. A decision needs to be made soon. He noted Cheswick was a big asset in dealing with the fire department as he had previously served with the department and suggested that Cheswick be involved in negotiations. Mayor Jabbour reported that discussions have taken place between Moorse, Long Lake City Administrator, Minnetonka City Administrator and an Australian City Administrator regarding effective methods to merge city govemnient. He feels that in the future City services might be merged such as Public Works. It also is his intention to develop a set of specific Goals & Objectives, along with a timeline for completion, and noted that completion of the update of the Comprehensive Plan is a top priority item. ENGINEER REPORT (*#13) REQUEST FOR PAYMENT #9 - BAY RIDGE/BRACKETTS POINT SANITARY SEWER PROJECT Kelley moved, Peterson seconded, to approve request for Payment #9, Bracketts Point/Bay Ridge Sanitary Sewer Project to Barbarossa & Sons in the amount of $17,732.51. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR NOVEMBER 9, 1998 (*#14) REQUEST FOR PAYMENT #11 - NORTH LONG LAKE SANITARY SEWER PROJECT Kelley moved, Peterson seconded, to approve request for Payment #11, North Long Lake Sanitary Sewer Project to Barbarossa & Sons in the amount of $18,380.12. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. (*#15) REQUEST FOR PAYMENT #3 - SHORELINE/HERITAGE SANITARY SEWER PROJECT Kelley moved, Peterson seconded, to approve request for Payment #3, Heritage/Shoreline Sanitary Sewer Project to G. L. Contracting in the amount of $24,551.80. Vote; Ayes 5, Nays 0. CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT (#16) PARKING LOT LIGHTING FOR CITY FACILITIES Moorse explained that per Council's directive the lighting plan was revised to replace the 20' poles with poles similar in height and style to the existing light poles and to include the installation of winter plug-in receptacles on the poles. Kelley moved, Peterson seconded, to approve the proposal by Frontier Electric for the purchase and installation of parking lot lighting at a cost of $9,595.00. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. (#17) HIRING OF PART-TIME POLICE OFFICER - RESOLUTION NO. 4196. Peterson questioned the language used in the Request for Council Action dated November 4, 1998 specifically "historically" and "due to personnel changes." Perhaps the structure of the police department needs to be reviewed because of the high turnover of part-time officers. Her concern was not with Tony Wittke but with the use of part-time officers. Moorse explained, the process works well because the City is given the opportunity to view their work performance before hiring them into full-time positions. Peterson expressed concern that we are educating officers only to be hired by other cities. Moorse explained the turnover in part-time officers has been due to moving them into full-time positions in the Orono Police Department. Mayor Jabbour stated the process is cost-effective. Moorse indicated money spent on training part-time officers has not been wasted as most of them have been moving into permanent positions for the City. i ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR NOVEMBER 9,1998 (#17) HIRING OF PART-TIME POLICE OFFICER - RESOLUTION NO. 4196 - continued Kelley moved, Goetten seconded, to hire Anthony A. Wittke for the position of part-time officer, effective November 10, 1998 with the starting salary of $12.25 hourly with no benefits and adopt Resolution No. 4196 declaring that the part-time position held by Anthony A. Wittke is that of a police officer and said employee shall become a member of the Public Employees Retirement Association Police and Fire Fund. Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 1 . Peterson voted against. (#18) TOPICS FOR UPCOMING WORK SESSIONS Moorse noted a Council work session has been scheduled for 7:30 a m. on Wednesday, November 18, 1998 regarding the Highway 12 preliminary lavout from Mn/DOT. He suggested inviting O'Keefe and Loken from Mn/DOT to attend the meeting. The work session scheduled for 7:30 a.m. on Wednesday, December 2, 1998 would include tours of buildings in the City's Industrial District. CITY ATTORNEY’S REPORT Attorney Barrett had no report. (*#19) LICENSES Kelley moved, Peterson seconded, to approve the following license. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. Cigarette License William Wear 12 Hi Liquor, Inc. 2160 Wayzata Boulevard P.O. Box 306 Long Lake, MN 55356. (*#20) BILLS Kelley moved, Peterson seconded, to approve payment of the All Funds Account. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 10:10 p.m. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Gabriel Jabbour, Mayor City of Orono 2750 Kelley Parkway P.O. Box 66 Orono, MN 55323 Phone: (612) 473-7357 Fax: (612) 473-0510 NOV 2 3 1998 crryo-ORo\'o MEMORANDUM DATE: TO; FROM: November 20, 1998 Mayor Jabbour and City Council Members 4 Liz Van Zomeren, City Planner/Zoning Administrator vx.4^ SUBJECT: #2395 Brent and Kathryn Bentrott 1453 Park Drive On Friday morning at 11:20 a.m., Mark Gronberg dropped off the enclosed revised survey at City Hall. The revised plan has not been reviewed by staff or the City Engineer and was not reviewed by the Planning Commission. No new hardcover worksheets were submitted. The staff report that you have in your packets is based on the 11-3-98 plan that was reviewed by the Planning Commission on 11-16-98. This application was reviewed at the July, August, October and November meetings. Please visit the site and note the existing location of the garage, the topography, unopened Bluff Street, the paved area of Bluff Street and the location of the adjacent property owner's residence to the proposed grading plan and driveway as noted on the 11-3-98 plan. If you have questions about the information in the packet or you need additional information please call my voice mail over the weekend at 985-1322 and I will respond on Monday. COFFIN A GRONBERG, INC. •URVrviNO. BNOINnillNO AND LAND PLANMINO 4B1A TAMARACK AVINUB LONG LAKB. MINN. BSaSB 473*4141 f:DV ^ 0 I99A i 4 I ••' • * J November 20, 1998 Brent Bentrott 1453 Park Drive Orono, MN 55364 Dear Brent: We revised your plan to show your driveway entering Park Drive within the extensions of your current property lines. We also showed the entry more at right angles to Park Drive although this really isn’t necessary because you always head west toward County Road 19. This plan causes the garage elevation and most of the driveway to be 2 feet higher than the previous plan which will require more fill and additional retaining walls. You may be able to eliminate the retaining wall shown along your east property line by working with your neighbor to the east. The elevations rise up to his garage and house and with permission for a small amount of grading on the common lot line, the wall there could be eliminated. To address concerns of the city engineer, we moved the proposed sidewalk farther west to allow for a larger depression to carry water to the west rather than along your east property line. Sincerely, COFFIN & GRONBERG, INC. Mark S. Gronberg, P.E. & L.S MSG/cr I !CWJTOOR^ / / / /• PORE^”^ boulevard ) CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY FOR BRENT BENTROTT OF LOT 9, BLOCK 15, SAGA HILL REVISED HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA "TO', 93$ - - - . ,»« / I DECK / ^i^ose - //I M IV \'': \\\,. v\ PATO \» STOCS LEGAL DESCRPTION OF PREMISES: Lot 9, Block 15, '*Sogo Hill Revised, Hennepin County, Minnesota*', also that part of vocoted Forest Boulevard as dedicated in the plat of "Sago Hid Revised, Hennepin County, Minnesota** which lies between the Northwesterly extensions ocross it of the Northeost- erly line of Lot 9, Block 15, **Soga Hill Revised, Hennepin County, Minnesota** and the straight portion of the Southwesterly line of said Lot 9. This survey intends to show the boundaries of the above described property, the locotion of on existing house, garage, and other visible hardcover thereon, and the proposed location of a prdposed goroge. It does not purport to show any other improvements or - encroachments. o : Iron marker : Existing spot elevation Beorings shown are based upon on assumed datum - •" ~ : ^ C0m^0t00- SS}--- * : ' , (»3«.T) \''-V--©- 'a\\ \ G . f« \ ^ a I'i? ipi|ltell I! 8 ’ . -0 % % J^O)>«isv I 'A '' 1V 4 N - ■ \ \ \x > “ 50 (954.) * -___ X ^ \ .. o66 . T5w ’) \\ \ V ------- .968-V ' \ ^ 9$0- \ z' - - ,,96A- (854r;r ■ yp - . - -966 s /< / i/>T5 .PjgJijcroo- - (966 4) COUNCIL IWE£TINQ Date of Application: 6/24/98 for variances; 10/23/98 for conditional use permit Last Revision to Application: 11/3/98 NOV 2 3 1998 60 day limit: 01/03/99 CfTY or cno ’'-o REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: November 20,1998 ITEM NO.: ^ Department Approval: Name Liz Van Zomeren Title City Planner Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: A2395 Brent A. and Kathryn S. Bentrott 1453 Park Drive Variances and Conditional Use Permit Vacation of Bluff Street/ Use of Park Drive/Bluff Street Zoning District: LR-IB One Family Lakeshore Residential District (1 acre) Lot Area:17.142 sq. ft. (.39 acres) Application: The applicants applied in June 1998 for multiple variances to make changes to their existing residence and relocate their garage. As the Planning Commission reviewed the plans in July, August, October, and November, the plans were revised. It was determined that a conditional use permit would be needed because grading changes were proposed within 5 ’ of the property lines and between 500 and 800 cubic yards of fill was proposed to allow for the garage to be rebuilt closer to the residence. The most recent plan that the Planning Commission reviewed involved the following: 1.Remodel the deck on the west side of the existing residence into a three-season porch. A side yard adjacent to street variance is required. Changing the southwest comer and entrance to the residence as shown in Exhibit A attached to the resolution. A side yard adjacent to street variance is required. Removing their existing garage located partially within the required street yard setback and building a new garage closer to their residence. Variances for a side yard adjacent to street and Date of Application: 6/24/98 for variances; 10/23/98 for conditional use permit Last Revision to Application: 11/3/98 60 day limit: 01/03/99 hardcover in the 75'-250' setback are needed. A conditional use permit to alter the existing topography with 500 cubic yards of fill and to grade within 5' of the property line is required. A 10% grade or less is recommended for driveways; less than 8% is preferred with 3:1 slopes for maintenance. 4.Use of unopened Bluff Street and Park Drive for a driveway where driveways are required to be at least 5' from side property lines and a right angles to the road. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION (11/16/98): To approve the side yard adjacent to street variances for the proposed improvements to the residence to change the deck into a three season porch and to allow the improvements to the south facade of the residence, subject to removal of hardcover in the 0'-75' setback as shown on the survey dated 11-3-98 by Mark Gronberg. To deny the conditional use permit for grading and land alteration to relocate the garage and to deny the side yard adjacent to street setback for the garage and the use of Bluff Street and Park Drive for a driveway to the proposed garage. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: To amend or approve the enclosed resolution that grants the side yard adjacent to street variance for the three-season porch and south facade changes as shown in Exhibit A attached to the resolution. A 35' side yard adjacent to street setback is required and 3’ is proposed. Attachments a b c d e f g h 1 J k 1 Resolution with Exhibit A Letter from applicant November staff report to Planning Commission 11/10/98 letter from Tom Kellogg Section 6.05 re: driveways and curb cuts 11/03/98 letter from Mark Gronberg REVISED PLAN REVIEWED BY PC ON 11/16/98, DATED 11/3/98 Hardcover worksheets for 11/3/98 plan Plan #1-July 1998 house elevations-June 17, 1998 garage elevations-8/9/98 floor plans for porch Date of Application: 6/24/98 for variances; 10/23/98 for conditional use permit60 day limit: 01/03/99m Alternate Plan-10/9/98n Tom Kellogg ’s letter-October 14, 1998 Application Information A application forms B plat map C topo E £opo G letter from neighbor's H Acknowledgemen* form I Sewer map M permit record h Planning Commission minutes from July, August, October 1998 Forest Avenue Vacation information requested by applicant A RESOLUTION GRANTING A VARIANCE TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.24, SUBDIVISION 5 (B) FILE NO. #2395 WHEREAS, Brent A. and Kathryn S. Bentrott (hereinafter "the applicant") are the owners of the property located at 1453 Park Drive within the City of Orono (hereinafter "the City") and legally described as follows: Lot 9, Block 15, "Saga Hill Revised, Hennepin County, MN", also that part of vacated Forest Boulevard as dedicated in the plat of "Saga Hill Revised, Hennepin County, Minnesota" which lies between the Northwesterly extensions across it of the Northeasterly line of Lot 9, Block 15, "Saga Hill Revised, Hennepin County, Minnesota" and the straight portion of the Southwesterly line of said Lot 9 (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, after due published and mailed notice in accordance with Minnesota Statues and the City of Orono Zoning and Planning Codes, the Orono Planning Commission held a public hearing on July 20, August 17, Octol;er 19, and November 16, 1998, at which times all persons desiring to be heard concerning this application were given the opportunity to speak thereon; and WHEREAS, the applicants have applied to the City for variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.24, Subdivision 5 (B) to permit the existing deck on the west side of the residence to be remodeled into a three season porch and to allow changes to the southwest comer of the residence and entry where a 35' setback from Bluff Street (a platted, unopened street) is required and 3' is proposed. Minnesota: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, FINDINGS 1 . This application was reviewed as Zoning File #2395. 2.The property is located in the LR-IB Zoning District, where 1 acre or 43,560 sq. ft. is the minimum lot area. The property consists of .39 acre or 17,150 sq. ft. Page 1 of4 J. 5. 6. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on November 16, 1998 and recommended approval by a vote of 6 to 1. 4. The Planning Commission made the following findings of fact: A. The existing lot does not meet the minimum lot area or lot width requirements. B.The proposed improvements, changing the deck to a three season porch, will not increase hardcover as the applicant has agreed to remove hardcover in the 0-75 ’. C.Bluff Street is a platted, unopened street where 35' is the required setback. The proposed improvements will be located 3' from the property line. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variances would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicants, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessaiy to preserve a substantial property right of the applicants; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. The City Council has considered this application including the findings tind recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicants and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.24, Subdivision 5 (B) to permit the deck to be remodeled into a tliree season porch and to allow changes to the southwest comer and entry as shown in Exhibit A. Page 2 of 4 I 1.The applicant shall remove all hardcover in the 0-75’ and at the southeast comer of the residence as shown in Exhibit A. 2.Authorities granted by this variance run with the property not with the applicants, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit within one year of the date of Council approval, or this variance will expire on that date (November 23, 1999). 3.Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this variance shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 4.The undersigned applicants have read, understood and hereby agree to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of themselves, their heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agree to the recording of this resolution in the Chain of Title of the property. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held on the 23rd day of November, 1998. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Gabriel Jabbour, Mayor Property Owner (s) Page 3 of 4 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 23rd day of November, 1998 by Gabriel Jabbour and Linda S. Vee, Mayor and City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this day of , 199 before me a Notary Public within and for said county, personally appeared______________________________________ known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this day of_____, 199_before me a Notary Public within and for said county, personally appeared _________________________________________ known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC Page 4 of 4 ^)(h'biT A. CONTOUR line ’ ■ >75 FOOT j^^^back Luc I i i N0U-19-19?3 12:29 EPENT EEr)TRQTT Date: Kovember 18, 1998 To: Mayor Gabriel Jabbour From: Brent ami Katy Bentroil 1453 Park Drive Orono, MN 55364 612 472 5799 P.O cc: J. Diann Goencn. Charles Kellcv, Barbara Peterson, Richard Flint Re: Application #2395, Proposed new garage and driveway b Dear Mayor and members of the City Council, As you review the accumulated five months of infonnation regarding our application for replacing our garage and generally improving access to our home, we would like you to consider the latest proposal a reasonable solution tor eliminating the two major access problems of our properly from the street to our home; distance and exterior stains. It addresses all of the concerns which wc have encountered in the four years we've lived here —from basic day-iO'day hardship issues .such as carrying things like groceries, children, profe.ssional carpet cleaning access, deliveries, etc. to sWety Issues such as handicapped relatives visiting, limitations of access by professional .services (i.e.: furnace duct cleaning), and currc^iriy having to back out directly onto the street from our garage (which the city inspector considers a hazard). Throughout this proce.ss we have been told, "...well, you were aware of these issues when you purchased it...". Which is somewhat true, we didn't fore.see some things, but we expected to be able to change and improve it, too. We !o% e our place, the ncigliboriiood, and the community. That's why we would really like this to be approved. There seems to be a lot of differing opinions on this. We hope that you slop by in person to appreciate the unique situations of this application and ti\jst that vou arrive at the best decision for all involved Thank you. Sincerely, Brent A. Bentrott TOThL P.02 r TO: FROM; DATE; SUBJECT; Chair Smith and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator Liz Van Zomeren, City Planner/Zoning Administrator November 9,1998 #2395 Brent and Kathym Bentrott 1453 Park Drive Conditional Use Permit-Public Hearing Zoning District:LR-IB Lot Area: One Family Lakeshore Residential District (1 Acre) 17,150 square feet (.39 acres) Application:The conditional use permit application is for grading and land alteration within 5' of the property line and to allow 500 cubic yards of fill. The applicant has submitted a plan that shows a difTrent driveway approach than the plan reviewed at the October meeting. The grading and drainage plan submitted for the conditional use application moves the curb cut to Bluff Street to provide a less steep landing area. Background Information m The applicants appeared at the July 20, August 17, and October 19, 1998 Planning Commission meetings and requested hardcover variances, a 10' vacation of Bluff Street, and side yard adjacent to street setback variances. The Planning Commission recommended that the proposed three season porch be located at least 3' from the side property line and that Bluff Street not be diminished by a 10' vacation. The applicant was also directed to redesign the location of the garage to include meeting the side yard setback firom the east property line. U2395 Bentrott 1453 Park Drive CUP 11/16/98 page~l The applicant submitted a new plan in August that showed access from Park Drive and located the garage closer to the house, approximately 130' from the street. The applicant also submitted building elevations for the proposed garage. The garage was proposed as a two story structure with the doors facing the street and a door on the lakeside for access to the storage area. October The applicant submitted two similar drawings for the October meeting where the only significant difference was the amount of fill. The October plan needed the following approvals: 1. 2. 3. A side yard adjacent to street variance to allow a new deck and porch to be located r from the property line where 35' is required. A side yard adjacent to street variance to allow a new garage to be located 8' from the property line where 35' is required. A hardcover variance in the 75'-250' setback to increase from 2,334 sq. ft. (23.43%) to 3,518 sq. ft. (35.32%). 4. A conditional use permit alter land and grade within 5' of the property line. The Planning Commission recommended approval of the above-referenced variances at the October 19, 1998, meeting subject to submittal and approval of a drainage and grading plan before commencement of construction. Staff noted that the conditional use permit application for grading and land alteration needed to be officially published and noticed to property owners within 350', therefo re, the Planning Commission did not take action on the conditional use permit. November The cofiditional use permit notice was published in the official newspaper and property owners within 350' received a notice with the survey. The applicant has submitted a plan that shows a new driveway curb cut from Park Drive via Bluff Street to provide a level driveway approach. #2iP5 Bentrott 1453 Park Drive CUP 11/16/98 page-2 Pertinent Ordinances Section 10.25, Subd.5 (B) LR-IB Standards Section 10.22 Subd. 1 and 2 Hardcover Regulations Section 10.56, Subd. 16 Hardcover Regulations Section 10.03, Subd. 19 Land Alteration Lot Area and Yards LR'IB District Standards Lot Area Lot Width Street Yard Side Yard Side Yard Adjacent to Street Lakeside 1 acre 140'35'10'35'75' Subject Property Lot Area and Yards Lot Area Lot Width Street Yard Side Yard Adjacent to Street Lakeside 17,142 sq. ft. (.39 acres) 48' at OHWL 54' at 75' setback 5.3' to garage House is 9'; Proposed deck is at r & garage is 8' 72' to house The subject property does not meet minimum lot area or lot width requirements. The proposed deck/porch on the west side of the residence requires a side yard adjacent to street setback variance. The proposed garage also requires a variance from side yard adjacent to street. Because the deck/porch addition is proposed to be located less than 3' from a property line, there are additional Building Code requirements for fire and public safety that are required. The applicant will need to work with Building Inspections staff to meet building issue concerns. #2395 Bentrott N53 Park Drive CUP 11/16/98 page-3 Hardcover Distar •from Shoreline Total Area in Setback Existing Hardcover Allowed Hardcover Proposed Hardcover Variance Rs: quested 0'-75'3,712 sq. ft.370 sq. ft. (9.97%) NONE 9 sq. ft..24 75'-2:0 ’9,960 sq. ft.2,303 sq. ft. (23.12%) 2,490 sq.ft. (25%) 3,404 sq. ft. (34.18°') 914 sq. ft. (9.18%) 250'-5''0'3,478 sq. ft.780 sq. ft. (22.43%) 1,043.4 sq. ft. (30%) 813 sq. ft. (23.38%). NONE TOTALS: 17,150 sq. ft. % of LOT AREA: 3,453 sq.ft. 20.13% 4,226 sq. ft. 24.6% The proposed plan represents an overall increase in hardcover of 971 sq. ft. Hardcover is proposed to be reduced in both the 0’-75' and 250' -500’ setbacks. The consulting engineer q':estioned ' ’.ether the area between the parallel sidewalks would be hardcover. According to the Dividing Inspector, applicants have proposed similar parallel paved areas in the past to reduce hardcover, liowever, the City has considered the entire area between the sidewalks to be regarded as hardcover because it becomes compacted as it is driven over. The Planning Commission should determine whether this area should be added into the harder er calculations. The grading and drainage plan indicates slight changes in the amount of proposed hardcover. The above table reflects the newest survey submitted. The Planning Commission should again revisit proposed hardcover because the numbers are different than those reviewed in October. ISSUES The conditional use permit for land alteration and grading is subject to the following criteria: I. That the proposed location of the conditional use is in accord with the objectives of the Zoning Chapter and the purposes of the district in which the site is located and Comprehensive Municipal Plan; The Planning Commission shall consider if the drainage and grading plan meets the objective of the Zoning Code and the Comprehensive Plan. H2395 Bentrou 1453 Park Drive CUP 11/1 6. OS page—4 2.That the proposed location of the conditional use and the proposed condition under which it would be operated or maintained would not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. Driveway curb cuts are to be at least 5' from the property line. This curb cut is not on the applicant's property and therefore does not meet Zoning Code requirements. 3. The engineer has indicated his concern that the changes may have a negative impact on the adjacent property because of grading along the property line, 'fhe engineer also does not favor the curb cut on Bluff Street because if the City ever opens or uses the area for public purpose, the curb cut would need to be moved off of Bluff Street. The applicant would then not have the appropriate grade level for a landing area at the top of the driveway. The proposed driveway cannot be contained on the applicant's property because of the exis;ing topography and the need to provide a grade of 10% or less for the driveway. That the proposed conditional use will comply with each of the applicable provisions of the Zoning Chapter. The zoning issues are as follows: A. The location of the driveway does not conform to the Zoning Code. B. The subject lot does not meet lot area or lot width requirements. C. The west side of the property is subject to a 35' setback from platted, unopened Bluff Street. The applicant originally requested vacation of a 10' portion of Bluff Street which was not favorably received by the Planning Commission. D. The existing deck encroaches into the required side yard adjacent to street. Both the proposed porch/deck and new garage encroach into the required setback, the Planning Commission in October approved these variances, subject to the submittal and approval of the grading and drainage plan. E. The existing garage encroaches into the required street yard setback. The parking pad in front of the garage is partially in the street right-of-way. F.The existing hardcover exceeds the limits in the 0'-75' setback. The applicant is proposing to remove hardcover in the 0'-75' setback, however, overall hardcover would increase on the zoning lot. The hardcover numbers are slightly different than the numbers submitted w ith the previous plan, please reconsider the numbers. Please note that dcover would be added for the driveway area near Park Drive which is outside of the property lines. ^2395 Bentrott 1453 Park Drive CUP 11/16/98 page- S' STAFF RECOMMENDATIONThe Planning Commission should evaluate the revised plan in view of the revised location of the driveway curb cut and the engineer's concerns regarding the culvert, retaining walls, the landing area and curb cut location and future use of Bluff Street. The variance approvals were contingent on the submittal and acceptance of a drainage and grading plan. The Public Services Director does not recommend approval of the driveway as proposed because it does not conform to the driveway regulations as set forth in Chapter 6 of the Municipal Ordinance regarding width of curb cut at the right-of-way and the angle of the driveway. Attachments Tom Kellogg’s letter dated 11/10/98 Tom Kellogg's letter dated 10/14/98 Driveway regulations Application Plat map Surveyor's letter New plan Hardcover worksheets July minutes August minutes October minutes Letter from neighbors-Palms Acknowledgement form (dated June 1998) Sewer plan Garage elevations Plan #1 Plan #2 NOTE TO COMMISSIONERS: In an effort to reduce the amount of staff reports that have previ..’isly been sent to you on this matter, the previous staff reports are not included as exhibits. If you need copies of previous reports before the meeting, please call Liz at 473-7357. U2395 Beniroti 1453 Park Drive CUP H/16/98 page-b ml m Bonestroo Rosene Anderlik & |\J I Associates Engineers & Architects November 10, 1998 Elizabeth VanZomeren City Planner/Zoning Administrator City of Orono Post Office Box 66 Crx'stal Bay, MN 55323 Re: Bentrott Site Plan File No. 139-2395 Boncitroo. Rosene. Anderhk tsncJ AssoctMes. Inc »s dn Af/irmdtive Acnon Equal Opportunity EmployerPnnctpali Olio G Bonestroo. PE • Joseph C Anderlik. PE • M«irvin L So'v.iM PE • Richard E Turner. PE • Glenn R Cook. PE • Robert G Schunchi. PE • Jer'y A Bourdon. PE • Robert W Rosene. PE and Susan M Eberlm. C PA . Senior Consultants Assoriate Pr:ncip,'^is Howard A Sanford. PE • Keith A Gordon. PE • Robert R Pfefferfe, PE • Richard W Foster PE • David O Loskota. PE • Robert C Russok. A IA • Mark A Hanson. PE • Michael T Rautmann. PE • Ted K Field. PE • Kenneth P Anderson. PE • Mark R Rolfs. PE • Sidney P Williamson. PE. L S • Robert F Koismiih • Agnes V. Ring • .Michael P Rau. PE • Allan Rick Schmidt PE Offices SI Paul. Rochester. Willmar and St Cloud. MM - Milwaukee. Wl Webfite WWW bonestroo com ,----------- c... - ...^ dL Dear Liz: We have reviewed the revised site plan dated November 10, 1998 for the proposed garage relocation on the Brent Bentrott property. The site is locatru at 1453 Park Drive on the south side of Forest Lake in the south half of Section 7. We have the following comments in regards to engineering matters. 1. Grading: The revised grading plan appe;uT» to address some but not all of our previous concerns. The proposed swale and associated grading east of the driveway is shown right up to the property line. To construct the swale and driveway as shown it will be necessary to obtain a temporar)' easement from the property owner to the east. Drainage along the east side of the house is still a concern. The proposed grading plan shows a culvert under the driveway that may direct some water westerly however it appears that a considerable amount of storm water will be directed towards the existing home. Retaining wall details and design should be submitted for review. 2. Driveway: The proposed grades on the driveway appear to be acceptable. The 2 percent landings at Park Drive and at the proposed garage make sense. The City should consider if the future construction of Bluff Street is a possibility. The proposed plan shows the driveway to be constmeted in (he Park Drive and Bluff Street right-of-way. Future improvements to either street would eliminate the 2 percent driveway landing making ingre.ss and egress difficult if not dangerous. 3. Drainage: A detailed drainage area map of the contributing drainage area and drainage calculations should be submitted for review. 4. Easements: Utility easements should be shown 5-feet wide along the interior lot lines and 10-feet wide along Park Drive and Bluff Street. Drainage easements should be provided across all drainage ways. Please contact me at (604-4863) if you have ary questions regarding this matter. Yours very truly, BONESTROO, ROSENE. ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES INC. Tom Kellogg Cc: Greg Gappa, City of Orono 2335 West Highway 36 • St. Paul, MN 55113 ■ 612-636-4600 • Fax: 612-636-1311 § 6.05 Subd. 7. Submission of Plans to Public Works Director. All plans submitted to the Building Inspector for his or her approval, which include or involve a sidewalk, curb and gutter, driveway, driveway turnaround, driveway approach, curb cuts, roadway surfacing or private improvement in any public road or other public property in the City, shall be referred by the Building Inspector to the Public Works Director for his or her approval before a building permit shall be issued. Subd. 8. Construction Requirements Generally. In addition to the rules, regulations and specifications as outlined by the Public Works Director with respect to the improvements listed above, the following requirements shall be complied with when work is done under the provisions of this Ordinance. A. All driveway approaches shall intersect piiHiTg road pavement at an angle to be approved by the Public Director based upon the physical characteristics of the public road, driveway approach and the parcel of land being accessed. -^uch angle shall be as close as is reasonably practical, in the judgement of the Public Works Director, to a right angle to the pavement of the public road. B. No curb cuts shall be made in such a way that the curb return extends beyond any property line as projected, except when consented to, in writing, by the adjoining property owner involved. Said consent, if necessary, shall be submitted to the Public Works Director prior to the issuance of a permit. C. The top of the paving of the driveway approach slab at the curb line shall be 1 5/8 inches above the flowline of the gutter, and shall not extend into the gutter beyond the face of the curb or beyond the gutter line, and shall not be constructed in a manner that will in any way interfere with the use of the for the purpose of travel or maintenance. The constructed^ public road shall not be excavated in the process of constructing the driveway unless previous approval, in writing, has been granted by the Public Works Director. D. Driveway culverts shall be provided and installed by the owner as required by the Public Works Director. E. Driveways shall not be cons*^v ^rtcid over stops, catch basins or other structures, if at possible. If there is no other feasible location for the driveway, it shall be the responsibility of the applicant to set the curb stop, catch basin cover, or any other structures flush with the final driveway surface. ORONO CC 141-1 (7-25-88) S 6.05 ' F. The owner and contractor shall protect the public from injury or damage during the construction of the sidewalkr curb and gutter, driveway, driveway approach, driveway turnaround, curb cuts, roadway surfacing or private improvement in any public street or other public property in the City and any permit issued pursuant to this Ordinance shall contain the agreement of the applicant that the City shall not be liable for damage which may arise from the result of work, and that the applicant will hold the City harmless for any liability incurred by the City as a result of such activity. G. Trees or shrubs shall not be placed adjacent to a driveway so as to constitute a site distance problem. H. If a parcel of land has frontage on both a cul- de-sac portion and a "lead-in" portion of the public road, the driveway shall be constructed off the "lead-in" portion of the public road and not the cul-du-sac. Subd. 9. Resident Driveways, Approaches and Turnaround. A. One driveway approach shall be allowed from up to two single residential parcels of land to the same public road provided that appropriate easements exist between parties sharing the driveway and driveway approach. Parcels having frontage on more than one public road shall be allowed a driveway approach to one public road. B. Residential driveway approach shall not exceed 20 feet in width at the intersected right-of-way line. C. The total width of driveway approaches to up to two single parcels of land from a single public road shall not exceed 20 feet. D. A curb cut shall not exceed the width of the driveway approach at the property line by more than 10 feet. E. No portion of a driveway approach, except the curb return, shall be constructed within 100 feet of a corner. ORONO CC 141-2 (7-25-88) § 6.05 F. For residences hereafter constructedr the driveway approach and that part of the driveway and turnarounds which drain to the public road shall be paved with bituminous concrete blacktop or equivalent paving. Where it has been determined by the City's Public Works Director that an existing driveway and/or driveway approach is causing a maintenance problem on the public road# including, but not limited to, the washing of dirt and gravel into the public road, the Public Works Director shall order that the property owner pave such portion of the driven ay and/or driveway approach as is necessary to remove the maintenance problem. Portland cement concrete will only be allowed from the driveway up to the public right-of-way. This requirement shall not be construed to reduce paving otherwise required by performance standards in the Zoning Code or required as a condition to the granting of a Conditional Use Permit, lot division, subdivision or as designated in the approved site plan. G. Driveway turnarounds shall be required on all driveways or driveway approaches entering onto a State highway. County road or collector roadway as determined in the Comprehensive Plan, and on all entrances to public roads within the City where deemed necessary by the Public Works Director, based on traffic counts, sight distances, street grades and other relevant factors. If a driveway turnaround is required by the Public Works Director, such requirement shall be stated on any permit issued by him or her pursuant to this ordinance. S ubd. 10. Turnarounds. Business Driveways, Approaches and A. Only one business driveway shall be allowed per development unless a greater number of driveways are approved by the City, or approved as part of the site plan review. The business driveway approach shall not exceed the width of the access road or 32 feet at the property line, whichever is less in a business or industrial district. The curb cut shall not exceed the width of the driveway approach at the property line by more than 20 feet unless approved as part of a site plan. In a residential district, the curb cut shall not exceed the width of the driveway approach at the property line by more than 10 feet unless approved as part of the site plan. B. All business driveways and driveway approaches shall be paved with asphaltic concrete or equivalent material. Portland cement concrete will only be allowed outside of the public road right-of-way. C. Loading docks, ramps and vehicular entrances shall be located in such a manner that backing onto and maneuvering within the public road right-of-way is eliminated and in such a manner that driveways greater in width than that specified by this chapter shall not be required. ORONO CC 141-3 (7-25-88) COFFIN & GRONBERG, INC. SUnVKVINO, INOINKiniNO AND LAND PLANNINO 4Sa-A TAMAKACK AVINUR LONG LAKE. MINN. SaSM 473.4141 Novembers, 1998 Brent Bentrott 1453 Park Drive Orono,MN 55364 Dear Brent: Because of the steep slopes from Park Drive down to your house, this is a difficult site to fit in a proposed driveway. The existing gravel driveway on Bluff Street right-of-way is at a 23% grade which is too steep to use for a driveway. Your previous October 7, 1998 plan by Larson Associates has the right idea but the elevation at the entrance to Park Drive is actually 2 feet higher which would cause problems with sideslopes, tree removal, visual appearance and amount of fill needed. The enclosed plan moves the entrance to Park Drive to the west and cuts along your property at an angle in order to stay off the steep sideslope. This eliminates grading and tree removal in this steep area, gives you a flat landing area at the entrance to Park Drive and gives you more length to get down the hill at a reasonable (10%) grade and give a flat area (2%) by the proposed garage. These proposed grades work well with this property and adjoining properties and require about 500 cubic yards of fill which is much less than would be needed under the October 7th plan using actual grades. Sincerely, COFFIN & GRONBERG, INC Mark S. Gronberg, P.E. & L.S. MSG/cr < CQUU tJU C/) C/> «/) I 1 iu c/i (JU uu V) CO ^ I . I uu CO CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY FOR BRENT BENTROTT LOT 9, BLOCK 15. SAGA HILL REVISED HENNEPIN COUNTY. MINNESOTA aOAL OCSCRPTON OT PRtItSCS; , Lot 9. OkKk IS. •S090 m K«vt»cd. Hmpn Cou^y. l«nnwo!o , ^ao thol part of vocotod roro*t Bodovord oa of -S090 Mi RoviMd. Monnapfn Cou»ty, linrwwto* otiich 6es ^r«m ihTNorlhiioaiirly •■leniont ocrota it of the Northeoel- efly bw of Lot 9. Bock IS. “Sogo Hicry L W. vw, ,. — —-- ------------ Hroepe* C0(«>ty. Meweeoto** and the etroi^l portico of the Southoeaterty fcno ot •old Lot 9 < CQLU UU tJU (o CO c/i tu c/i U* uu c/i c/i cu cu c/i c/i uu lu c/i c/i Uu u« uu CO* CO* c/i U« tu uu c/i CO c/i ^ INa eirvey intends to show the boundaries of the ,**®*^**?^_ property. Uw locolion of on esisting houso, Qorog^ and olhor el*We ^hardcover* theroOw and the prapoee d bcolion of o proposod 9yo9<. It does not pupoct to show any other Improvements or encroochmenli. Iron morliar : CsisUng spot elevation o BeoHhgs shown ore bosed upon on ossumed dotien • • f rr- • ; i r««r#^ r: I 1 p \ \ \ VACATED BOU.EVARD- \ ' ' \ \ \ ’ boulev ard \ I'O BE «OED to OESCW tkn', ^ N ei’OO* 20“ E . I ^00 .j••• 'P/C ‘■21 s. 5 f^ENNEP/N ( ^TBACK Lt£ DECK \ ^0 Lo \ EXis-ni^ house \ 1 \ V. 7( ......deck existing house <f4«^) \ 1 1 \ i \ \ CD \ \ \\ 8 \ \ \ s\ 5 e « ‘ I.--w] . i EXISTlNGai^fe|b ’ garage V^>vV\ \ t \ \ A r- p!:<,’;';t'0 VlX1> TliN- J rrriT t ' { '1 Hli•1 j i •i!y V1 1tn ___1 ;.L •^ • ’.^•«»J W«» •ii£0!l>Ji!.'^' •<^mf— •' 1-* rr' i: .1: / liif”'rT•I ]ff(ir«*vr» i:r-‘ Ttrrr— T1 'f"T /VV- ••• / ii‘- "•• i| -r«,, r- .1 -r-v \K ■ m mi* »••*»'! _,L-^ iii . i'j u; oj I '^;y j *\ tF ’i: Riff;-rniii s:T^^i'r'!tyiifeHn:lj!:r:n:iiir73:...jH!l,Jk. ■ ** * f a II III" *f T 41 1*1 ^ '"ll--tlli 1 iiL— «••.*% #•. M« ■ 9\.S -£.vx»^It1#sItV**^ 11 “>****^ 1 I giCo ^ pr. fWV04TT*fO '0w vicwp htteecw^) LARSON ASSOCIATES Larson Associates, Inc. Architects and Engineers 23S1 Eakai Avenue N.E Buffalo. Minncsola Tel. (612)682 95.^ Fax (612)682 612-602-9531 10-08-98 07:54 P.Ol October?, 1998 Mr. Brent Bentrott 1453 Park Drive Qrono, MN 55364 Re: Bentrott Site Plan Dear Brent: Enclosed is a copy of the site plan for your property as requested. This option shows the location of the proposed garage to be mid-way b^een the existing house and the street. With this option I calculate the required fill, whidi must be inqx>rted, to be 831 cu. yds. This is based on the criteria of an 8% maximum dope for the grade of the driveway. The amount offiD could be reduced if the maximum dope could be increased for a portion of the driveway near the street. Since the greatest change in elevation Is at the street, this would allow you to descend down more quickly, reducing the fiD iteeded to build the driveway. If you have any questions please feel fioe to call nw. Sincerely: 1, A Ja/ed K. LarsdoTP-E. dtect, Structurd Engh Minnesota Reg. No. 15847 98150U1 jkl OCT-03-1998 03:34 612-632-9531 3V4 P.01 RSON ASSOCIATES 612-682-9531 10-08-98 07:55 P.02 MnWMM3 MCA OP HOTM. ANBA »eP MMCc0Mn ALUMAUr A%a. PT no4ao.pr roil oa yf-TBC aaaiM pt aMiaa.PT jMaa 90*ciaao.PT aauaaLPT aartii aoa Urfton Attociaiett Inc. ArohiUoif And Bsfioteri 23SI Kaken A tbiiuc * K.E. Buffalo, UinoftoU S5S13 Tcl. Pai eia 2ar 682-9530 682-0531 I y • 1 loA/at Pr«)Mi TitJ* BENTROTT RESIDENCE ORONO. MlMNEbOTA AMt Tltto SITE PLAN __98160 10/7/QS omM ar toia If## A1 r\ •tt •n )f y e e g n It s S-1998 08:35 612-682-9531 915;P.02 Apphc Kl 6- Appit cocHon i«t«p 4d|>* . elcrww l«4S‘Ci*v«^ Fmtv Stvi^r rviAp ^^pCriniV r^COir^ loDVHf Jan&f'j Tl, A Application # Date Received fO- Amount Paid CITY OF ORONO - GENERAL LAND USE APPUCATION PROPERTY LOCATION . , ^ - Site Address IMCS \ Or\sr^ Type of Application to be Filed ^ V « * /V < * ^ T % Type of Application to be Filed ^ ^ ____________________________ . Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) \_crV g>ta-cl=-tS . Cc;^, on-lx'7-z^-H2- 002:2, 'oozz APPLICANT Name - —»—» ■ ~ • : Address ^ v^<xr\c Or ^ rjL<u-APi 1 >01 \ t Phone (home ) Name R?recv'V c, B>e^vVro~^ Phone (work) ~ -oA «f_ I. # '0 Trmu rW 3 City (Or«s>sso Zip ^^64 OWNER (if different than applicant) Name ________ Phone (home). Phone (workX Address City Zip. Date P'yperty Acquired ________________________ I (do) (MoHo^also oxvn the adjacent parcels of land. (month/year) FEES - CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS - _____$ 75.00 For each variance request with CUP application _____$175.00 Residential Accessory Use _____$250.00 Institutional (church, school, etc.) _______$225.00 Guest House/Guest Apartments _____$200.00 Duplex Credit/Bldg _____$300.00 Commercial/Industrial Use _____$250.00 Land Alteration ____ Grading and filling - designated wetland or floodpl^ Grading and filling - 501 cu. yd. or more __ Grading, seawall, retaining walls within 75' of lakeshore PRD/PED - see Fee Schedule $150.00 Renewal Fee (no change from original application) After-the-Fact Fee - Double Current Application Fee OTHER APPLICATIONS _____$250.00 Commercial Site Plan Review (+ consultant fees) _____$300.00 Vacation _____$200.00 Easement Vacation _____$100.00 Easement Vacation With Subdivision _____$350.00 Rezoning (PUD - refer to fee schedule) _____$350.00 Comprehensive Plan Amendment _____$100.00 Appeals Other - see Fee Schedule Application if Date Received Amount Paid CITY OF ORONO - VARIAMGE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee(^_250^00^ ($50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $150.00 (no change from original application) Variance for non-conforming structures $250.00 After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) PROPERTY INFORMATION 3iteAddress IHSS PA 1^-1^ Property Identification Number (P.l.D.)X Q~l-» IM^ Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. Date Property Acquired_____tslov/ETyVA^ETlf^ _____________ I (do) ^o n^ also own the adjacent parcels of land. Present use of property: .X. residential ___other (specify)__________ Zoning District: X LR- I 0___________________________________ (month/year) '•"Ae/ APPLICANT Name Address: (MS*^ pp tvHg City: Phone fhome l 2. - fpM (g^ Phone (work ) Zip:_9ilDM OWNER (if different than applicant) Name Phone (homeX Phone (work)_ % Address:City:.Zip:. DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Constmction Cost $ Describe request in detail: }sJEvO C2LeS0(^ ~TD V^O^fc? - VWAg' lk)CCiUDUj^A -TDC«Jt^U)S x (attach additional sheets if necessary) (AMS' VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area Lot Width X Setback:Front X ..ide Hardcover Rear Lot Coverage Average Lakeshore VyACATloM cF AC!\A6ei^ I?v0 ‘ Access VEW D(u U5U a AM/ MTir\MCHARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS ('A/Ojr VAC DOC fX) 6435422 VAC DOC NO 6074295 • K • « / 07- in- 33- . /S'-30.73-V (4lr; g/ s M ^9 K0.5 (35) —=3 —;: • 10/iCC 8./; /*. 245_b1 7 / *® ^ M »r>/ /•o / ^ 2C3.57 xh>' ^ I <7) 3/',/> 10.44. 1 r 145.54 ♦o m ^ eo :^^.52 $ _______ ooc PAST Of % * miL \\ -'55 '^z t?'''' /(15; ^5; ■.•.■MAOM I (2?) y ^*. * J9.r JX o MmrzSa^jaia^ >^'vy / X '■X. (8) .-■ 5 y'^" \ w \%-<i & rV\£AjJ> O^cJ^I^P^ ^rr\n\2SJ^XZ\ • 1 ^^y<i/\^0!]JL. ^^'ClxZeJbCcV^ ^ /V\/^^ CoY\<jljuuu^>^ x"Vxmr\ jJI W\.kAJ^SL^ \CXAv\S^ , GoAA,W CTLT SvVv<>0k5^1 onto Adjacent Property Owners' Acknowledgement Form I (we) [print name(s)][print address] have at IM review'edthe plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the properly located % pc-yjr\C also referred to as Land Use Application No.________. I (we) understand that in executing this acknowledgement, I (we) am (are) not asked to declare approval or disapproval of the property or use but merely to confirm for the City Council tnat I (we) am (are) aware of the impro. ement plans and that the proposed neighbor's project or use requi res Council approval. SC Property Owner Date Proper\y Owner t Date ******************************************* ************ I (we) [print name(s)l [print address] have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the property located at___________________also referred to as Land Use Application No._________• I (we) understand that in executing this acknowledgement, I (we) am (are) not asked to declare approval or disapproval of the property or use but merely to confirm for the City Council that I (we) am (are) aware of the improvement plans and tliat the proposed neighbors project or use requires Council approval. Cm Property Owner Date DateProperty Owner If you have any information that may assist the City in the review of this Land Use Application, please submit your comments to the Building & Zoning Office at least 10 days prior to the scheduled meeting date. r ^ Ti •'’i'V.;:4«i;.-,mVJi» '* ilSfij'j^. ;*i |r-ifrr-~^*lTrm^ ’ . • • ... . ■ , ••■-.• Y i- ^ “•*" •» *» % ■ , . * ♦ i '^■• - • •* • • * . • ' V •*** ■ - ..»'. *•... • ••• *»•' ■-.• •# • * ^ .*• ■ . .. vC*. . . ' < .w ‘ • .. . . , • < ' ► ‘ •’■•.. • •* . .* * •• •. . * * ^ ..a- : • .• .,•>•. • ..^ --v ...,/... ;. • ■...., •■ ■■ . X NOT TO 8E SERVED V.. A.--. . .Aiji::...-,.--' : •■■ ■■•■•■ •- ■■•X ^ BY ■ 0B4VITY, Permit No. ZS2Z. -3l3X 5-.J PERMIT RECORD Date /-/fc- 79 €'is-9<o 9^-JK. /Vss '7=^^ . Type of Permit /^OO. S^ci/eA hi AOQ 'f ^<r/7vooc2. iLBtis. ________ ■ '’Tyue/^ N CTI Ces +0 Y ppWc 1 CITY OF ORONO P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 473-7357 ZONING FILE #2395 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION DATE OF NOTICE: 7/21/98 TO:Brent Bentrott 1453 Park Drive Mound, MN 55364 COPIES TO: TYPE OF APPLICATION:Vacation of Bluff Street and Variances DATE OF MEETING: 7/20/98 VOTE:6 FOR 0 AGAINST Planning Commission recommends the following: Tabled for reasons noted below. NOTES AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS: 1 . Make sure that proposed 3 season screen porch is at least 3' from Bluff Street property line - show on survey. 2. Deny 10'vacation of Bluff Street. 3. Rework garage location and be at least 10' from garage on adjacent propert>' (Palms). Contact building official, Lyle Oman, at 473-7357, for assistance in determining a location for the proposed garage. Applicant's next scheduled meeting is confirmed as: Planning Commission Monday August 17,1998, meeting starts at 6:30 p.m. If you desire certified copies of the official Planning Commission minutes, they are available from the City Recorder af er review and approval by the Planning Commission. X:UPPS\WPWIN60\WPDOCS\CAROLEy»CACTlON\2395 . y__A CITY OF ORONO P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 473-7357 ZONING FILE #2395 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION DATE OF NOTICE; August 18,1998 TO: Brent & Kathryn Bentrott 1453 Park Drive Mound, MN 55364 COPIES TO: TYPE OF APPLICATION:Variance DATE OF MEETING: 8/17/98 VOTE:6 FOR 0 AGAINST Planning Commission recommends the following: Tabled for reasons noted below. NOTES AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS: Resolve issues re: a. hardcover - provide accurate information for proposal b. location of proposed garage c. proximity to adjacent residence - noise, lights issue d. engineering issues with grading, fill, slope - provide engineered design with grading, drainage and topography as existing and proposed. Applicant's next scheduled meeting is dependent upon receipt of additional information. Deadline for the September 2’, 1998 meeting is September 4, 1998. Enc. Minutes from 7/20/98 Extension Letter X:\APPS\WPWIN60\WPDOCS\CAROLE\PCACTlON\2395-2 CITY OF ORONO P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 473-7357 ZONING FILE #2395 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION DATE OF NOTICE: October 20, 1998 TO:Brent Bentrott 1453 Park Drive Mound, MN 55364 COPIES TO: TYPE OF APPLICATION:Variance DATE OF MEETING: 10/19/98 VOTE:5 FOR 0 AGAINST Planning Commission recommends the following: Tabled for reasons noted below. NOTES AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS: 1. Provide drainage and grading plan for the plan submitted by Larson Assoc. 2. Work with adjacent owner regarding drainage concerns. Applicant's next scheduled meeting is dependent upon receipt of additional information. Deadline for the November 16 meeting is to be worked out with staff dependent on when you can obtain the new information, no later than November 1. The review period is hereby extended an additional 60 days. X:\APPS\WPWIN60\WPDOCS\C AROt.E\PCACTIOVa395-3 CITY OF ORONO P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 473-7357 ZONING FILE #2395 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION DATE OF NOTICE: November 17, 1998 TO: Brent & Kathryn Bentrott 1453 Park Drive Orono, MN 55364 TYPE OF APPLICATION: DATE OF MEETING: 11/16/98 COPIES TO: Variance/Conditional Use Permit VOTE:6 FOR 1 AGAINST Planning Commission recommends the following: 1. Approve variances for house improvements for side yard adjacent to street. 2. Deny conditional use permit, grading and land alteration. 3. Deny variances for hardcover and side yard adjacent to street for garage. NOTES AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS: Applicant’s next scheduled meeting is confirmed as: City Council November 23, 1998, meeting starts at 7:00 p.m. If you desire certified copies of the official Planning Commission minutes, they arc available from the City Recorder after revie\v and approval by the Planning Commission. X:V\PPS\VP\VIN60v\VPrxx:SCAROLE'PCACTION\2395-4 PC /Ain u+<s M €jT AuAos-f mm ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MONDAY, OCTOBER 19,1998 (klA27 Kenton and Diane Carlson, Continued) Van Zomeren commented the drawing shows 3/4 ’ stone along Baldur Park Road and in the yard between the house and north property line. Currently a boat is stored on the rock. Staff is recommending that this area be regarded as hardcover but not included in the hardcover survey. Staff is recommending that this stone or rock be replaced with sod and landscaping. Staff is also recommending approval of the after-the-fact variances for structural lot coverage, side yard setback, and hardcover, with the condition that no further variances for hardcover and structural coverage be granted. Carlson stated he intends to sell the boat or house the boat indoors. Chair Smith suggested the Applicant seriously consider adding sod to that area. Carlson commented he could put In a decorative garden in that area. There were no public comments. Chair Smith stated the Planning Commission will give the Apolicant a reasonable amount of time in which to remove the boat. Lindquist suggested by June 1.1999. the Applicant have grass in the arsa and the rock removed. Chair Smith suggested the boat be removed within 60 days. Smith inquired whether hardcover for this lot should be reduced. Van Zomeren recommended no new hardcover or structural coverage be allowed on the property. Stoddard moved, Smith seconded, to approve Application #2427, 3498 North Shore Drive, granting of after-the-fact variances for side yard setback, hardcover, and structural coverage, subject to removal of the boat within 60 days of today's date, and further subject to the condition that the rock be removed and sod be placed in the area where the boat is currently stored, and further subject to the stipulation that no new hardcover or structural structure will be allowed on this property in the future. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. OLD BUSINESS: CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARINGS (#4) #2395 BRENT BENTROTT, 1453 PARK DRIVE - VARIANCES AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT. 8:04 p.m. - 8:54 p.m. Mr. and Mrs. Brent Bentrolt were present. Van Zomeren stated the Applicants have appeared at the July 20th and August 17th Planning Commission meeting requesting hardcover variances, a 10 foot vacation of Bluff Street, and side yard adjacent to street setback variances. Van Zomeren commented the Applicants have submitted a new plan which requires a side yard adjacent to street variance to allow a new deck and porch to be located one foot from the property line, as well as a side yard adjacent to street variance to alio./ a new garage to be located eight feet from the property line where 35 feet is required. A variance to hardcover is also required in the 75-250 ’ setback to allow 35.32 percent hardcover. Page 7 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MONDAY, OCTOBER 19,1998 (#2395 Brent Bentrott. continued) Van Zomeren stated a conditional use permit is also required to alter land and grade within five feet of the property line which will require proper notification to the adjoining property owners. Bentrott commented his architect has reviewed Kellogg's letter and responded to the concerns. Bentrott stated they are contemplating planting hostas and other green cover along the bank to avoid the necessity for mowing. Mrs. Bentrott commented they have planted hostas previously along an existing bank. Bentrott stated they could also consider constructing a retaining wall or me /e the Till somewhat. Chair Smith inquired whether the water drainage issues concerning the a Jjoining properties have been adequately addressed. Bentrott stated their adjoining neighbor is in the process of remodeling as well. Lindquist stated a joint drainage and grading plan should be developed between the property owners to resolve any water runoff issues. Bentrott remarked he was unsure what Item No. 4 in Tom Kellogg's letter was referring to. Van Zomeren stated the language contained in Items 3 and 4 is standard language for a subdivision, and was not sure of Mr. Kellogg's intent by including that language in his letter. Bentroli commented ho is frustrated by the continual requests by the Planning Commission at each meeting to change a different aspect of the plan, noting he requested at the last meeting to have the Planning Commission give better direction on what they would like to see changed in the plan. Van Zomeren stated Staff has received a letter from the Palms at 1447 Park Drive expressing their support of this application. Bentrott commented according to the building inspector, his present driveway is a hazard due to the necessity to back out onto the street. Hawn stated she has concerns about the amount of nil that will be necessary. Chair Smit*! stated the drainage issues still need to be addressed before this application could be approved. Stoddard stated he was oksy with the three foot setback on the side for the proposed three season porch. Hawn commented that she knows the Applicant has appeared before the Planning Commission three times, noting there are substantial issues that need to be addressed with this application. Lindquist stated a definite plan for the grading and drainage needs to be submitted. Van Zomeren slated notification needs to be given to the adjoining property owners of the request for a conditional use permit for any grading within five feet of the property line, noting there was not sufficient time to give notice to the neighbors before tonight's meeting. Van Zomeren commented the Applicants have been working closely with City Staff to get an acceptable plan together. Page 8 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MONDAY, OCTOBER 19,1998 (11^2395 Brent Bentrott, continued) Chair Smith inquired when the Applicants were planning on commencing construction. Bentrott stated they had wanted a fall start date but have pushed it back *o the spring. Chair Smith suggested putting this item on the November agenda to allow the Applicants time to submit a detailed drainage plan and less fill required. Bentrott inquired whether the Planning Commission could approve the application subject to the submittal of a drainage and grading plan. Schroeder stated an acceptable drainage plan needs to be submitted before approval can be given. Van Zomeren stated the steepness of the driveway also should be addressed. Stoddard suggested aoproving the side yard and hardcover variances subject to the submittal and approval by City Staff of a grading and drainage plan. Lindquist inquired whether the Planning Commission was in favor granting the variances. It v/as the concensus of the Planning Commission that they might look favorably upon the variances subjc^ct to an acceptable grading and drainage plan. Schroeder moved to approve Application #2395,1453 Park Drive, granting of variances to side yard adjacent to street to allow a new deck and porch to be located one foot from the property line, a side yard adjacent to street variance to allow a new garage to be located eight feet from the property line, a variance to the hardcover requirements In the 75-250' setback as outlined in the Planner's Report dated October 14,1998, subject to the submittal and approval of a drainage and grading plan before commencement of construction. MOTION DIED DUE TO LACK OF A SECOND. Van Zomeren noted an extension will be required because the 60 days expires November 8th. Schroeder suggested tabling the item since notification has not been given for the conditional use permit. Schroeder withdrew his motion pending submittal of a grading and drainage plan. Van Zomeren staled the variances are part of the old application. Schroeder suggested submitting a new application for the variances as well as inclusion of the request for a conditional use permit. Chair Smith staled it v.'as the concensus of the Planning Commission that the variances will be approved subject to the submittal of an acceptable drainage and grading plan. Smith moved, Schroeder seconded, to table Application #2395,1453 Park Drive, to allow the Anplicants time to submit a drainage and grading plan. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. (#7) #2413 PAUL AND MEGAN BENNETT, 500 HANLON AVENUE - VARIANCES, 8:55 p.m. 9:05 p.m. Paul and Megan Bennett were present. Page 9 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR AUGUST 17,1998 (#2408 MIKE HILBELINK, Continued) Chair Smith staled the Planning Commission has to act on what is presented to them, but the Applicant could request that the application be tabled to allow lime to submit revised plans. Van Zomeren staled if the barn is to be used to house animals, the Planning Commission needs to know the exact lot lines that are being proposed. Schroeder stated to house horses a minimum of three acres is needed. Van Zomeren staled since the barn has not housed animals for an extended period of time, the intent to house animals probably iia' been abandoned and a new conditional use permit would be required. Van Zomeren slated if a new house is constructed on the backlot, it must meet the required setbacks for that lot, noting the restriction for the barn falls on the lot that contains the barn. Smi;h moved, Schroeder seconded, to table Application #2408 for property located at 90C >7illow Drive North to allow the Applicant time to submit revised plans. VOTE: Ayes 6, Nays 0. OLD BUSINESS: CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARINGS, CONTINUED (#3) #2395 BRENT BENTROTT, 1453 PARK DRIVE - VARIANCES, 7:20 p.m. - 7:45 p.m. Van Zomeren stated this application was considered at the July 20 Planning Commission meeting where the Applicants requested hardcover variances, a ten foot vacation of platted, unopened Bluff Street, and side yard adjacent to street setback variances. The Planning Commission had recommended denial of the vacation of Bluff Street and tabled the application to allow the Applicant lime to submit revised plans Van Zomeren reported the Applicant has submitted a new plan that shows access from the street and locates the garage closer to the house, approximately 130 feet from the street. The Applicant Is proposing to construct a two-story 22' by 25' garage. Van Zomeren staled she has spoken with Tom Kellogg, an engineer with Bonestroo, who has reviewed this plan. Kellogg has expressed concerns over the slope of the driveway, which would require a considerable amount of nil to obtain a grade of 8 percent. Van Zomeren stated the Planning Commission needs to consider whether this garage can be relocated to its proposed site, what grade the driveway should be at. how much fill will be allowed, hov/ close the garage should be to the adjoining property line and existing house, and whether a variance to hardcover should be granted. Chair Smith staled this application involves issues that need to be addressed by an engineer, which the Planning Commission is not in a position to handle. Bentroll slated at the last meeting the Planning Commission had staled they would not be in favor of using the unopened street for access to the garage, which necessitated the need to relocate the garage. Bentroll remarked a structural engineer has viewed the property. Benlrott stated the adjacent property should not be impacted by the additional fil! since the elevation is much higher. Van Zomeren slated the engineer has also raised concerns about the distance available in the lot Page 5 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION ivi^ETlNG MINUTES FOR AUGUST 17.1998 (#2395 BRENT BENTROTT, Continued) width to maintain an adequate bench of three to one for safety and mowing. Stoddard commented the steep embankment might require retaining walls, which would also increase hardcover. Lindquist stated this property will exceed the allowable hardcover in all three zones if the application is approved and will require variances in both the 75 ’-250' and 250'-500 ’ setbacks. Lindquist stated he would probably vote against this application with the proposed hardcover. Van Zomeren stated that the new hardcover numbers were not provided with the revised plan. Chair Smith stated the Planning Commission probably cannot act on this application without the new hardcover numbers. Stoddard stated the surveyor or Applicant should be notified by City Staff that hardcover needs to be calculated before the meeting. Mrs. Bentrott stated they would like to relocate the garage closer to the residence to allow elderly relation the ability to visit them year-round, noting they weren't aware they couldn ’t relocate the garage. Mr. Bentrott stated Bruce Vang, building inspector, has been out to view the property and followed his suggestions to utilize the platted, unopened street and to construct a new garage because in his view the existing garage was a hazard since they had to back out onto the street. Stoddard stated it has not been the philosphy of the Planning Commission to vacate or allow use of platted, unopened street for private driveways. Stoddard stated the Applicant will need to review the possible need for retaining walls, amount of fill, and new hardcover numbers, noting the Planning Commission cannot act on this application until those issues are addressed. Berg expressed concerns over the driveway being close to the neighboring house and the impact the noise and headlights would have on the adjoining property. Schroeder suggested tabling the application to allow the Bentrotts time to address these issues. Chair Smith stated she would prefer a plan without retaining walls if possible, and suggested the Applicant continue to work v/ith City Staff on the hardcover and engineering issues. Mr. Bentrott stated they applied for the vacation to eliminate setback for the three-season porch. Hawn stated the vacation probably would not be approved. Mr. Bentrott staled in his opinion he has three options; 1) keep existing garage; 2) reconsider the application without the ten fool vacation of Bluff Street; and 3) proceed with the revised plan, which is the most costly. Hawn remarked in her view those options are not viable due to the increased hardcover. Schroeder suggested tabling the matter, noting he is not prepared to give guidance on this application due to the engineering issues that need to be addressed. Stoddard suggested the Applicant continue to work with City Staff in an effort to resolve some of Page 6 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR AUGUST 17,1998 (#2395 BRENT BENTROTT, Continued) these issues. There were no public com.ments. Schroeder moved, Lindquist seconded, to table Application #2395 for property located at 1453 Park Drive. VOTE: Ayes 6, Nays 0. NEW BUSINESS: PUBLIC HEARINGS (#5) #2391 EVAN ANDERSON, 1260 SPRUCE PLACE - VARIANCE, 7:46 p.m. - 8:05 p.m. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. Mr. and Mrs. Anderson were present. Weinberger stated the Applicants are applying for an after-the-fact variance for hardcover to allow a patio to remain in the 0-75' distance from the lake, and a variance from allowed hardcover in the 75 ’- 250 ’ lakeshore setback for a patio and the reconstruction of an old garage, which would require a variance from the side yard adjacent to street setback. The Applicants are proposing to construct a 24' x 20’ garage to replace an existing 22.5' x 20’ garage, which is 40.6 square feet larger. Weinberger stated a conditonal use permit is needed for retaining walls that have already been replaced on the property. An after-the-fact variance is needed to allow retaining walls and patio to remain in the 0-75 ’ zone which are not depicted on a 1996 survey. Mr. Anderson stated the retaining walls have existed since 1978 and have been replaced. Weinbei^er stated the Applicant is proposing to maintain the total hardcover within the 0-75 ’ lakeshore setback at 18.5 percent. The allowed hardcover in this zone is none, which would require a variance. A hardcover variance is also required for the 75 ’-250' distance from the lake. The Applicants are proposing to increase hardcover from 55.3 percent to 56 percent. The allowable hardcover for that zone is 25 percent. Anderson staled City Staff have been out to review his property in the past, noting they were not aware the retaining walls were not depicted on the survey. Mrs. Anderson slated they have obtained many permits over the years for the work that has been completed on their property. Mrs. Anderson noted their properly is the principal watershed for that entire area and the retaining walls are necessary for the drainage. Chair Smith expressed concern that the retaining walls were not depicted on the survey. Stoddard staled he agrees with Staffs recommendations. There were no public comments. Stoddard remarked he would be in favor of granting the after-the-fact variances, but would like to limit the size of the garage to what is currently existing. Stoddard commented he has viewed the Page 7 rtTCtit]mTTTsmwiwm rtmusitK*fsiCTHiiirtHtj MCsIt rtIW:lt] [•Hint BTi[iFTOM*UW rtnrw*]rtKinimwKiiL*] ^iHf5TViT¥«r« r*iti«iiu«j [5BirTc«WiJ ^T*10 rsnnnniTniiTTOWiPHiE r^w^.wMmFmw^mum rtiM« ^TtTtnfi*w#™ MAiltltTrltlllli rtifliit] ^T7:l«nili rtiiiat][immj rtniLt Hmn9\r»T»t ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR JULY 20,1998(#14) #2395 BRENT BENTROTT, 1453 PARK DRIVE - VARIANCES AND VACATION,9:24 c.m. - 9:47 p.m.The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted.Mr. and Mrs. Brent Bentrott were present.Van Zomeren stated this lot is located in the LR-1B zoning district, which has a minimum of one acre. Van Zomeren stated the applicar.ts are requesting that a 10 foot portion of platted, but unopened. Bluff Street be vacated to allow an existing deck that is along the west property line to be remodeled into a mree.season porch. The vacation Is also requested in order to build a nw oaraae that vrould be accessed from Blult Street. Variances are needed lor hardcover m the 0-500 setbacKs. Variances are also required for the side yard adjacent to street setback from Bluff Street to add the three-season porch, and a variance to the side yard setback for the proposed garage because it is considered an oversized accessory structure. Van Zomeren stated this application is dependent on the vacation, which traditionally have not been granted, and recommended the Planning Commission consider that portion of the application first. Bentrott stated they are proposing to build a new garage which would be located closer to the residence which should help reduce hardcover. Bentrott stated he didn't know a fire lane was considered a road. Mrs. Bentrott stated they would like a portion of the existing deck turned into a three-season porch. Chair Smith inquired what the practical use of the tire lane was. Van Zomeren stated any access off of the lake would need to also be reviewed by the utility compa.nies and the DNR, who would probably deny the request. McMillan stated the Planning Commission might be setting a precedent if the variance is granted, noting she was not in favor of the vacation. Lindquist remarked he does not think realistically this application would be approved as proposed. Bentrott stated they suggested using the fire lane as one option. There were no public comments. Chair Smith inquired what would happen if the vacation is denied. Van Zomeren stated if the vacation were not granted, the Planning Commission would be looking at a side yard adjacent to street setback to build right on the property Ime. no additional the conversion of the deck into a three season porch would be considered a structural change, a at least ten feet would be required between the accessory buildings. Bentrott stated he would be in favor of constructing the garage under 750 square feet and ten feet from the neighbor's building. McMillan stated she would be in favor of the three season porch and ^ 9a ‘'39® ^th proper setbacks from side yard with no additional hardcover in the 75’-250’ and 250 -500 zones. Lindquist stated the garage cannot be constructed right on the property Ime. Page 13 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR JULY 20,1998 (#2395 Brent Bentrott, continued) Benlrott commented the existing deck is currently located right on the property line, which will be removed. Lindquist stated the Applicant probably will be denied the vacation and will have to comply with present hardcover restrictions. Chair Smith suggested the matter be tabled to allow the Applicant to submit revised plans. Bentrott stated he would be fine with tabling the application. Lindquist commented he would be in favor of a 60 day extension from August 22. Van Zomeren stated the City is required to act within 60 days of when the application is submitted. Bentrott stated he would be in favor of extending the time limit. Smith moved, McMillan seconded, to table Application 2395 for property located at 1453 Park Drive. VOTE: Ayes 6, Nays 0. (#15) #2396 CLINT AND JODI MORRISON, 3510 BAYSIDE ROAD - VARIANCES, 9:48 p.m. - 9:57 p.m. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. Mr. and Mrs. Morrison were present. Weinberger stated the Applicants are requesting to replace their existing residence with a new house and attached garage. This prop'^dy is located in the LR-1A zoning district, which requires a minimum of two acres. This lot consists of 1.36 acres. A variance from lot size requirements would be needed as well as a variance from average lakeshore setback requirements. A conditional use permit is also necessary to allow a boat house to remain on the property during the demolition and reconstruction. The boat house would need to remain as an accessory structure and not be occupied while the residence is under reconstruction. No variance to hardcover is required. Staff recommends approval of the application based on the lot being a corner lot and the construction is com.pleted in a timely manner. The Applicants had no comment. There were no public comments. McMillan inquired whether a conditional use permit is needed to allow the accessory structure to remain. Van Zomeren stated a variance is needed to allow the accessory to remain during the reconstruction. Morrison remarked the boat house is really the original garage of the house. Lindquist commented boat house should be changed to read accessory structure Page 14 fOKSsf itMOWXt, LA' TO'd nniOi — • • ' *• “ • • Post-ir Fax Note 7671 ^ ... To \_\'l,from _ cc D«pi tX- csAot^-^Co Phone «Phone* PaK « • tJ Fa/* -«5'1*=^‘T COUNCIL MEETW, NOV 2 3 1998 irasrr- \n \ ^ \HX -XiX % 0\^ '^<m- 'WfT Sniee fWO <2^^ /)U(t '^AIU^ ZhJ((^i0rLM^ bJiP^ I/AcA^ -'’ Sx&^ fiei/^pfirjif 0(UU5^ iLnt^ fjk/,{c OiLVjC tUT3 IT fT2- /l^ c/ TO'd ’rt'il,j ■; wt* V T'?liOdilOg i(Gd:3 M:-?0 8t.*iT-:,.r-i:'0 « .'■JRtA. ■%'A i-ni-ij • ••-» • ^ J’ •*. H •i . % r *» Tlt'ont; GRcertiw^ 3-8352.'• • ••••. - ^ ^ ^ •% VW - :•-^ V;. • ...A •**•*• • "V- V ;;>/ •% f : > /•: > • j •••t - •-. :-■ i :ARtEIGH C 'S.' _ ^,;‘;,OF PRipFEBTy OF. > i f.*•_ V «• I • •• ,P • .' * • V •• *r \ ‘ ■ '*1^ y ^ . • •••' Jl \ -- -* ' f y .• • - .. • ‘*» • •• * . .» ■ •• * ^ •' . ;.' • . .* . .r; •:? -• Ir • . • . - *r ' s -■%' ‘ • .. -•• *1 ^ * r* • /* •;• ' . ••. V¥ ; ^ : • ' ' . '.., y. »• ■■ ■ * *• • '*>. ^■ >■•. ’ • * •■ •,• * • » • i • . • * V*. * . •, • .* •. . •'.-v. • V • -V- • . . ',. • -y. -. •;•.•, ' y} .r • V--;> ; . r.. • - iCfiHTinCATE OF LOCATION OF .B01U>niG .;» < r. r »■* .* / . ' • •’.* ».. • . • •*."A^‘ • ^ 't . ; ,* v"* ' • *•* . '.I ht^eb}^ .certify that bn ,•'•’ jr:.-. -r.._y : : > - ^ •* *, n ' '• a."* V • .%■ '*• .’ . • o o\ \ \\ \\ I .1. . * ' • V V. ^, ^■**esb 5^ October 28, 1998 CITYof ORONO Nfunicipal Offices Street Address: 2750 Kelley Parkway Orono, MN 55356 Mailing Address; P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323-0066 Brent Bentrott 1453 Park Drive Mound MN 55364 Re: Vacation of Forest Avenue In May 1989, Douglas and Tricia Johnson, 1399 Park Drive, brought a proceeding to register land with Hennepin County regarding vacated portions of Forest Avenue, Oak Place, and Forest Boulevard. There may have been some problem with their title or survey that required a proceeding to have the vacated portions properly recorded on their title. Forest Avenue was vacated before 1968, the proceeding to clarify registration for the Jolinsons occurred in 1989. The document numbers are filed with Hennepin County and referenced on the enclosed section map. If you have questions, please contact me at 473-7357. Sincerely, W Elizabeth Van Zomeren Citv Planner/Zonina Administrator EVZ/jlg Telephone (612) 473-7357 • FAX 473-0510 t • • • •I ti«ocEEoi:ic3 i--’£jiKC':r-NT TO XNrTXAf. Hfori nv-TiOfi cr la;;d A-:3750 3TATE CF MINNESOTA COVNTV OF HE.WEPI.*! In tr.e Matter of t.*;<» F.-titicn cf niSTRICT COORt FC'JPTtf JirorCtAL DlrriRIca ’ C-U71J3 Cftarlea Johnaon ar.d TriciA Ann Johnson, For 4.n Ofiar Addir.7 Land in Vacated Streets. STATE OF KINMESOTA) CSONTT OF HEMJJEPI.H) ) •• John Gerhardaon. being duly *wom on oath, states and deposet.; 1. I an the director of Public Works for the City of Orono. and In that capacity I have knowledge of the facts stated in this affldAVlte j 2. I have reviewed^ for and on behalf of the City of Orono, the Haport of Exaaincr, survey and proposed Order t.hat are on file and of record in this actloh. 5. C«,t:ficate of Title «o. 721757. cn f.u vr.d cf record in tn... orr.c. or tr.v Ponistrar of Titles of Honnepln Ocunt/. yirn-uor... »«•• • r * I,.* J -’’rw'it: * -»e»w,r.j A* , •: ,•- t irt of f .1 i ::.M ^4 ir. IS... 1 re.:..,- .. ■ • . ... . A . . . . I . • F. . . * X -i • - • •1 • I • ■ • • • • extensxcn of We Northeasterly and Southeasterly lines • If B*ccic XSf saxd Addition end tner*j tersxnatln^ and lyin'? between the extensions to Forest :>Jcu cf the Soutn-osteriy line of Ut 16. 3locJc 6. caid Aodltlcn, and the Northeasterly line of Lot I, Slock 15, said Audition. Cocuaent No. 156330:, a PesoluClon adoFtud by the City ^*^'‘*ncil cf the City cf Orono vacatin'? the foliovin^ described street: That part of vacated Forest boulevard aa dedicated la the plat of "Saga Hill r'cvtso'd, Hennepin County, Minnesota" vhlch liva between t.-.c .Northwesterly extensions a.Tra.uj it of the Northeasterly lint of Lot Ifi, tilock 6, “Sara Hill .'^evisc'i, Hennepin County. Mlnnesctj" and the straight portion of the Ccutr.wosterly line of said L-ot 16. Cocusert No. 1563353, a resolution adopted f«y tl?e City Council cf tne City of cro.-’o vacjcln? "OaJc Plano, described as follows: Blocx 6 anc eierk 7, Sigj Kill .''.eviacd. Section 7~Townshlp 117•f.ang.j 23". 4. That the above-d-ascribed portions of OaH Place. Forest Lcu'.e'/ard and Forest Avenue vere dedicated to the public In the plat of Saga Hill Revised, Hennepin Co., Minn. 5. That by said Vacation Resolutions •••he city Council of the —mi city cf Orono intended tb vacate thoae portions cf Oaic Place, Forest A • Boulevard, and Forest Avenue as hereinafter described, and said resolutions should ts construsd accordln9ly: Thoan portions ^of vacated Park Drive (formerly Lafayettj Avenue)^ vacatad Oak Place, vacated Forest Avor.uo and vacated Ferest Boulevard, all as dedicated an the pU.t oi '•Saga Kill Pevlaud, Hennepin Co., Minn”, cluscrlbNd A3 follows: toginnir.'j at tr.o ocot C.utarly corr.ur of Lot 16, block In LoL'i plat; thence South 22 degree.; 43 ninutes wceondi fjut, aso-oir.g the Nortriedot-i-iy line of said r. At^ 1'. t f iro Cojtn 41 Uogi«csa 44 nir.utej 05 secondj a '.t*i-Cjncu of 42.43 fc«t to a poirv: r.erair.jtter t*«'j Co ao A**: tr.enca r*outwhwesterl/ along a f.or.-*:ur.'j^ur,t: al cjr’/a concave to the South, having a * raJial lino pasoin; througn . oir.t A" Lifiro .‘forth 03 d^greea 04 Ciinutoa to tnu i;;tero»ictIc.n w*tn tho .> I i ,*.• ••r X ^ • r ‘.f . ‘ ' - I*•* :.| • -j ■>} ' 1 i J :'i I / •.i /.Vi 4 ■i i f T ► I .11* ■•1 Zir^ of vacated fcraat Avenue: thonca Scuir.wastariy alcr.7 Mid Soutiiaasra*!*/ lira to cr.a intarsaction witA tha ScutiJaaatarly axtanalon of tha cantar lira of said vacatad forast Avanua; thanca ;'ortiivastarly •long said Southaastarly axtansicn, along s^id center lina ^nd along tha Morthvastarly artanslon of ^Jid carter lina to tha shora lina of forest Lake; tnar.cc »«crthaastarly along said ahora lina to the !.*orthvv»5t«rly a^ansicn of said Wortfiaastarly lina of let le; tnar.ca Couthaastcrly alc.tg si Id Korthvcstarly • rt»-nsion cf caid :^ort/:^«starly lira to tha Dost ?i‘orwhorly comar cf said Lot 16; thanca Southvastarly, 5o*jthaast«rly, and Korthaastarly along tha »*crt:hwastorl:/, iouthuastarly, and Southoastarly I Inao cf said Lot 16 to tha point of baginning. 6. Thrit^ to tho extant that Vacation Kasolution Docuaant No. ?472:3^ vnciti.tg Forast Avanua Includas any portion of Park Orlva (fomtrly r^fayatto Avrnua) as dadicatad in tha plat of "Saga Hill Ilonnx'oln Co., Kinn.", it was tha intantion of tha City C-'inciA to also vacate said portion of Park Driva and said Pasoluticn fhcjild tn an censtruad. 7. That by reason of said Vacation Kosolutions thara should ba added to tha land dascribad in Cartificata of Titla No. 721757 thoso portior.n cf vacated Park Criva, Oak Placa, Forast Avanua and Forast noulevird as horeln’’bova dascribad. onn Garnardson, Director of Public Works of tha City of Orono /■ nwi n-r;bo nvorn to boforo of Mav, 19H9. /X^t.iiy iyJhllc ) JWnOTiry u. MiutiN ___ r f^OUN'ClLf/££Ti.\'a Date of Application: 7/21/98 f^Qy p3 1998 Dcue Complete: 10/30/98 60 day limit: 12/30/98 _ crrYo-QROMo REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE; November 18, 1998 ITEM NO.: ^5^ Department Approval: Administrator Reviewed: Name Liz Van Zomeren Title City Planner Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description:#2399 Muriel Senn 4448 North Shore Drive Variances Zoning District:LR-IB One Family Lakeshore Residential District (1 acre) Lot Area:16,722 sq. ft. (.38 acres) Application:The applicant is requesting the following variances: 1. Lakeshore setback of 32' where 32' exists and 75' is required. 2. North side yard setback of 8.6' where 8.6' exists and 10' is required. 3. Street yard setback of 10' where 8' exists and 35' is required. 4. Structural coverage to allow 15.88%(2,656 sq. ft.) where 2,508.3 sq. ft. is allowed and where 11.62% (1,944 sq.ft.) exists. 5. Hardcover in the 0'-75' setback of 3,371 sq. ft. (24.65%) where 3,493 sq. ft.(24.81%) is existing and none is allowed. 6. Hardcover in the 75'-250' setback of 1,387 sq. ft. (52.5%) where 660.5 sq. ft. is allowed and where 1,129 sq. ft. (42.73%) is existing. Overall hardcover is 27.64% of lot area and proposed at 28.45%. 84% of the lot is located in the 0'-75' setback. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: To unanimously (7-0) deny the requested variances finding that the amount of hardcover remains excessive and the structural coverage exceeds the 15% limit by 147.7 sq. ft. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: To deny application #2399 for lakeshore setback, side yard setback, street yard setback, structural coverage, and hardcover in the 0'-75' and 75'-250' setback. Attachments TO:Chair Smith and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM: DATE: Liz Van Zomeren, City Planner/Zoning Administrator November 10, 1998 SUBJECT: #2399 Muriel Senn 4448 North Shore Drive Variances—Continued Public Hearing Zoning District: LR-IB One Family Lakeshore Residential District (1 acre) Lot Area:16,722 sq. ft. (.38 acres) Application:The applicant is requesting multiple variances to add to an existing residence. This application was postponed from the August, September and October agendas in order to obtain an accurate survey and develop a plan that meets the Zoning Code regulations to the extent possible given the topography, proximity to the channel, and existing conditions on the zoning lot. The applicant is requesting variances for lakeshore setback, side yard setback, street yard setback, and hardcover in the 0'-75 and 75'-250’ setback and structural lot coverage. Pertinent Ordinances: Section 10.24, Subd. 5 (B) LR-IB Standards Section 10.22 Subd. 1 and 2 and 10.56, Subd. 16 Hardcover Requirements Section 10.03 Subd. 14, C Structural Lot Coverage U2399 Muriel Senn 444S North Shore Drive PC-11/16/98 page-1 ANALYSIS Lot Area and Yards LR-IB District Standards Lot Area Lot Width Street Yard Side Yard Lakeside Yard 1 acre 140'35'10'75' Subject Property Lot Area and Yards Lot Area Lot Width Street Yard Side Yard Lakeside 16,722 sq. ft. (.38 acres) 2 .' ?.' at street setback 8' existing 10’ proposed 8.6' existing and proposed 32' existing and proposed The zoning lot does not meet lot area requirements. The lot docs not meet street, side or lakeshore setbacks. The proposed addition does not increase the lakeshore setback encroachment. The addition does add more structure into the required side yard along the existing north facade. The proposed plan improves the street yard setback distance by removing the portion of the existing house/garage that is 8' from the right-of-way at the southwest comer to 10' along the street yard property line. Stmctural Coverag e Total Lot Size Total Structural Coverage Allowed Existing Structural Coverage Proposed Structural Coverage 16,722 sq. ft. .38 acres 2,508.3 sq. ft. (15%) House=l,884 sq. ft. Shed=60 sq. ft. Total= 1,944 sq. ft. (11.62%) House= 1,345 +712 Shed=60 sq. ft. Total=2,656 sq. ft. (15.88%) +147.7 sq. ft. The current residence and shed comply with structural lot coverage requirements. The proposed addition exceeds the lot coverage requirements by 147.7 sq.ft, or .88%. U2399 Muriel Senn 4448 North Shore Drive PC~n/l6/98 page-2 Hardcover Distance from Shoreline Total Area in Setback Existing Hardcover Allowed Hardcover Proposed Hardcover Variance Requested 0’-75'14,080 sq. ft.3,493 sq. ft. (24.81%) None 3,371 sq.ft. (24.65%) 3,371 sq. ft. (24.65%) 75'-250'2,642 sq. ft.l,129sq. ft. (42.73%) 660.5 sq. ft. (25%) 1,387 sq. ft. (52.5%) 726.5 sq. ft. (27.2%) The applicant is requesting hardcover variances in both setbacks. The applicant received approval for the driveway configuration from staff in 1984 (see Mike Gaffron ’s letter dated 7/12/98, Exhibit (G). Hardcover variances are required for the addition. STATEMENT OF HARDSHIP The applicant has indicated that she desires to have additional living space to include a utility room. The existing lot does not have a suitable building pad because much of the lot area is located in an unbuildable area due to required setbacks, topography, proximity to the channel and the bridge location. The existing structure encroaches into required street, lakeshore, and side yards.However, this plan is an improvement over the previous plans submitted in previous months. The applicant is proposing to remove 285 sq. ft. of paver driveway area, 75 sq. ft. of patio blocks, and 32 sq. ft. of the patio. ISSUES 1. 3. The zoning lot does not meet minimum lot area requirements. The existing residence encroaches into the following setbacks: a. b. c. North side yard is 8.6' existing and proposed where 10' is required Street yard is 8' existing where 10' is proposed and where 35' is required Lakeshore yard is 32’ existing and proposed where 75' is required Structural coverage is currently 11.62% where 15% is allowed and 15.88% is proposed. The proposal exceeds the allowed limit by 147.7 sq. ft. #2399 Muriel Senn 4448 North Shore Drive PC-U/16/9S page-3 4.The zoning lot exceeds hardcover limits in both the 0'-75' and 75'-250' setbacks. The applicant has proposed reducing hardcover in the 0'-75' setback by removing stone walks, a portion of the patio, and blocks. In the 75'-250' setback, the applicant has proposed a 650 sq. ft. addition and removal of other hardcover for an overall increase of 258 sq. ft. in the 75'-250' setback. 5. 6. The proposed addition encroaches into the required north side yard and required street yard. The proposal improves the street yard setback by moving it back two feet. There is a well near the southeast comer of the residence that limits the location of an addition. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recognizes that this is a very difficult site to work with given the location of the existing residence, the slope/grade from the road to the driveway and parking area, and the bridge. The proposed plan is an improvement over other plans that were submitted to date because a 1 O' setback would be maintained along the County Highway and some hardcover would be removed. Staff had previously suggested an alternative to increase the structure by adding living space over the existing main floor. This option, however, would not provide more garage space or solve internal floor plan issues regarding mechanical systems. Staff recommends approval of the follov ng variances: 1. 2. 3. 4. Lakeshore setback to remain at 32' where 75* is required Side yard setback to :eiiiain at 8.6' where 10’ is required Street yard setback to be 10' where 8' is existing where 30' is requ ’’ed Hardcover in the 0'-75' and 75'-250' setback Attachments A B C D E F G H Application Plat map Topography Survey Hardcover August minutes Letter re: driveway County road plat it2399 Muriel Senn 4448 North Shore Drive PC-Ocloher 19. 1998 page—4 CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee S250.00 _ ($50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $150.00 (no change from original application) Variance for non-conforming structures $250.00 Afier-ihe-Fact Fees (Double application fee) ft ApplicaUon # Date Received J u I la^ ^ S Amount Paid PROPERTY INFORMATION Site Address if ^ ____*CL^ Property Identification Number (P.1.D.1 A f ) l~T D-3 .^1 _________ Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. Date Property Acquired?"/ 19'J^__________________________________^(month/year) I (d^(do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. Present use of propert>" X residential ___pother (specify)______________________ Zoning District: (JZ ( -_________________________________________________ APPLICANT Name ic /C rJ f\j Phone (home) Phone (w'ork)_ Address: Nc. ft City:Zip: c •/ OWNER (if different than applicant) Name Phone (home) Phone (work)_ Address:City:.Zip:. DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Constiuction Cost $ Describe request in detail: c».i^ j _____ (attach additional sheets if necessary) VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area Setback: ___Lot Width ^ Front V Side X Hardcover Rear Lot Coverage Average Lakeshore V Other (specify) G HARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty or unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code requirements: tiicvv 'tr _____ ________i'_____________<aA(^¥\£> tP_________________________________________________________ — (attach additional sheets if necessary) REQUIRED SUBMITTALS All of the following information must be submitted bv the application deadline date in order for your application to be considered complete: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. z / / Completed Application Form Certified Property Owners List of ovsners within 150', labels and plat map (you must obtain this list, labels and map from Hennepin County Department of Finance, A-603, Gov't Center, 348-32?n . Certificate of Surv-ey (signed by a licensed surveyor) and include hardcover calculations as required. In addition, provide one (1) copy S'A" x 11" for reproduction. Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing grade are proposed. In addition, provide one (1) copy 8'/a" x 11" for reproduction. Sketches or plans of floor & elevation views (provide one (1) copy SYi" x 11"). List of the legal names (include marital status) of all persons with an interest in the properly. This would include name(s) of applicant(s) if not current owner(s). As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. Additional items as may be requested by City staff. The Applicant and Properly Ow'ner must sign this application. Please remember that vour variance application is not complete if the above information has not been included. APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment) and/or consultant expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. Applicant's Signature /f Date ^ i/ O^VNER’S SIGNATURE ^ 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 4^Date '7) ^>1 ^ t Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. / . • * y setback ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE)75-250 ’:S0.500 ’ FXI*^T1SG hardcover IN ZONE A. HO'JSC \ 'S Lcnjih Width ^ H6-0 X X •X - B. Garaec X s C. Driveway X 'pA\yarL X — B(J Oc roA D. Sidewalks «-“'«=»sc=X /c^Cavcr-cCjC = {fra^( Ct/Aii<)X = Xe c/1 r / o ■ A/ tv E. Pa;io/Dcck ub f>raop X se sr**?6 AlW "i^ATIO F. Lar.dscapc bloc.is x Underlain ______biog.b:^ x By Plastic _____/1, x TL o^jmo C. Other IZ X o. c /•7 TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE -J- B !4oAc?X 100 = " PROPOSKD HARDCOVER TN ZONT (c/JAj^Cfr) AA€A /X/ CO. A^. t? *A 9l 9,V (if "a . House Y ' « S.F. Length Width B. Oarage' C. Driveway D. Sidewalk E. Patio/Dcck F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic X X X X X X JT£f/L/( U//lKf^ , ' TTTuryy Vf) X fidrto X _____ X etor<S— X A(Aiei/( Aou*-A frjjL>(r; - X A L/C oi>/t At on y = /-2 rci^. / 500-1000 ’ S.F. ^0 S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. m S.F. ^4 S.F. BO Z02 S.F. S.F. T-tfro Z.Z-Z 2^S.F. l 4 S.F. 2. 6 S.F. . /4 S.F. / O S.F. Zo S.F. J4J3 S.F. /4 0^0 S.F. . ___Z4/9/% f*A CO, AA. /? *A £(u S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. T CZ S.F. S.F. S.F. -z^S.F. S.F. -7 S.F. S.F. ■‘94 S.F. - 2o S.F. -14 S.F. ■ A B 0. Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE T B X 100 = _____________ S.F. C//AA'C( s -2Z —^^liZZi__ S.F» S.F. ■ % /<.o 90 24. €S A B I* .» .* li * ;!• ■i' ’ •v ’ I.* If ' • * ‘ I •• ^ • / ^ I U /» * w ^ / 4HARDCOVER CALCULATION VYORKSHEEI SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75’75-250’250-500 ’ '-'y 500-1000' EXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZQNF. A. House ___________63 J S.F. Lcn^ih Width X X X S3 Sm S.F. S.F. S.F. B. Garage S.F. C. Driveway X X 370 33 S.F. S.F. D. Sidewalk X X S.F. S.F. E. Patio/Dcck ■S’lV IQ ^Lor Jt. < X X ..4.‘ • •• '■ »#• ' S.F. S.F. F. Landscape Underlain By Plasiic X X X S.F. S.F. S.F. G. Other S.F. f * - •« f • • ■V; TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE //-2? -r B //Z? X 100 = S.F. S.F. % PROPOSED HARDCOVER TN 70VF. (cuAuCfs) A. House ^ ^aer A-*ar Length X X /Ay» Co, AO. /? S.F. Width B. Garage ' _____________ S.F. S.F. S.F. ffSo S.F. C. Driveway A4yfK X X S.F. - 26s S.F. D. Sidewalk X X /0/yP>/e /lOC*J E. Paiio/Dcck Ajr,rj S.F. S.F. X X - 75- - 32 S.F. S.F. ..f.. Landscape Underlain * I* - j ■-------.By Plastic X X X S.F. S F. S.F. G. Other S.F. TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE -r B X 100 = C/^AJ^-CP -•* 2 S8 /3S7 S.F. Z64Z S.F. S2, SO % A B A B ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR AUGUST 17,1998 P (#7) 2399 MURIEL SENN, 4448 NORTH SHORE DRIVE - VARIANCES, 8:18 p.m. - 8:i The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication v/ere noted. Mrs. Senn was present. Van Zomeren stated the Applicant is requesting hardcover and street yard setback variances to construct an addition to an existing residence to include a 16’ x 22 ’ garage and utility room. The Applicant has been asked to provide a current survey with updated, accurate hardcover information. Van Zomeren requested the Planning Commission provide direction on what amount of hardcover will be allowed, how close the encroachment to the front setback can be. and whether an addition to the housf will be allowed. Senn stated she purchased the property 25 years ago, noting the stipulations regarding hardcover and setbacks were not present on the property when it was originally purchased. Senn commented the lot has a unique configuration as well as problems with continuing erosion. Senn requested she be allowed to construct a new garage on the property. Schroeder suggested the Applicant submit an application based on the ordinances, noting the property is a difficult piece of land to work with. Senn remarked she has contacted a surveyor but has had poor response. Lindquist inquired how much acreage this lot consists of. Senn stated the lot is one acre Van Zomeren stated a rough estimate for the hardcover is 2.200 square feet. Van Zomeren requested the Planning Commission give guidance on what a reasonable setback from the county right-of-way would be. Berg commented the Applicant will need to submit a p.<’oposal before the Planning Commission can act on her application. Lindquist stated the Applicant will need to obtain an updated survey and plan for what is acceptable to the City of Orono. _____ Schroeder suggested the Applicant start with 1,500 square feet and attempt to minimize the setbacks. There were no public comments. Smith moved, Schroeder seconded, to table Application #2399, Muriel Senn, 4448 North Shore Drive, to allow the Applicant time to submit a proposal. VOTE: Ayes 6, Nays 0. (#8) #2401, THOMAS AND MARGARET RADKE, 3424 EAST LAKE STREET - VARIANCES, 8:25 p.m. - 8:26 p.m. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. The Applicant was not present. Lindquist stated the Applicant was unable to stay until this matter was heard tonight and requested that the application be tabled. Page 10 KV; •, . ' • t* V ■ ’ *fe ctTY;' .• p:pPC?>tORONOV ^3B9 CITY of ORONO Post Office Box 66•Crystal Bay, Minnesota 55323•Municipal Offices On the North Shore of Lake Minnetonka July 12, 1984 Mrs. Muriel Senn 4448 North Shore Drive Mound, MN 55364 Re; Paving Driveway Dear Mrs. Senn: I have reviewed your proposal to pave your existing gravel driveway and turn-around apron. After discussion with the City Engineer, we agree that in your specific situation, paving with asphalt or concrete over the existing aravel surface may actually have a beneficial effect on the quality of runoff entering the lake, since the silt from the gravel will be eliminated from the direct runoff. Even though bituminous or concrete paving is less permeable than gravel, it appears that with your unique topographic problems, paving appears to be a good idea. I also discussed with the City Engineer the idea of creating a "basin" around the perimeter of the turnaround area to catch the runoff and slow it down. He felt this would need to be quite extensive to have any major effect, and he suggested instead that you ensure that the paving be sloped to allow runoff to flow equally to all edges of the paving, and eliminate a swale which would channel the runoff to a single point and possibly cause some erosion. the the the and all Based on the above, we have no objections to your proposal, with condition that the paving cover only areas already gravelled, i.e. 12' wide garage driveway apron leading to the turnaround, and turnaround itself which is approximately 30' wide and 40' deep, bounded by the existing hedge, and that the paving be sloped in directions as described above. No permit is required for this work. Thank you for your concern with this project and your patience in awaiting this response. Sincerely, Michael P. Ga^ron Assistant Zoning Administrator BLILUINC * ZONING - 473-7357 • ADMINISTRATION * FINANCE - 473-7358 ASSESSING . ,pc: Thomas J. Jacobs, Building Official PL BLIC VSORKS - 473-735^ COUN'CIL f/££Ti:V'\vJ Date of Application: 8/5/98 Last Revision Date/Complete: ll/19/98--revised survey 60 day limit: 12/6/98 by extension letter ^'0V 2 3 1998 crn'CFCRc.vo REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: 11/19/98 ITEM NO.; Department Approval: Name Liz Van Zomeren Title City Planner Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: ^2403 Terry Clark 1575 Long Lake Boulevard Variances and Conditional Use Permit Zoning District: LR-IA One Family Lakeshore Residential District (2 acres) Lot Area:31,661 sq. ft. (.72 acres) Application:The applicant proposes to add a 12’ x 16’ addition in the required street yard setback of an existing residence and to add a lakeside upper deck and stairway to be located within the 75’ lakeshore setback. A hardcover variance is required in the 0 ’-75’ setback because the existing residence is currently located almost entirely in the required lakeshore setback. A top of bluff setback variance is required to allow grade changes on the west side of the residence. A conditional use permit is required to raise the house 4 ’ to allow the construction of a walkout basement where tlie land alteration/grading will require 15 cubic yards of fill and be partially located in the lakeshore setback. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: At the September 21, 1998, meeting the Planning Commission recommended approval of the requested variances and conditional use permit on a 6-0 vote, subject to provide an accurate grading plan with the amount of cut/fill determined. Date of Application: 8/5/98 Last Revision Date/Complete: ll/19/98--revised survey 60 day limit: 12/6/98 by extension letter COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: To amend or approve the enclosed resolution granting: 1.A street yard setback variance to allow the addition to be located 25' from the street property line where 50 is required and 31.8’ is existing. 2.A lakeshore setback variance to allow an upper deck and stairway to be located in the required lakeshore setback where 75’ is required, 49 ’ is existing and 36’ is proposed from the lakeshore to the proposed deck/stairway. 3. 4. A top of bluff variance to alter the grade within the required 30’ bluff setback. A hardcover variance in the 0’-75’ setback where 6.0% (1»223 sq. ft.) is existing, 7.10% (1,467 sq.ft.) is proposed and none is allowed. 5.A conditional use permit to cut and fill to allow the existing residence to be raised 4’ to allow for the construction of a walkout basement in the lakeshore setback where no land alteration is allowed and 15 cubic yards of cut/fill is proposed. Attachments ™ ——'ww • jLjrx j. ?? WXVlVOIXUflLr 1 SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE)75-250*250-500 ’500-1000' EXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZONE A- House aasnm? ifeioes. pbfltfeuqi-jls^ B. Garage C. Driveway D. Sidewalk X X X X E. Parto/Deck \MOi- 9 Of-^ ‘iOtm ar __________________ X __________________ F. Landscape _____________ x _____________ Underlain _____________ x _____________ By Plastic_____________x ___________________ G Other tent. 1118- 4W)to0(i<Ol*jfc------- ----- ow ---- TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE -e ...................... TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A V\^>7 B 7Jb^tiO X 100 = PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House AtWe-tf^ ffOOCftM Length A0PiTI<»3 Width B. Garage C. Driveway D. Sidewalk E. Patio/Deck F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic G. Other VtiO^ /WHtofcL siottttatf- X X X TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE 1 - B X 100 S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. s.f::. ’ZO.AOQT S.F. Bs.i Hb V yC // i S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. _______S.F. — S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. I m ACO S.F. S.F. 44T2—^ A B -:55V fTT SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75'75-250 ’a 250-500*500-1000' EXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House Length « * t I 36'fe^S.F. Width X X X S.F. S.F. S.F. B. Garage C. Driveway 'U7 S.F. D. Sidewalk V/bmC^ E. Patio/Deck 1)M Mf (fX-Yf Text' Tgrrr^ X X F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic X X X G. Other 14&‘M> wy-W.tmw- - TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPER rV AREA IN ZONE ___-i- B U.^1 X 100 = PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House ^J^VXX\X ^ IM Ungth Width ________________________ X = X = B. Garage C. Driveway X X D. Sidewalk X X E. Paiio/Deck X X F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic X X X G. Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE - B X 100 S.F. S.F. 110.0^ it.lit S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. A % ill S.F. a>, (uiwjF-S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. 61 S.F. S.F. % A B \ ^ - U'........A- - - -. ... - - <-V------- - -7 ~ - - 77 \- -G(?AE5IIVtG.PLAN V- - ^ t !« I- i: "I, i! 4 • 1 I A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.23, SUBDIVISION 6 (B); SECTION 10.56, SUBDIVISION 16 (C) 2, (J) (L) AND GRANTING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PER SECTION 10.03, SUBDIVISION 19-21 FILE NO. #2403 WHEREAS, Terry and Bruce Clark (hereinafter "the applicants") are the owners of the property located at 1575 Long Lake Boulevard within the City of Orono (hereinafter "the City") and legally described as follows: Lots 13, 14, 15 and the West half of Lot 16, Albee's Long Lake Addition, Hennepin County, MN (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, after due published and mailed notice in accordance with Minnesota Statutes and the City of Orono Zoning and Planning Codes, the Orono Planning Commission held a public hearing on August 17 and September 21, 1998, at which times all persons desiring to be heard concerning this application were given the opportunity to speak thereon; and WHEREAS, the applicants have applied to the City for variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10,23, Subdivision 6 (B) and Section 10.56 16 (C) 2, (J) (L) to permit a 12' X 16' entr>' addition to an existing residence on the street side and a deck and stairway on the lakeside where the existing residence is partially located in both the required street and 75' setback from the shoreline and to allow the existing residence to be raised 4' to construct a basement walkout requiring a net increase of 15 cubic yards of fill in the required lakeshore setback and within the required top of bluff setback. A hardcover variance in the 0-75' setback is required to allow 7.10% (1,467 sq. ft.) where 6.0% (1,223 sq. ft.) is existing and none is allowed. A conditional use permit per Section 10.03, Subdivision 19-21 is required for land alteration in the lakeshore setback. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: Page 1 of 5 1. 2. FINDINGS This application was reviewed as Zoning File #2403. The property is located in the LR-IA Zoning District, where 2 acres is the minimum lot area. The property consists of .72 acre or 31,661 sq. ft. 3.The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on September 21, 1998 and recommended approval by a vote of 6 to 0. 4. The Planning Commission made the following findings of fact: A. The lot area does not meet the 2 acre minimum requirement, B. The lot measures 110 ft. deep and does not meet the required street or lakeshore setbacks. C. The lot is impacted by steep topography including a bluff in the lakeshore yard. D. The proposed improvements are compatible with the architectural style of the existing structure. E. Raising the structure 4' and cut and filling with a net increase of 15 cubic yards of fill will not have a significant impact on lakeviews or lake quality. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variances would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicants, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preser\'e a substantial property right of the applicants; and would be in keeping with the spirit and inient of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. Page 2 of 5 6.The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicants and the effect of the proposed variances on the health, safety and welfare of the community. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.23, Subdivision 6 (B) and Section 10.56, Subdivision 16 (C) 2, (J) (L) and Section 10.03, Subdivision 19-21 to permit an addition on the street side of the residence to be located 25' from the street where 31.8' is existing and 50' is required; to allow a lakeside upper deck and stairway to be located 36' from the shoreline where 49' is existing and 75' is required; to allow 1,467 sq, ft. (7.10%) hardcover in the 0-75' setback where 1,223 sq. ft. (6.0%) is existing and where none is allowed; to allow a net increase of 15 cubic yards of cut/fill within the required top of bluff setback and lakeshore setback where no alternation is allowed to raise the existing residence 4' above the existing grade to construct a walkout basement. Approval was subject to the following conditions: 1. 2. J. 4. The applicant is to provide the City with an erosion control plan prior to issuance of a building permit. The applicant and future owners are advised that future requests for hardcover increases will not be viewed favorably. Authorities granted by this variance run with the property not with the applicants, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit within one year of the date of Council approval, or this variance will expire on that date (November 23, 1999). Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this variance shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. Page 3 of 5 5.The undersigned applicants have read, understood and hereby agree to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of themselves, their heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agree to the recording of this resolution in the Chain of Title of the property. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held on the 23rd day of November, 1998. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Gabriel Jabbour, Mayor Property Owner (s) STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 23rd day of November, 1998 by Gabriel Jabbour and Linda S. Vee, Mayor and City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public Page 4 of 5 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this day of for said county, personally appeared , 199_before me a Notary Public within and known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this day of , 199_before me a Notary Public within and for said county, personally appeared known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC Paae 5 of 5 • t GSZADINGt l\- (to /✓// fji/'jy.fk NE!L WEBER ARCHITECTS 2230 WATERTOWN ROAD. SUITE 100 LONG LAKE. MINNESOTA 55356 (612)476-4434 (6'2) 476-5863 (FAX) 16 November 1998 TO: Orono City Council and Planning Staff FROM: Neil Weber RE: Terry Clark Application As we have previously stated, we have revised our plan to only add the entrance at the rear of the existing structure and raise the existing home approximately 4’0”. The addition and deck as shown and approved by the planning commission, has not changed with the attached information. Attached is a more detailed grading plan and calculations of cut and fill done by Coffin and Gronberg. Also attached is the grading plan as verified by actual survey by Coffin and Gronberg. The previous survey was the aerial survey information as supplied by the city. As can be seen by the figures, the total amount of fill needed to raise the home is only 15 cu. yards. . -- . . The small addition will be of the same materials as the existing home since the intention of the addition is to maintain the same character as now exists. AlCHITCCTUII • PLANNING ■ INIftlOtS • CONSTtUCTlOH MANAQtMINTsINSPfCflONS .9 \ z < 0. c yy y <bD 0 / / I I I I I I I I rr:fl t I > : t) P.lN>.lr ► f;\V ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR AUGUST 17,1998 (#2401 THOMAS RADKE, Continued) Schroeder moved, Smith seconded, to table Application #2401, Thomas and Margaret Radke, 3424 East Lake Street. VOTE: Ayes 6, Nays 0. (#9) #2402, GLENN SAUER, 4104 HIGHWOOD ROAD - VARIANCE, 8:27 p.m. - 8:40 p m. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. Mr. Sauer was present. Weinberger stated the Applicant is proposing to construct a new 22* x 28* two-stall garage to replace an existing 22* x 15 ’ garage that was damaged by a storm this spring. Weinberger stated the insurance company will only pay for replacement of the garage. A variance to ha'^dcover in the 75*-250' zone is needed. The Applicant is proposing to remove a 178 square fool storage shed subject to the new garage being built. Sauer had no comments. There were no public comments. Hawn moved, Lindquist seconded, to approve Application #2402, 4104 Highwood Road, granting of a variance to hardcover in the 75'-250* zone which will remain at 48.4 percent, a variance to allow an accessory structure to be within the front yard setback, a variance to allow an accessory structure to be located approximately three feet closer to the road than the principal structure, and removal of a 178 square foot storage shed that currently exists on the property after construction of the garage. VOTE; Ayes 6, Nays 0. (#10) #2403 TERRY CLARK, 1575 LONG LAKE BOULEVARD - VARIANCES, 8:41 p.m. - 9:06 p.m. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. Ms. Clark was present along with her architect Neil Weber and Tom Terry. Van Zorrcren slated this Applicant is proposing to build an addition on the existing residence to add more living space, bedrooms, and a bath, which will require a variance to encroach into the 50* street yard setback and to add hardcover in the 0-75* setback. In addition, a variance is needed to the lakeshore setback and a conditional use permit to change the grade in the 0-75* setback to allow a walkout patio addition on the lakeside. The property is in the LR-1A zoning district, which has a minimum of two acres, with this lot consisting of .72 acres. The residence sustained damage from a tree falling on the roof so is in need ot repair. Van Zomeren remarked variances were previously granted for a proposal to add to the rear of the structure to allow a two-car garage and a second story. Those variances have expired. The subject lot does not meet ine minimum I ' area requirements due to the shallowness of the lot and ViTOuld not be considered a buildable lot under current zoning standards. The Applicant is proposing to increase hardcover in the 0-75* zone by 7 percent for a total of 2.704 square feet. In the 75*-250* zone, there will be a modest increase for a total of 8.37 percent or 942.82 square feet. The proposed addition would not encroach any closer to the lake than the existing residence. Page 11 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR AUGUST 17,1998 (#2403 TERRY CLARK, Continued) Van Zomeren staled residences under two acres located in the LR-1A zoning district arc allowed 15 percent structural hardcover or 1,500 square feel, which they currently exceed. There were no public comments. Weber staled they have gone through a similar analysis that Van Zomeren has just recited and arrived at the conclusion that the addition should be built on the flattest part of the site so it would not encroach any closer to the lake or encroach into the bluff area. Weber commented the proposed additicn is designed to increase living space, and noted the Applicant gave an easement to the City for a lift station last year. Weber staled the previous variances v/ere requested by the prior owner. Chair Smith stated she has reviewed the property, and inquired whether the addition could be added to the rear of the residence. (Charles Schoeder leaves at 8:55 p.m.) Van Zomeren commented the street setback is 50’. Clark staled there is a very sleep grade behind the house up to the garage. Stoddard remarked the Planning Commission needs more information concerning encroachment into the bluff area to determine the impact this proposed addition would have on the bluff. Van Zomeren staled there is a 30' setback to the top of the bluff, noting the proposed addition is forward of the bluff. City Staff has a concern with grading or land alteration in the 0-75’ zone as it relates to the bluff. Van Zomeren remarked the previous resolution granted tota' hardcover in the amount of 2,652 square feet, with this application proposing 2,734 square feet in total hardcover. There were no public comments. Chair Smith inquired whether the Applicant was familiar with Staffs recommendations and their concerns that this addition will have on the lakeshore. Lindquist stated the Planning Commission has concerns about adding hardcover in the 0-75' setback, and inquired whether the Applicant will be proposing to add a garage in the future. Clark stated she would like to keep the addition away from the bluff as much as possible. Weber commented they are trying to keep the addition as simple as possible, noting the former applicant proposed to completely remodel the existing residence. Chair Smith indicated the Planning Commission has a concern about the impact in the 0-75’ setback, noting the majority of the residence lies within that zone. Chair Smith inquired whether the addition could be reduced at all or whether the Applicant could go up with >he addition. Hawn inquired whether the addition could be added to the other side. Weber slated that particular site was chosen due to the flatness of the land ond to lessen the impact on the lake and bluff Weber indicated they understand the City’s policies, noting that variances are granted for compelling reasons. Lindquist stated the impact to the lake is the higher priority in his opinion and would be hard pressed Page 12 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR AUGUST 17,1998 (#2403 TERRY CLARK, Continued) to approve an addition in the 0-75' setback. Chair Smith stated the impact to the lake and bluff areas are both high priorities of the Planning Commission, and suggested the Applicant look at reducing and moving the addition to lessen the impact on the 0-75* setback. Stoddard stated he agreed with Chair Smith. The Applicant’s contractor stated that what the Applicant was proposing was reasonable, noting the current residence has no basement. Chair Smith stated this was a very special property, and recommended tabling the matter to allow the Applicant time to submit revised plans. Stoddard commented it probably wouldn't pass as currently proposed. The App''cant's contractor requested the matter be tabled. Smith moved, Stoddard seconded, to table Application #2403,1575 Long Lake Boulevard, to allow the Applicant time to submit revised plans. VOiE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. (#11) 2404 OTTEN BROTHERS NURSERY, 2350 WEST WAYZATA BOULEVARD - COMMERCIAL SITE PLAN REVIEW/VARIANCES, 9:07 p.m. - 9:33 p.m. The Certificate of Mailing and Affida' t of Publication were noted. Rod Johnson, representative of Often Brothers, was present. Gaffron stated the Applicant is requesting approval of a commercial site plan for construction of a 132' X 144' greenhouse addition at the east end of the main building and will be utilized for virtually the same retail sales function as currently exists in the main building but will provide for a more controlled environment. Gaffron commented there currently is no standard in the B-6 zoning district for structural coverage. (Charles Schroeder returns at 9:12 p.m.). Gaffron stated the proposed greenhouse addition meets the height and setback requirements, and will have low impact to drainage. This addition will not require additional parking or signage and the proposed design of the greenhouse is compatible with the existing structure. Gaffron stated a retaining wall was erected to serve as a loading dock in Outlet C. and cited concerns this retaining wall/loading dock would have on the neighboring residential properly. City Staff recommends that the retaining wall/loading dock be moved back. Gaffron staled the present zoning code requires that any change to the approved final PUD development plan be processed as an amendment of the final development plan followed by a resolution that amends the conditions of the PUD agreement. Gaffron remarked Staff has received a letter from an adjoining property owner who has expressed concerns about the current landscaping at the rear of the property. Currently there is a berm located Page 13 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR SEPTEMBER 21, 1998 (^2401 Thomas and Margaret Radke, continued) Stoddard recommended limiting the size of the storage shed to 140 square feet. Berg stated she concurred with Stoddard. Stoddard moved, Lindquist seconded, to approve Application /f2401, 3424 East Lake Street, granting of a variance to construct an accessory structure on Outlot B, the size of the structure to be limited to 140 square feet, per the concept plan submitted by the Applicants. VOTE: Ayes 3, Nays 2, McMillan and Smith opposed. («3) ttZAOZ TERRY CLARK, 1575 LONG LAKE BOULEVARD - VARIANCES AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, 6:52 p.m. - 7:08 p.m. Terry Clark and Architect Neil Weber were present Van Zomeren stated the applicant is requesting variances for street yard setback, hardcover in the 0-75’ setback, bluff setback, lakeshore setback, as well as a top of bluff setback variance. A conditional use permit is also required to alter the land in the 0-75* setback. The Applicant has submitted s revised proposal that v/ould raise the existing residence four feet '.o allow for a walkout lower level, which would change the grade on the south side of the structure. This is a solution that has been reached in an effort to reduce the impact on the lake side of the property, and v/ou!d add an additional 159 square feet in hardcover. Weber slated the 0-75* setback will be affected no matter what design is proposed since the residence lies in the zone. Weber stated the current proposal is an effort to minimize the impact to the 0-75* zone as much as possible by raising the house up to add a walkout under a new deck on the lakeside of the residence. Chair Smith opened the hearing up for public comment A resident of the area inquired about the impact the excavation would have on the adjoining properties, noting he has had standing v/ater on his properly in the past. Weber staled there will be very little excavation done except for the footings and under the deck. Van Zomeren stated City Staff is aware of the resident s concerns and has requested the City Engineer to review the plans. Van Zomeren stated the neighbor’s current water problems are not related to this application and would need to be addressed separately. Chair Smith commented it is the Planning Commission’s philosphy not to approve applications that would adversely affect the adjoining properties, noting the City Engineer feels it will not have a negative impact on the neighboring properties. Van Zomeren stated the ground elevations and amount of fill still need to be calculated. Stoddard commented he is in favor of the plan Lindquist stated the Applicants have complied with v/hat the Planning Commission had requested at the prior hearing, noting the ordinances governing hardcover v ere passed after the house was built. McMillan staled she is concerned about major excavation in the 0-75* setback, noting this application Page 3 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR AUGUST 17,1998 (#2404 OTTEN BROTHERS NURSERY, Continued) at the rear of the property with pine trees on top, with the area needing to be cleaned up somewhat. Staff recommends the Planning Commission approve the amendment to the PUD agreement, denial of the proposed location of the loading dock with relocation to Lot 2. approve location of the canopy, and address the concerns of the neighbor. Johnson stated Otten Brothers are proposing to construct the greenhouse to maintain quality materials throughout the year. Johnson commented the photographs do not depict the garbage dump that is referenced in the letter, but indicated a willingness to work with the adjoining property owners in an effort to add more screening, noting that Otten Brothers have complied with what was required of them as far as landscaping and screening. Lindquist stated he was not in favor of a retaining wall/loading dock located in Outlet C. Chair Smith indicated she would go along with Staffs recommendations. Lindquist noted the light posts located at the Highway 12 entrance must meet a five foot setback from the right-of-way. Joel Walvatne, 710 Dickey Lake Drive, commented he owns the property to the north and in his opinion feels the required landscaping does not meet the original requirements. Lindquist inquired where Walvatne would like the additional screening. Walvatne stated he was promised more trees which have not been planted. Johnson remarked Otten Brothers is open to more screening to acco.mmodate the concerns of the neighbors. Lindquist commented both parties need to be cooperative. Walvatne remarked it was tne original intent that the roadway would be used as an additional buffer and nothing be located there. Chair Smith indicated that was the Planning Commission's consensus as well. Schroeder moved, Smith seconded, to approve Application #2404, Otten Brothers Nursery, 2350 West Wayzata Boulevard, per Staffs recommendations as outlined in the August 14,1998 memorandum, and directed Otten Brothers to cooperate with the neighbors in an attempt to provide acceptable screening io both parties. VOTE: Ayes 6, Nays 0. (#12) 2405 GEORGE KALWEIT, 4265 FOREST LAKE DRIVE - VARIANCES, 9:33 p.m. - 9:42 p.m. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. Mr. and Mrs. Kalweit was present. Weinberger commented the Applicants are proposing to reconstruct a deck that was severely damaged by a tree in late spring as a result of a storm. The new proposal is to increase ihe size of Page 14 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR SEPTEMBER 21. 1998 (#2403 Terry Clark, continued) will not be upsetting the natural contour of the current grade. McMillan stated she i.s fine with the proposed hardcover. Chair Smith inquired w*" ner the addition will be keeping the same character of the residence. Weber stated an additional dormer will be added, which will keep the same character of the house. Lindquist moved, Smith seconded, to approve Application #2403,1575 Long Lake Boulevard, granting of variances to hardcover in the 0-75* setback, street yard setback, lakeside setback, top of bluff setback, and a conditional use permit to change/alter the land in the lakeshore setback to raise the house four feet, subject to the submittal of an excavation plan with the amount of fill calculated in cubic yards and elevations calculated. VOTE: Ayes 6, Nays 0. SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARINGS: SUBDIVISIONS (#4) #2408 MIKE HILBELINK ON BEHALF OF TED WOLF, 900 WILLOW DRIVE - SUBDIVISION, 7:10 p.m. - 7:13 p.m. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. Mike Hilbelink was present ^pn-tiel^lf of Ted Wolf. Van Zomeren stated the Planning Commission reviewed this'application at its August 17.1998 meeting to allow the Applidant time to.submit revised plans. The revised plan proposes to move the lot line to allow a 50 ’ setback for the existing barn fronr^e proposed lot line, which means the barn would meet the setback reauirement from the rear loMine on a front lot The newly created Lot 1 would be comprised of 3.0^ acres and the>\ewly Lot 2 would be comprised of 8.07 acres. Staff recommends approval of the application^ Hilbelink commented the revised plan satins th^oncerns raised at the previous meeting, noting the barn will be used as primarHy^as_§>ttxage shed. Chair Smith noted Mr. Wolf had expressed an interest in housing animals in the barn previously, and inquired whether he was aware that under the current proposal that would not be allowed. Hilbelink remarked Mr. Wolf is aware that he does not meet the proper setbacks to house animals under the current proposal. There were no public comments. McMillan moved, Berg seconded, to approve Application #2408, 900 Wiliow Drive, granting of a lot line rearrangement as prepared in the survey revised on 9/11/98. VOTE: Ayes 6, Nays 0. (#5) #241it STEVE WHITE ON BEHALF OF VCI CAPITAL. 4355 BAYSIDE ROAD - SUBDIVISION RENEWAL. 7:14 p.m. - 7:21 p.m. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted Page 4 REP rr : TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Chair Smith and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator Liz Van Zomeren, City Plajiner/Zoning Administrator September 16, 1998 #2403 Terry Clark 1575 Long Lake Blvd. Variance and Conditional Use Permit--Continuation of Public Hearing Zoning District: LR-IA Lot Area: One Family Lakeshore Residential District (2 acres) 31,661 sq. ft. (.72 acres) Application:The applicant is requesting variances for street yard setback, hardcover in the 0'-75'setback, bluff setback, and lakeshore setback. A top of bluff setback variance is also required. A conditional use permit is also required to alter the land in the 0'-75' setback. The applicant has submitted a revised proposal that raises the existing house 4' to allow a new walkout lower level. The grade would be changed on the south side of the structure. An entrance is proposed on the street side of the residence to provide an entry and stairway to the lower level. The addition would be 12' x 16'. A deck is proposed on the upper level on the lakeside. Pertinent Ordinances: • Section 10.2', Subd. 6. B. LR-IA Setback Standards • Section 10.56, Subd. 16., L, Hardcover • Section 10.56, Subd. 16, J, Land Alteration in the Shoreland District ► • ANALYSIS Lot Area and Yards LR-IA District Standards Lot Area Lot Width Street Yard Side Yard Lakeside Yard 2 acres 50'50'30'75' and ALS Subject Property Lot Area and Yards Lot Area Lot Width Street Yard Side Yard Lakeside 31,661 sq. ft. (.72 acres) 237' at 75' setback IT to proposed addition 36.4' on east side 49' The proposed entry requires a street yard setback variance to be located 27' from the property line. The deck on the lakeside requires a variance to be located 49' from the lakeshore where 75' is required. The proposed deck does not impact views from adjacent residential property. The allowed height of the residence is 30' measured from ground level to the midpoint of the roof Hardcover Distance from Shoreline Total Area in Setback Existing Hardcover Allowed Hardcover Proposed Hardcover Variance Requested 0'-75’20,400 sq. ft.1,258 sq. ft. (6.16%) NONE 1,417 sq. ft. (6.94%) + 159 sq.ft. (6.94%) 75*-250'11,261 sq. ft-825.82 sq. ft. (7.33%) 2,815.25 sq. ft. (25%) 856 sq. ft. (7.6%) +30.18 sq. ft. no variance needed »2403 Clark 1575 Long Lake Blvd. 9/21/98 page-2 Total hardcover proposed on this lot is 2,273 sq. ft. which is 20.18% of the area in the 75'-250' setback. S T A T E M E :v I »)F H A R D S H I P The subject property does not meet the minimum lot area requirements. The shallow depth of the lot precludes a building pad because of the 50’ street yard setback requirement and the 75' lakeshore setback. No additions can be made to this property without requiring variances. ANALYSIS The applicant has proposed additions of a lakeside deck and an entry to minimize the amount of hardcover on the site. The applicant proposes to remove the following: Walk at front and rear of home Concrete tile surrounding the residence Upper patio Lower patio Front entry fo add living space to the existing residence and maintain the architectural character of the house, the applicant has proposed to raise the house by 4' to add a walkout under a new deck on the lakeside of the residence. STAFF RECOMMENDATION The Planning Commission should review the previous plan and compare it to the revised plan. Staff does not believe that the raising of the structure by 4' will impact lakeviews from adjacent residences. More structure will be visible from the lakeside. The revised plan requires: Hardcover variance in the O'- 75" setback to add 159 sq. ft. Street yard setback variance to locate 27' from the street where 50' is required Lakeside setback variance to locate the deck 49' from the shoreline where 75' and ALS is required A conditional use pennit to change/alter the land in the lakeshore setback to raise the house 4' The Planning Commission should consider that the size, shape and orientation of the lot, the existing setbacks, and the topography of the lot and determine if the proposed additions meet the intent and purpose of the Zoning Code. Staff prefers the revised plan. m03 Cla-k 1575 Long Lake Blvd 9/21/98 page-3 Attachments A B Architect's letter Hardcover C D Survey Plan E F Pictures Prev ious report t U/.L A NEIL WEBEP ARCHITECTS 2280 WA^:"*OWN ROAD. SUITE 100 LONG LAKE. MINNESOTA 55356 (612) (612) 476-5863 (FAX) 4 September 1998 To: Orono Planning Commission and Orono CouncilI iji |\j lai II III 1^ wwi IIII I ai IVI wi wi iw v/wvii iwii M \ » } J From: Terry Clark (Applicant), Neil Weber (Architect) Re: Variance Application of Terry Clark,1575 l.ong Lake Blvd. Following the discussion which tabled the application at the planning commission meeting of 17 August 1998, wc searched for a solution which would allow Terry to provide her family with additional space while reducing the impact on the 0-75 setback area. We are now proposing to raise the home approximately 4 feet, provide the home with a new walkout lower level. This would mean that the grade would be reduced on the south elevation of the home. A revised grading plan is attached to this memo. We would propose to add a small entrance addition on the street side to provide an entry to the home and a stair to the lower level. This addition would be 12’ x 16’ and is shown on the attached revised plan. About half of the addition is within the 75’ line and the other half Is in the 75-250 band. I have attached the revised hard cover calculations showing what has changed and what has been added. Because of the raising of the home we are eliminating much of the existing hard cover as shown on the survey. After the calculations are complete, we have reduced the hard cover area from the previous 2,704 SF.to 1,417 SF. This includes the deck added to make the upper level work for living purposes. The increase would be from the existing 6.16% to a final 6.94% In the 75-250 area we have reduced the hardcover from the previous 942 SF to 856 SF. The architecture of the home will be maintained and the small entrance addition will have the same character as the existing home. The small quaint quality of the home will be maintained. AfCHiriCfUBf • PLANNING • iNTEBiOPS • CONSTRUCTION MANAGCMCNT* INSPECTIONS 1 f HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE)75-250’250-500’500-1000' EXISTING HARDCOVER IN House HtiA ____ X ________ ____ X ~~ ____ X Length B. Garage C. Driveway X X VA v » riiKfe yt-LVj E. Pado/Deck F. LandseqM Underlain By Plastic G. Other X X X X X S3 8S ^ - w • w w etJ TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAj^^OTERFY AREA IN ZONE X 100 >» A. House HARnrOVER IN 7nfjp £tLsm>mr » lAaft.^mSkx>'Mrm B. Garage C. Driveway D. Sidewalk E. Patio/Deck F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic G. Other X X X X X AODitlflKl ----9e«eatiD cw ftjw X X X X X ufiW'mo.Lfftufi/L /Mim TTOKO#^ 1 MEPJ g1 & a t/o . S.F. ^ . ' a) .S F- S.F. ^ s.f; \ S.F. 1 S.F. S.F. 13Ez— S.F j , S.F. } S.F. S.F. / S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F.’ ^l^C/00_ S.F. B % %h S.F. 1 S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. ! * O; ^ ^ i t-it' TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTA^ PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE^703- B -2a.ioo % 100 - '2Aot(S.F. • ‘ A S.F. B c-c; .'of ^ •HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75’ FXTSTINC HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House____________X 250-500'500-1000' Length Width X X X S.F' ^ s.fJ S.FJ^P S.F.^ B. Garage C. Driveway 14)S.F. flSt^yugwJ tKim smvi D. Sidewalk j* C X1^ x _________ = Xih fiBUPUtr lUM. (fi^t ictci 9X5E. Patio/Deck X X F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic G. Other X X X wi it/#JWfiLWWJ Ull^ m TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PRpPERlT AREA IN ZO + B X 100 PROPOSED HARDCOVER I^QNE a7 House Ui % Length Width B. Garage C. Driveway D. Sidewalk E- Patio/Deck F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic G. Other X X X X X X X X X X X X total HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZON -i- B 100 = MQl JIO S.F.' ^ S.F. 3 S.F, S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. s.F.p^^ S.F. % i B I in___S.F.' 7fc:.- w ! S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. I S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. Z S.F. ^s.F. ito.r- S.F. S.F. • (.*• * /hlCfif S.F. B €*30./O F ?re'/ioas Sla-fiP O TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: ^/O Chair Smith and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator Liz Van Zomeren, City Planner/Zoning Administrator August 12, 1998 #2403 Terry Clark 1575 Long Lake Blvd. Conditional Use Permit and Variances--Publ:: Hearings Zoning District: LR-1A One Family Lakeshore Residential District (2 acres) Lot Area:31,661 sq. ft. (.72 acres) Application:This residence sustained damage from a tree falling on the roof. The applicant could repair the roof without any need for variances. The applicant weuits to build an addition on the existing residence to add more living space, bedrooms, and a bath. The proposal requires a variance to encroach into the 50' street yard setback, to add hardcover in the 0'-75' setback, to encroach into a bluff area, lakeshore setback and ahead of the average lakeshore, and to change the grade in the 0'-75' setback to allow a walkout patio addition on the lakeside. Variances were previously granted for a proposal to add to the rear of the structure to allow a two-car garage and a second story. Those variances have expired. (Resolution 3785, gifted October 28, 1996.. Pertinent Ordinances: » * • LR-1 A Setback Standards, Section 10.23, Subd. 6, B. • Bluff Impact and Setbacks, Section 10.56, Subd. 16, C, 1 and 2 • Average Lakeshore Setback, Section 10.56, Subd. 16, C, 6 • Hardcover, Section 10.56, Subd. 16, L • Land Alteration in Shoreland District, Section 10.56, Subd. 16, J, page —I ANALYSIS Lot Area and Yards LR-IA District Standards Lot Area Lot Width Street Yard Side Yard Lakeside Yard 2 acres 50'50'30'75' and ALS Subject Property Lot Area and Yards Lot Area Lot Width Street Yard Side Yard Lakeside 31,661 237' at 75' setback 26' to proposed addition, garage is on right-of- way 36.4'49' existing The subject lot does not meet the minimum lot area requirements. The existing structure encroaches into the required 50' street setback. This lot is wide and shallow. It would not be considered a buildable lot under current zoning standards. The residence encroaches into the average lakeshore setback, 75' lakeshore setback, and is located in a bluff impact zone. The proposed addition would further increase the encroachments into the required street yard, lakeshore yard, and bluff impact zone. Although the residence is located in the average lakeshore setback, the proposed addition would not impact views from adjacent properties. Hardcover Distance from Shoreline Total Area in Setback Existing Hardcover Allowed Hardcover Proposed Hardcover Variance Requested 0'-75'20,400 sq. ft.1,258 (6.16%) None 2,704 sq. ft. (13.25%) 1,446 sq. ft. (7%) 75'-250'11,261 sq. ft.825.82 sq. ft. (7.33%) 2,815.25 sq. ft. (25%) 942.82 sq. ft. (8.37%) None pagt—2 The proposed addition would add 1,446 sq. ft. more hardcover in the 0'-75' setback. The proposed additions in the 75'-250’ setback would not require a hardcover variance. Generally, the City does not approve additional hardcover in this setback. Issues 1.The subject lot does not meet the minimum lot area requirements. The lot is wide, yet shallow. The shallowness of the lot prevents it from having a suitable building pad because it cannot meet the 75' lakeshore setback nor the 50' street yard setback. Any additions to increase beyond the 871 sq. footprint to the house require variances. 2.The current one car garage encroaches on the right-of-way. The proposal does not rectify this problem. 3.The lot is steep and a portion of the lot is considered to be bluff. A 30' setback is required from the top of the bluff. The proposal encroaches into the bluff setback and further proposes to change the grade on the lakeside of the residence to allow a walk-out patio. A conditional use permit is required to alter the grade in the 0'-75' setback. 4.The proposed addition increases hardcover in the 0'-75' setback where the previous variances that were favorably considered added to the rear of the residence, away from the lake. STAFF RECOMMENDATION The subject property does have a hardship in that under current zoning regulations it would not be considered a buildable lot. The shallowness of the lot creates a situation where the lakeshore and street yard setbacks cannot be met. The bluff setback requirements further encumber this !ot. However, the proposal places the bulk of the addition in the lakeshore setback instead of away from the lake and retains a substandard garage situation. Grading to allow a walkout patio on the lakeside is also further disruption of the lakeshore setback. Due to the numerous issues with this application, staff does not recommend approval as proposed and suggests that the applicant rework the plan to reduce the impact on the lakeshore and the bluff Attachments A B C D E F G H Letter to applicant Application Plat map Architect's letter Hardcover Survey Proposed Addition Photos I Floor Plans and Elevations J Previously approved Proposal t pages o o \ ' t- .V : A GITYofORONO Municipal Ofllces Street Address: 2750 Kelley Parkway Orono, MK f5356 Mailing Address: P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay. MN 55323-0066 July 28, 1998 Terrv Clark 1575 Long Lake Blvd. Long Lake, Minnesota 55356 NOTICE OF INCOMPLETE APPLICATION Re: Application #2403 City staff has reviewed your application for an addition to an existing residence at 1575 Long Lake Blvd, Staff has determined that variances are required for hardcover in the 0-75' setback and lakeshore setback. A conditional use permit is also required for changing the grade to construct the walkout and patio because the Building Official has determined that land alteration in the 0-75’ requires a conditional use permit. A conditional use permit requires a mailing list of 350 ft. where variances require a 150 ft, list. We need mailing labels from Hennepin County for the area between 150-350' from your property. Please contact Hennepin County at 348-3271 to order the labels. They can be sent directly to the City. Also, please complete the enclosed conditional use permit application and mail it back. If you have questions, please call me at 473-7357. Sincerely, Elizabeth Van Zomeren City Planner/Zoning Administrator EVZ/ch .rv'? 'vj» . ✓ •I J Tekphoue (612) 473-73S7 • FAX 473-0510 CITY OF ORONO - Application if ^*403 Date Received Amount Paid l>aXx. Coy^UAi- ^ PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address I3"l^ Long> Lak:e Bl\J^ Loog LOiPe^ NM T>pe of Application to be Filed CiiP •for lQLy\^ ______________ Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) 3l(g 1 1ft 33 I l________________ APPLICANT Name PwiJ'ic\r\ Address I \ }< I cit^ Phone (home) ^ Phone (work ) ^ MI - /> O o Zip_^£j3!SLl OWNER (if different than applicant) Name _______ hone (home). Phone (vvork)_ Address City -Zip. -Date Property Acquired _ I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. FEES - CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS - ^ $ 75.00 For each variance request with CUP application _____SI75.00 Residential Accessory Use _____$250.00 Institutional (church, school, etc.) _____S225.00 Guest House/Guest Apartments _____$200.00 Duplex Credit/Bldg ______$300.00 Cornmercial/Industrial Use X $250.00 Land Alteration ____ Grading and filling - designated wetland or floodplain ____Grading and filling - 501 cu. yd. or more X Grading, seawall, retaining walls within 75' of lakeshore _____PRD/PID - see Fee Schedule _____$150.00 Renewal Fee (no change from original application) _____After-the-Fact Fee - Double Current Application Fee (month/year) OTHER APPLICATIONS _____$250.00 Commercial Site Plan Review (+ consultant fees) _____$300.00 Vacation _____$200.00 Easement Vacation _____$100.00 Easement Vacation With Subdivision _____$350.00 Rezoning (PUD - refer to fee schedule) _____$350.00 Comprehensive Plan Amendment _____$100.00 Appeals Other - see Fee Schedule J '• 3 .4. /--•.I I ? 2. 3. REQUIRED SUBMITTALS I. ^ Completed Application Form. ___ Describe request in detail. yC Certified Property Owners List of owners within 350\ labels and plat map (you \ must obtain this list, labels and map from Hennepin County Department of ' Finance, A-603, Government Center, 348-3271). Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed surv'eyor) - refer to handout for survey information. Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. , Topographic survey (existing and proposed contours) if land alterations involve changes in elevation (grades). , List of the legal names (include marital status) of all persons with an interest in the property. This would include name(s) of applicant(s) if not current owner(s). Construction plan, if applicable (see staff for requirements). 4. X 5. 6. 7. 8. 9.As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. / YOU ARE REQUIRED TO SUPPLY 30 COPIES OF LARGE DOCUMENTS OR COPY FOR REPRODUCTION (ll” X 17" OR SMALLER) FOR ALL DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED. (Staff will require to scale drawings of all documents, plans, etc. to be submitted.) The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your application is not complete if the above information has not been included. Certification by Clerical Department that Land Use Application is complete. Initials of Clerical Staff; Date APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment) and/or 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. t's signature ^• )// f .^^7 f _ DateApplicant's sign; ( -I- '( OWNER'S SIGNATURE The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorized reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents, commission members, and Council .members for, purposes of^vestigation and verification of this request. Owner ’s signati^e 'Lj _________f /k / S Applicant must Have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. I . • * RUN DATE 07/31/98 BATCH 503 PROP ADDR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER NANE/ADDR PROP ADDR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR PROP ADDR OWHJR NAHE TAXPAYER NANE/ADDR PROP ADOR OWNER Ni^HE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR PROP ADDR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR 38 26-118-23 33 0006 01516 LONG LAKE 8LVD CINDY J FREDRICKSON CINDY COX 1516 LONG LAKE BLVD LONG LAKE HN 55356 38 26-118-23 33 0007 01560 LONG LAKE BLVD ROBIN E CRAWFORD ROBIN E CRAWFORD 1560 LONG LAKE BLVD LONG LAKE HN 55356 38 26-118-23 33 0012 01565 LONG LAKE BLVD J E BIGHAH i C A BIGHAH JAHES S CYNTHIA BIGHAH 1565 LONG LAKE BLVD LONG LAKE HN 55356 38 26-118-23 33 0021 00888 DAKOTA AVE R T A L R FRERES DMRRy RICHARD T t LILLIAN R FRERES 888 DAKOTA AVE LONG LAKE HN 55356 38 26-118-23 33 0026 00930 DAKOTA AVE THOHAS C ODEAN ETAL THOHAS C ODEAN 930 DAKOTA AVE LONG LAKE HN 55356 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORHATION SYSTEH PROPERTY OWNERS LIST 38 26-118-23 33 0005 01520 LONG LAKE BLVD RAYHOND GORDON JOHNSON RAYHOND GORDON JOHNSON 1520 LONG LAKE BLVD LONG LAKE HN 55356 38 26-118-23 33 0008 01570 LONG LAKE BLVD C E TRUHAN ET AL W/L EST CHARLES E I HELEN F TRUHAN 1570 LONG LAKE BLVD LONG LAKE HN 55356 REPORT NO. PI635601 PAGE 12 38 26-118-23 33 0022 00908 DAKOTA AVE S R KNUTSON t J A KNUTSON SCOTT R I JULIE A KNUTSON 908 DAKOTA AVE N LONG LAKE HN 55356 38 26-118-23 33 0025 00950 DAKOTA AVE G A OLEN ETAL G A OLEN 950 DAKOTA AVE LONG LAKE HN 55356 38 26-118-23 33 0006 01530 LONG LAKE BLVD GRANT D EGGENBER6 GRANT D EGGENBERG 1530 LONG LAKE BLVD LONG LAKE HN 55356 38 26-118-23 33 0011 01575 LONG LAKE BLVD B D t T B CLARK TERRY I BRUCE CLARK 1575 LONG LAKE BLVD LONG LAKE HN 55356 38 26-118-23 33 0023 00910 DAKOTA AVE T t K STEINKE THOHAS A t KARI A STEINKE 910 DAKOTA AVE LONG LAKE m 55356 38 26-116-23 33 0026 01590 LONG LAKE BLVD RICHARD K ENGHAH RICHARD K ENGHAN 1590 LONG LAKE BLVD LONG LAKE HN 55356 38 28-118-23 33 0014 38 26-118-23 33 0020 « 01535 LONG LAKE BLVD CHARLES N HARVIN 00886 DAKOTA AVE J H BENWAY I K J GASNER CHARLES N HARVIN J H BENWAY 8 K J GASNER J 1535 LONG LAKE BLVD LONG LAKE HN 55350 886 DAKOTA AVE LONG LAKE HH 55356 \s 1 i PROP ADDR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR 38 26-118-23 33 0030 01586 LONG LAKE BLVD ARDIS J SEVERTSON ARDIS J SEVERTSON 1586 LONG LAKE BLVD LONG LAKE HN 55356 38 26-118-23 33 0031 01580 LONG LAKE BLVD ROGER W CARLSON ROGER W CARLSON 1580 LONG LAKE BLVD LONG LAKE HN 55356 38 27-118-23 66 0007 01699 NORTH FARH RD RICHARD W PERKINS TRUSTEE RICHARD W PERKINS 1699 NORTH FARH RD LONG LAKE HN 55356 \’1r > i.tr RUN DATE 07/31/98 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORHATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNERS LIST REPORT NO. PI935901 PAGE 13BATCH 503 PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/AODR 38 27-118-23 99 0008 01659 NORTH FARM RO JOSEPH H OFFERHAN JOSEPH H OFFERHAN 1669 N FARM RD LONG LAKE HN 55356 0007 N 38 39-118-23 11 00800 DROWN RD V t D STEIN VICTOR N STEIN 800 DROWN RD H LONG LAKE ffH 55356 38 35-118-23 22 0002 01525 LONG LAKE BLVD MARIE E WENDT TRUSTEE MARIE WENDT 17505 OLD ROCKFORD RD PLYMOUTH MN 55996 PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR 38 35-118-23 22 0003 01509 LONG LAKE BLVD THOMAS W CASHMAN THOMAS W CASHMAN 1509 LONG LAKE BLVD LONG LAKE MN 55356 TOTAL BATCH 503 00022 I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION, TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF. DATE g-3-^6 C?1 T!:■ ■ 1 i D NEIL WEBER ARCHITECTS 2280 WATERTOWN ROAD. SUITE 100 LONG LAKE. MINNESOTA 55356 (612) 476-44 34 (612) 476-5863 (FAX) 22 July 1998 To: City of Orono From: Neil Weber Re: Front Yard Variance Request by Terry Clark 1575 Long Lake Blvd. Attached are documents which relate to the front yard variance request we are seeking. The home recently was damaged by a tree falling through the roof because of high winds. The current home is built 49 feet front the high water mark of Long Lake. This means that the repair and addition will be within the set back line from the lake. The addition will be built on a relatively flat area to the west of the existing home and therefore will not impact seriously the bluff area wnich separates the home from the roadway. Thn calculations show that the hard cover does not exceed 13% in the first zone. The addition uses material similar to the existing home. It is designed to fit well on the site and not have a significant impact on the site and surroundings. ABCH»TCCTUBC ■ « INTEBIOSS • CONSTBUCTION MANAGEMCNTelNSPICTlONS HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) i 75-250'250-500' EXISTING HARDCOVER TN A. House Length Width X X X B. Garage C. Driveway X X D. Sidewalk MMdOLQ^HV h’tW' dP- HM, HfUWW ________ E. Patio/Deck X X F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic X X X G. Other jw**^**^ hbut h A TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPER IT AREA IN ZONE **■ B "TCAOO X 100 PROPOSED HARDCO A. House IDCOVER IN ZONE St'^woaa> witv»j Width X X X B. Garage C. Driveway X X D. Sidewalk AOXtieKl----ffetfeeso aj ftJW E. Patio/Deck X X uPpnfi'lWiQ t^CODH- 500-1000' F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic /9«jr liMW X X X G. Other 1 NWJ gll S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F.' S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. % A -t B S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. - S.F. ^5 S.F. S.F.I S.F. 3 S.F. *cp- i' S.F. -» TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTALPROPERTY AREA IN ZONE X 100 =45*2^ S.F. S.F. % A B 13 w*- HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75’ EXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House ______________ X 250-500’500-1000' Length Width X X X B. Garage C. Driveway . thi CFfm gawtn) 24^^ UJIAMWJ fttoH Smvi 3S2. D. sidewalk ( C X x .{/ft •IffCl/ 9X9 HO •ai.g E. Patio/Deck X X m S3 F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic G. Other X X X Wi TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZO ^ B \L PROPER!' ^/tOl X lOO = . S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. -U S.F. _ S.F. % PROPOSED HARDCQV™ IN ZONE A. Ho^e ^flU *2 T/L>±* Length Width in B. Garage C. Driveway D. Sidewalk E. Patio/Deck F. Landscape Underlain X X X G. By Plastic _ Othe.* X X X X X X X S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. 72771L tf'JMU IWO. /r S.F. 1 S.F. TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZON ^4'^* firz* B X 100 W* s,p. ” S.F. ” % /L-Lcpy 1 j wr'A . y.i; ^1 i •W imi •'1 1 j ^w S''m/. ■Y f T i ) •• ^ •• J /:•»D I* ‘ K. p-'P'n\t r;..: X.- "^•-i?:-’§ %WL :t| iJM -iv-iV T/ I ^ • I _ «T >1, fm mil V/' /J V Vi. \ . < '■ ?, r M ■,.»;iv$ '<vv ' -, V.,'. L* •It ri »*» ii *> 'fe- • • •^/‘ •*> •■ ,.'.* V . •'-» ,4>. >;-v. * -...... UK 7a- >?■ "4^ iKirf-a; i\V ::/;-;JN I' » I -i K. r ‘ •■• K . I ^'T'» V J -j li ‘X. <•> ■'1 Iscsl, r V, V i-rf •:■<** (» I?'.M1,V. il »'■ ‘^' ’ t.* '■- ik..V’’ *1- viriii' i^vvMi I. •* M:'k ' 7T«/•/ 7, / / ■] >•7 I '• il ■:■ ^ ■' ?.'! • . ' \w ' ^ ''•,1; •, • ^*-. . ,' lil7 - •• . ’ll'*', ?'*.■•'1 ' .'. : i'j V ‘.‘7 - ■ , 4 . . ‘'-tf , .•• L • ■ • •». •' » *• . %fi"C J ' ' Iu I r//‘ O O X CL 5sjiii UJ<< 1 ’*5'7 ’■*m . ■ v: 1 St-".' •• % Ci. O vS 2 -‘.V','*' j rif i .i Iyy/< ; / 7 . . t>- »?..♦ ; I * ■ • . ' I k-y* ' /V'4 . ' « s-‘f ■: / rt* '‘-r'* I^S^vV" ■' ■•■/I .\ « Kl%< ^i: <:rrr < L« %% » pi. eiiOM % I “>4 -ri' ^ Jl Vf. V»A w’4 y p /' "z / / / /.../.- / ■ / . X . X 1C I /♦ X y V \/ / / / / >. • ■■ /"~7’ QC LU ~7~~ '^Siilii C >-^.J 1 I— < > LU ? I \ \ \ \ \ \\ ^ • • JUi\^ iP Application Date: Completion Date: 60 Day Deadline: 8/14/98 9/25/98 11/24/98 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION NOV 2 3 1998 CITY cr ORONO DATE: 11/18/98 ITEM NO.: ^ Department Approval: Name Paul Weinberger Title Assistant Zoning Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description:#2411 Paul and Leann Hanssen 3195 Casco Circle Variances—Public Hearing Zoning District: Lot Area: Application: One Family Lakeshore Residential District (1/2 Acre) square feet (.56 acres) _______ The applicants are requesting to repair a boathouse 15 feet from the lakeshore. The existing boathouse has been determined by the City Buildine staff to be in disrepair. A wind storm in May heavily damaged a deck that was located on top of the existing boathouse. The deck could be replaced by receiving a building permit, as it had existed before the storm. However, the Building Official did not issue the building permit due to the condition of the boathouse it would be located above. The deteriorating condition of the boathouse was not a result of the wind storm. This application will require the following variances: 1. Hardcover in the 0-75' lakeshore setback. The existing hardcover is 310 s f ( 4 5%) The apf hcants are requesting to replace the 160 s.f. boathouse. 2. To allow a boathouse to exist within 75' of the lakeshore. 3. A variance from the side yard adjacent to street setbacks to allow the structure to be located 1 O' from a platted public right-of-way, where 15' is required. Conditional Use Permit: The City typica^^^y would require a Conditional Use Permit to aliow grading and work below the Ordinary High Water Level (OHWL) of929.4V Slaffhad contacted the DNR who requhes a Kmifin thkT" ‘-elow the OHWL. DNR staff has indicated they would not requirea from the Restore “ 15' PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION (10/19/98): The Planning Commission recommended by a 4 to 1 vote to: To recommend denial based on the following reasons: 1 . The structure is a non-conforming structure within 75' of the lakeshore. -p'~t of toiTby^Tstoi®was not orming. The City Attorney has determined this provision only applies to uses, not struc CITY COUNCIL ACTION (I0/26/9S): non- not structures. The aty Attorney smted Section I0.03(J) applies only to the use and not to the location of rhe Structure, noting the boathouse is not a non-conforming ”use. the Public Hearing on October 19, 1998. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION (11/16/98); n 1o^re “ 7 to 0 to deny the application based on not having any new COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MONDAY, OCTOBER 19,1998 I .?3 (#2413 Paul and Megan Bennett, continued) Weinberger staled this item was before the Planning Commission at the September meetinjj^ere it was tabled to allow the Applicant time to pursue possible purchase of an adjacent tax fp^ited lot. The Applicants are proposing to construct a 20' by 24' garage with second floor livjpg space to the existing residence which requires variances to the side yard adjacent to streelsproack requirements, side yard setback requirements, rear yard setback requirements, and a variajice to the structural coverage. Weinberger noted in 1991, the City Council adopted Resolution No/«82 to permit the construction of a deck by the previous owner with the advisement that futur^froposals to increase lot coverage by structure on this property would not be looked upon favowWy by the City Council. Weinberger stated without the adjoining lot the hard^ adjacent lot it would be 14.4 percent. IT would be at 31 percent and with the Bennett commented he is willing to purchas] special assessment for the sewer. le tax forfeited lot but would like to negotiate on the Chair Smith staled the Planning CpfKmission does not have the authority to waive special assessments and it would neer^Jlobe brought betore the City Council. Lindquist commented h^^uld approve the application if the adjoining lot is purchased and would deny the application i^((^ adjoining lot is not purchased. It was the concpil^s of the Planning Commission that the application be approved subject to the purchase adjoining lot. Ther^l^re no public comments. ,Jmith moved, Schroeder seconded, to approve Application #2413, 500 Hanlon Avenue, as outlined in the October 15,1998 Planner's Report, subject to the acquisition and legal combination with this property of the tax forfeited property. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. ^ NEW BUSINESS: PUBLIC HEARINGS, CONTINUED (#10) #2411 PAUL HANSSEN, 3195 CASCO CIRCLE - VARIANCE AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, 9:08 p.m. - 9:27 p.m. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. Paul Hanssen was present. Weinberger staled the Applicants are requesting a land alteration permit to replace a boathouse 15 feel from the lakeshore as well as replacement of a deck located on top of the boathouse that was damaged in a wind storm. The building official has reviewed the boathouse and has determined the boathouse to be in a deteriorating condition which was not the result of the wind storm. Weinberger remarked the Applicant has hired a structural engineer to review the boathouse and was advised that the front and back walls would need to be replaced as well as portions of the side walls. The structure’s foundation will also need to be replaced which will require a conditional use permit. Page 10 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MONDAY, OCTOBER 19,1998 A i.f 3 (#2411 Paul Hanssen, continued) Staff is recommending the boathouse be treated as a new structure due to the major renovation work that needs to be completed. Staff is recommending denial of the request since the Zoning Code does not allow any structure within 75 feet of the lakeshore. Hanssen stated they have recently purchased the property with the intention of maintaining the boathouse, noting the boathouse is an attractive feature of the property. Hanssen presented the Planning Commission with three letters from the adjoining neighbors expressing their support of allowing the boathouse to remain. There were no public comments. Hawn commented she was not anxious to allow structures along the lakeshore, but stated the Applicant should have the right to rebuild since the structure was pre-existing. Chair Smith noted the structure was already in disrepair at the time of the purchase of the property. Weinberger noted the boathouse was not damaged by the storm but has deteriorated over the years. Stoddard stated he is in favor of the application. Schroeder inquired whether improvements to this structure could be made since the improvements may exceed the 50 percent limit allowed for under the ordinance, and recommended the aoplication be denied. Lindquist staled if the improvement costs exceed 50 percent of the fair market value, then the application should be denied. Weinberger stated more information should be obtained on the fair market value. Schroeder commented it is his understanding the value of the structure is what it was in 1975 or 1976 when the ordinance was passed and the improvements cannot exceed 50 percent of that value. Hanssen stated when the property was purchased he knew the boathouse would need some work but thought the structure would last for another ten to fifteen years. Chair Smith stated the Planning Commission is not in a position to determine the value of the structure or the cost of the improvements. Weinberger commented a conditional use permit is needed to do the work around the foundation. Chair Smith suggested tabling the matter until further information can be gathered concerning the ordinance and the fair market value of the structure. Stoddard moved to approve Application #2411, 3195 Casco Circle, granting of a variance to the hardcover requirements in the 0-75' lakeshore setback, a variance to allow a boathouse to exist within 75' of the lakeshore, a variance from the side yard adjacent to street setbacks, and a conditional use permit to allow work on the foundation. MOTION DIED DUE TO LACK OF A SECOND. Lindquist moved. Smith seconded, tn deny Application #2411, 3195 Casco Circle. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 1, Stoddard opposed. Page 11 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MONDAY, OCTOBER 19,1998 aA 3 of 3 (#2411 Paul Hanssen, continued) Chair Smith noted the value of the structure should be reviewed by the City Council (#11) #2422 RICHARD GAY, 2735 SHADYWOOD ROAD - VARIANCE. 9:28 p.m. - 9:48 p.m. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. Jchard and Tanya Gay were present. WeirH^rger stated the Applicants are requesting to construct a six foot fence within the average lakesnSre setback which exceeds the maximum three and a half foot height limit. The Applicant has state^the three and a half foot fence is not adequate to contain his two Russian Wolfhounds. City Staff is m^ommending denial of this application since fences are not allowed within 75 feet of the lakeshore. Richard Gay state^Ihey have recently purchased the property and would like to erect a fence to house his dogs. GayV^arked he has spoken with the neighbors who are in favor of the fence, noting he is willing to pl^t additional landscape to provide more screening. Tanya Gay commented the^wrrently have two Russian Wolfhounds, which are large dogs, and the fence is needed to prevenPthem trom leaving the yard. Gay stated the dogs are capable of Jumping over a three and a half\ot fence which necessitated the need for the higher fence. Richard Gay stated he was not awarwiat he would need to obtain approval to construct a six foot fence at the time of the purchase and oSly became aware of that fact after the property was purchased. There were no public comments. Lindquist inquired whether invisible fencing could l!te utilized, Gay stated the invisible fencing would not deter the do^ Lindquist stated he understands the desire for the fence, bi)^e does not look favorably on fences within 75’ of the lakeshore. Chair Smith agreed with Lindquist. Schroeder stated the hardship is not related to the topography of the lli^. Stoddard wondered whether all of the options have been pursued regardin^his application. Chair Smith suggested that perhaps the fence could be removed when the property was sold. Gay indicaled he would be in favor of removing the fence at the time of sale. Lindquist inquired whether the fence could be kept out of the front yard. Gay stated they are proposing to locate a portion of the fence in the front yard to permit ac3H^s for the dogs into the house. Page 12 ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR OCTOBER 26, 1998 6 I (Public Comments, Continued) Kellogg stated the plans have been submitted to the State, with the City preparing to advertise for bids in January, 1999, awarding the bids in February, 1999, with const^tion scheduled to begin in the spring of 1999. Kellogg remarked construction shoul^w completed by October of 1999. Lyman inquired whether the posted speed limit could be reduced to 3^t\ph instead of 40 until the road is improved. Lyman stated the current posted speed limi^^gns are not readily visible and are not adequate. Lyman requested that hidden driveway be posted along the road, noting there are 14 hidden driveways on the Orono side aloj^^emdale Road, which is a hazard. Lyman commented the width of the road does no^ronform to current City standards as well as not having shoulders. Lyman also requestet^e City consider relocating the sign concerning the Luce Line Trail to give the m^Morists more time to slow down. Mayor Jabbour commented Lyman’^f^uests are reasonable but the City of Orono is dictated by law and is not able t^Knver the speed limit without the input of MnDot. Jabbour stated the Public Works Depamnent can review the locations of the speed limit signs to insure that they are visible to apo^ching vehicles. Kellogg stated the ol^hs and specifications for North Ferndale Road will cut down the height of the hills as woH^s require 30 miles an hour for the new road. Mayor JajilJbur remarked the Orono Police Department has purchased a speed monitor which couldJre posted along the road to inform the motorists of their traveled speed. !yman requested that the speed monitor be posted along the road. Mayor Jabbour requested Gappa to relay Lyman's concerns to the police chief ZONING ADMINISTRATOR’S REPORT (#3) #2411 PAUL HANSSEN, 3195 CASCO CIRCLE - VARIANCE/CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Paul Hanssen was present. Weinberger stated the Applicants are requesting a Conditional Use Permit and variances to replace a boathouse and deck located 15 feet from the lakeshore. The deck located abo^e the boathouse was damaged in a windstorm; however, the building official has determined the ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR OCTOBER 26, 1998 h (^2411 Paul Hanssen, Continued) boathouse to be in disrepair, which is not the result of the windstorm. Weinberger stated the Applicants have had a structural engineer inspect the boathouse who has determined that the front and back walls would need to be replaced as well as portions of the side walls. A variance to hardcover in the 0-75' setback would be required as well as a variance to allow the boathouse to exist within 75' of the lakeshore, and a variance from the side yard adjacent to street setbacks. Weinberger stated the Planning Commission denied this application based on their understanding of the ordinance which limits improvements to 50 percent of the fair market value of the non-conforming structure. Hanssen commented he would like to improve the boathouse as it is a nice asset to the property, noting he was unsure as to why the Planning Commission denied his request. Hanssen stated the assessed value of the boathouse is listed at 515,000, with the fair market value usually being slightly higher than the assessed value. Mayor Jabbour stated the improvements cannot exceed 50 percent of the fair market value. Hawn stated it was the Planning Commission's understanding that the value is what it was at the time the ordinance was put into effect. Hanssen stated the ordinance specifies the fair market value of the structure at the time of the loss. Mayor Jabbour commented that perhaps this application should have been tabled until a determination was reached on the fair market value of the structure. Barrett stated this is the first time he has had an opportunity to review this application, noting the ordinance concerning non-conforming structures limits improvements to the existing structure to 50 percent of the present fair market value. Section 10.03(J) applies only to the use and not to the location of the structure, noting the boathouse is not a non-conforming use. Mayor Jabbour inquired whether this application should go before the Planning Commission to allow them to review the application based upon the correct information. Hanssen stated he would like to have a decision as soon as possible. Mayor Jabbour suggested tabling the application until the new information regarding the value of the structure is reviewed by the Planning Commission. ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR OCTOBER 26,1998 (^2411 Paul Hanssen, Continued) Hanssen inquired whether City Staff could approve the application Mayor Jabbour stated the City Council would need to approve the application, but would like to wait until the correct information is available. Weinberger stated the 60 day time period for this application ends November 24th. Goetten commented since all the correct facts were not before the Planning Commission when it reviewed this application, they should have the opportunity to review the information to give their recommendation to the City Council. Flint stated it is procedurally better to have this application go back to the Planning Commission for their consideration before the final decision is made by the City Council. Mayor Jabbour recommended placing this item on the agenda for the next Planning Commission meeting to allow them to reconsider their decision based on the correct information. Van Zomeren stated this application vvill be on the November 16 Planning Commission agenda and will appear before the City Council on the 23rd. Goetten moved, Flint seconded, to send Application t/2411, 3195 Casco Circle, back to the Planning Commission for their review. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. (#20) ANN TRIES, LAKE MINNETONKA CABLE COMMISSION - 1999 PROPOSED BUDGET Ann Thies, Administrator of the Lake Minnetonka Communications^C«11tmission, addressed the City Council concerning the 1999 LMCC budget, notingjt^^iC'^ne LMCC has taken over the responsibility for funding local access programming#<^Tne new access fee is expected to generate S52,200 in revenues for 1999. Thies commented the expenses rei^tetTto equipment repair and maintenance, office rent, studio fees, office equipmerjMrtlaaccess equipment have all increased. A subcommittee has been appointed to loolHIito the access fees for the upcoming year. Thies reqa^^d the City Council pass a motion approving the 1999 LMCC budget Mayor Jabbour thanked Ann Thies for her efforts in serving on the LMCC. CITY OF ORONO P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 473-7357 ZONING FILE #241 1 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION DATE OF NOTICE: October 21. 1998 TO:Paul and Leann Hanssen 3195 Casco Circle Wayzata,MN 55391 COPIES TO: TYPE OF APPLICATION:Conditional Use Permit DATE OF MEETING: 10/19/98 VOTE:1 FOR 4 AGAINST Planning Commission recommends the following: Denial for reasons noted below. NOTES AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS: 1. The structure is a non-conforming structure within 75’ of the lakeshore. 2.The repairs to the structure would include adding a foundatioi! and complete replacement of over 50% of the walls. 3.The damage, resulting from the storm, only destroyed the deck. The boat house was not damaged by the storm. Applicant's next scheduled meeting is confirmed as; City Council October 19, 1998, meeting starts at 7:00 p.m. If you desire certified copies of the official Planning Commission minutes, they are available from the City Recorder after review and approval by the Planning Commission. X:\APPS\WPWIN60\WPDOCS'CAROl.E\PCACTION'241l c CITY OF ORONO P.O. Box 66 Crj’stal Bay, MN 55323 473-7357 APPLICATION NO. #2411 NOTICE OF COUNCIL ACTION Date of Notice: October 29, 1998 TO: Paul & Learm Hanssen 3195 Casco Circle Wayzata MN 55391 COPIES: TYPE OF APPLICATION: Variance & Conditional Use Permit DATE OF MEETING: 10/26/98 VOTE: 4 FOR f AGAINST COUNCIL ACTION - MOTION: To table the application and return the proposal to the Planning Commission. If you desire certified copies of the official Council minutes, they are available from the City Clerk after review and approval by the City Council. jig E |of5 10 ' lo I OrOnO C‘hj /P G 3cxas ‘ o«co4j bA «i-| Qu^ T Uu. \A aw A, \\^ivv$StAS a ^4. cV a ^S jl \w v\oVi6'i^V^ ^^c^v^Ssiv>wV ^ Vk ^ Wcsv -^ VsjCi ^SJL\/V^ \^dil^wo<aJG j \>^k Jl 'To , bv\w4 A sls\^\^ ^ * ^slWv 'SW'^ * I ^V^^^^^A'A ■^C^v^OnT' '■^a J: '^^'^SL^'.AV^N S^rJL V^OC^ i VsfAMs. . ^\^->i/'^l\AiL\ C_/) 6v0y ^jO I V jOjUOiTJG Vv f £ Douglas & Cheryl Hawkinson 3205 Casco Circle Orono, Mn 55391 (612) 4710-0121 October 19,1998 £ 3.^3 Dear Orono City Council, Planning Board, Inspections Dept; As the next door neighbors to 3195 Casco Point Circle, we are, without reservation, in favor of the re-building, fixup of the deck on top of the boathouse on the adjoining property. It was severely damaged during the May 15,1998 storm. The repair is certainly necessary to restore lost value to the property. Please feel free to call me with any questions you may have. Yours, Flot 5 § 10.03 SEC. 10.03. GENERAL PROVISIONS. Subd. 1. Minimum Requirements. In their interpretation and application, the provisions of the Zoning Chapter shall be held to be the minimum requirements for the promotion of the public health, safety, morals, and welfare. Subd. 2. More Restrictive Provisions To Apply. Where the conditions imposed by any provision of the Zoning Chapter are either more restrictive or less restrictive than comparable conditions imposed by any other law. City Code provision, statute, resolution, or regulation of any kind, the regulations which are more restrictive, or which impose higher standards or requirements shall prevail. Source: Municipal Code Effective Date: 9-14-67 Subd. 3. ^ All Permits Compatible With Agency Requirements. A building permit, conditional or special use permit, or other permit or necessary permission of the Council, wherever cr whenever required by the City Code may be denied if the proposed action or permit is not compatible with the intent and provisions of the Surface Water Management Plan, the Storm Water Run-Off and Shoreland Guidelines Policy Statement promulgated by the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District, and any other valid governmental regulations, plans and policies adopted by the City. Three copies of the Policy Statement, other applicable governmental regulations, plans and policies adopted by the City shall be marked as official copies and filed for use and examination by the public in the City Hall. Source: Ordinance No. 172 Effective Date: 1-1-75 Subd. 4. Prohibitions. It is unlawful to convert, enlarge, reconstruct or alter any structure or use any structure or land for any purpose nor in any manner which is not in conformity with the Zoning Chapter. Subd. 5. Non-Conforming Uses. Any land or buildings Jiilich_Ji6X*£_^^^uaTT2|]j^n3™Te2aTT2^|[He^^eT|^T^^^^on^conTor^^^g^use'’on January iT 1975. may be continued in said non-cohtorm'lng use permit grantee as hereitfa A. The non-conforming use may not be changed to another non-conforming use. placing of declared unsafe by the Building Inspector, providing the necessary C C C ORONO CC 251 (4-1-84) F 2.fJ § 10.03 repairs shall not constitute more than fifty percent (50%) of the fair market value of such structure. Structure shall include such accessory features attached to the structure or located anywhere on the land, such as signs, marquees, monuments. C. When any lawful non-conforming use of any structure or land in any district has been changed to a conforming use, it shall not thereafter be changed to any non-conforming use. D. Whenever a lawful non-conforming structure shall have been damaged by fire, flood, explosion, earthquake, war, riot, or act of God, it may be reconstructed and used as before if it be reconstructed within twelve (12) months after such calamity, unless the damage to the building or structure is seventy-five percent (75%) or more of its fair market value as shown on the assessment records at the time of damage, in which case the whole thereof shall be demolished, and any construction thereafter shall be for a use in accordance with the provisions of this Zoning Chapter. E. Whenever a lawful non-conforming use of a structure or land is discontinued and remains discontinued for a period of twelve (12) months, any future use of said structure or land shall be in conformity with the provisions of this Zoning Chapter. F. Any lawful non-conforming use of land not involving a structure, and any lawful non-conforming use involving a structure with an assessor's fair market value upon the effective date of this Zoning Chapter of $3,000.00 or less, may be continued for a period of thirty-six (36) months after the effective date of this Zoning Chapter, whereupon such non-conformirg use shall cease, unless brought into conformity with the Zoning Chapter. G. Any proposed structure which will, under this Zoning Chapter, become non-conforming but for which a building permit has been lawfully granted not more than six (6) months prior to the effective date of this Zoning Chapter, may be completed in accordance with the approved plans; provided construction is started within six (6) months of the effective date of 'this Zoning Chapter, and continues to completion within two (2) years. Such structure and use shall thereafter be a legally existing non- conforming structure and use. H. Normal maintenance of a building or other structure containing or related to a lawful non-conforming use is permitted, including necessary non-structural repairs and incidental alterations which do not extend or intensify the non- conforming use. ORONO CC 252 (4-1-84) F S 10.03 I. Alterations may be made to a building containing lawful non-conforming residential units when they will improve the livability thereof, provided they will not increase the number of dwelling units or bulk of the building. Source: Ordinance No. 172 Effective Date: 1-1-75 J. Apply to "Uses" Only. The non-conforming use provisions of the Zoning Chapter apply only to the use to which land and buildings are put, and do not apply to situations where location or height of structures, lot size or other factors not involving the use of the premises prevent strict conformance with the requirements of the Zoning Chapter. Where, however, such a situateid existed legally under the prior applicable law, the Council will not unreasonably require strict compliance and will generally look with favor on granting of a variance under Section 10.08. Subd. 6. Lot of Record. A lot of record is any lot for which a deed or registered land survey has been recorded in the office of the Register of Deeds or the Registrar of Titles for Hennepin County, tMinnesota, prior to January 1, 1975, and after approval by the Council if required. Source: Municipal Code Effective Date: 9-14-67 A. Existing Lots. A lot of record existing upon January 1, 1975 in an "R" District, which does not meet the requirements of the Zoning Chapter as to area or width may be utilized for a single family detached dwelling purpose provided that in the judgment of the Council such use does not adversely affect public health or safety and the following requirements are met: Source: City Code Effective Date: 4-1-84 1. In "R" Districts of One Acre or Less and With Public Sanitary Sewer. A lot of record existing upon the effective date of this Zoning Chapter in any "R" District of the City of up to and including one acre, which lot is serviced by public sanitary sewer and which does not meet the requirements of this Zoning Chapter as to area or width only, may be utilized for single family detached dwelling purposes without Council approval if the area measurements and width of that lot are within eighty percent (80%) of the requirements of this Zoning Chapter. However, the lot of record shall not be more intensely developed unless ORONO CC 253 (4-1-84) TO: FROM: Mayor Jabbour and City Council Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator Paul Weinberger, Assistant Zoning Administrator DATE:November 19,1998 SUBJECT:#2411 Paul and Leann Hanssen 3195 Casco Circle Variances-Public Hearing Zoning District: LR-IC Lot Area:24,750 One Family Lakeshore Residential District (1/2 Acre) square feet (.56 acres) Application:The applicants are requesting to repair a boathouse 15 feet from the lakeshore. The existing boathouse has been determined by the City Building staff to be in disrepair. A wind storm in May heavily damaged a deck that was located on top of the existing boathouse. The deck could be replaced by receiving a building permit, as it had existed before the storm. However, the Building Official did not issue the building permit due to the condition of the boathouse it would be located above. The deteriorating condition of the boathouse was not a result of the wind storm. Structural Review: The applicant hired a structural engineer to review the existing condition of the structure and recommend corrective measures to provide a structurally sound foundation conforming to the Minnesota State Building Code. The structural engineer has determined the front and back walls would be replaced and portions of the side walls that will connect to the new front and back walls would have new concrete blocks added to fit the existing walls. The side walls would require some additional repairs. The structure has a minimal foundation that would need to be replaced. A portion of the hillside must be temporarily removed to build a foundation under the structure. The existing roof is deteriorated and must also be completely replaced. 1^241 1 Paul and Leann Hanssen 5195 Casco Circle Parlances 1 1/25/98 Page I Lot History:The Planning Commission recommended denial of variances to tear down the existing residence to allow a new residence on March 17, 1997. The Planning Commission also recommended the applicant remove the boathouse upon new construction. The applicant was a potential buyer of the property, not the current property owner. Following the Planning Commission action the previous applicant withdrew, and did not appear before the City Council. This application will require the following variances: 1. Hardcover in the 0-75’ lakeshore setback. The existing hardcover is 310 s.f.( 4.5%). The applicants are requesting to replace the 160 s.f. boathouse. 2. To allow a boathouse to exist within 75' of the lakeshore. 3.A variance from the side yard adjacent to str^.n setbacks to allow the structure to be located 10' from a platted public right-of-way, where 15' is required. Conditional Use Permit: The City typically would require a Conditional Use Permit to allow grading and work below the Ordinary High Water Level (OHWL) of 929.4' above sea level. Staff had contacted the DNR, who requires a permit for any alteration occuring below the OHWL. DNR staff has indicated they would not require a permit in this case because the work would not impact the lakeshore. The boathouse is located 15' from the lakeshore. Since the work below the OHWL would not require a permit a Conditional Use Permit is not required. Ordinary High Water Level (OHWL) of Lake Minnetonka 929.4' Lowest floor elevation for building 932.0' Footing elevation (footings required to be 5' minimum depth) 927.0' Pertinent Ordinances: Section 10.22, Subd. 1(.A): Lakeshore Setback Regulations Section 10.56, Subd. 16(L)(l): Lakeshore Setback Regulations U24U Paul and Leann Hanssen 3195 Casco Circle Variances 11/23/98 Page! Section 10.25, Subd. 6(B): Setback Regulations for the LR-IC Zoning District Section 10.56, Subd. 16(J)(5)(i): Land Alteration below OHWL • 1 i H24J / Pau! and Itam Hanssen 3195 Casco Circle Variances 11/23/98 Page3 •I n ANALYSIS Lot Area and Yards LR-IC (1/2 acre) Lot Area Lot Width Lakeside Yard Side Yard adj./Street Street Yard Required 21,780 s.f 100'75’15'30’ Proposed 24,750 s.f 90’16’10’NA The subject property does meet lot area requirements. The structure would be located 15' from Lake Minnetonka where 75' is required. The property is adjacent to a platted, undeveloped street. The code requires a 15' setback for structures adjacent to a street in the LR-IC Zoning District. Hardcover Distance from Shoreline Total Area in Setback Existing Hardcover Allowed Hardcover Proposed Hardcover Variance Requested 0’-75’6,750 s.f 310 s.f (4.5%) none (0%) 310 s.f (4.5%) To allow replacement of a boathouse 75’-250’13,500 s.f 4,476 s.f (33.1%) 3,375 s.f (25%) 4,476 s.f (33.1%) none 250’-500’4,500 s.f 1,340 s.f (29.7%) 1,350 s.f (30%) 1,340 s.f (29.7%) none 500’-1000’0 0 0 (35%) 0 none The proposal requires a hardcover variance for the 0-75 ’ lakeshore setback to allow the lot to retain 310 s.f (4.5%) where 310 s.f (4.5%) exists. The deck is proposed to be 18 ’ by 20'. U24! I Paul and Leann Ifanssen 3195 Casco Circle I driances 11/23/98 Page 4 Structural Coverage To[al Lot Size Total Structural Coverage Percentage 24,750 s.f.3,467 s.f.14.0% The lot does meet the 15% allowed lot coverage for structure. ANALYSIS Issues 1.The boathouse requires major renovation to include complete replacement of two walls and partial replacement of the two remaining walls. Both remaining walls would also require tuckpoint and repairs to cracked block and other masonry to provide a solid wall. The roof would consist of a full replacement. The applicants are requesting to replace a deck above the boathouse. The City Building Official has determined the boathouse is unsafe to construct a new deck above. 4.ITie deck could legally be repaired because it was damaged in a storm. The building which the deck was located above has been determined to be structurally unsafe net allowing the deck to be constructed. Therefore, the property owners would loose their right to the deck which was involuntarily removed. 5.Last year the Planning Commission recommended denial of variances to allow the e.xisting house to be removed and a new residence constructed. It was recommended at that time the boathouse be removed to reduce hardcover on the lot. The applicants withdrew the application without a hearing with the Council. #2-/// Paul and Leann Hunssen 3195 Casco Circle Idriances 11/23/98 Page 5 Attachments A B C D E F G H I J K L Application Applicant Letter Plat Map Location Map Topographic Map Survey Hardcover Calculation Worksheets Site Photos Deck Plan Structural Engineer Report Property Owners List Permit Record U241 / Paul and Leann Hanssen 3195 Casco Circle I’ariances 11/23 98 Page 6 I Application # S^//_____t Date ReceivedT 9^ Amount Paid CITY OF ORONO - GENERAL LAND USE APPLICATION PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address ^C <r».5iCca. CliVci-«g^ ^ Type of Applicadon to be Filed ^ Property Idenlification Number (P.I.D.) 'ZXC'^ ( \ ~7 3»*^- APPLICANP) Phone (home) 4"7 \ Name _______________ Phone (work) i - Address City Zip 5zrs>‘=i ( OWNER (if different than applicant) Name _______________ Phone (home). Phone (\vork)_ Address City Zip. Date Prope*typ^quired (month/year) I (do/t^ not) mso own the adjacent parcels of land.L FEES - CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS - _____$ 75.00 For each variance request with CUP application _____$175.00 Residential Accessory Use _____$250.00 Institutional (church, school, etc.) _____$225.00 Guest Ho’ise/Guest Apartments _____$200.00 Duplex CrediL^ldg $300.00 Commercial/Industrial Use $250.00 Land Alteration •____ Grading and filling - designated wetland or floodplain ____ Grading and filling - 501 cu. yd. or more ____ Grading, seawall, retaining walls within 75' of lakeshore _____PRD/PID - see Fee Schedule _____$150.00 Renewal Fee (no change from original application) _____After-the-Fact Fee - Double Current Application Fee OTHER APPLICATIONS _____$250.00 Commercial Site Plan Review (+ consultant fees) _____$300.00 Vacation _____$200.00 Easement Vacation _____$100.00 Easement Vacation With Subdivision _____$350.00 Rezoning (PUD - refer to fee schedule) _____$350.00 Comprehensive Plan Amendment $100.00 Appeals , .. .r • ^ -K' Other - see Fee Schedule UCfOW of Ne-v Conf..P.t«f 5fruclure -- August 13,1998 Request to replace deck at 3195 Casco Circle We submit this application to replace our deck that was damaged in the May storm. W^e purchased this property in the early spring of this year. After our purchase but before the actual closing and move in date, a severe wind storm took the deck and lifted it off it’s foundation, landing it nearby totally destroyed. The property consists of an older home of marginal value. The deck was one of the main ;easons we purchased the property. It greatly enhanced the appeal and value of the property. We only wish to restore it to it’s original condition. See Sec 10.03 Subd paragraph ofOrono Municipal code.D Paul and Leann Hanssen 1 ,____j f r. :: V J{ ^ -r> 4 4 ^ 4o ” i - m^* •. ^**. • • ««»*v *?r^^'»'%. . %•*C--- !^;r iiojr*i»o»i J •I s. --'.T > L •* •> • • N v:. • 4- .•- .**- ;IOHN$)S ‘'^C'i:¥^->rss” i •■■ - - -\“ >:. .-s. '•..•r :*.'V4rfli •*••*, • •• •r •*.• •• *• L*. • .•■«>• *7- ^'^MCrystai ; :nr;\ccJ Point • •* - DEERING "“PTnoT^ Fasmu^iPoim\;j • • VWlMIll • jTl .-.; .•^. iopo^ ull $40(5 -3£ -r®^7!5^T5T^•^SMi afw.^i niiwet u 1/ / gv »«M>tmuy I U alamrinsfe* I ICKSOM AVI 0 ita ^ • • •wnjMjamu Spring ^. • ■• -- Park ,24Ci ITOUl ' ‘0« U1 * ^ I • Carman « Point S-'^c^UV PRO ii Vv «• • c^COOSE • ■' • ISLAND [caaS" ' - -*• ^.4V • ...,^ V^SPRAY k--point ™ ^ * V . I \'^0 'L HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75' EXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House ______ X 250-500'500-1000' 6 Length X X X Width ■S' B. Garage C. Driveway __ D. Sidewalk E. Patio/Deck F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic G. Other A i .5 X X X X X X X X X 4-5 I I fTA— TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE - B ;y:100 PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House X Length Width B. Garage C. Driveway D. Sidewalk E. Patio/Deck F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic G. Other X X X X X X X X X X X X TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE T cT ^ */ ^ B s.F. C ^1 S.F. /Tj ZZ S.F. l « F W • 4 • S.F. I I '3 s.F.C;^ ^ S.F. S.F. ___ S.F. ___S.F. A B S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. s.F. ^ c cS.F. V _ s.F. 1) X 100 S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. % A B HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75' EXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House - X '. 75-250'' 500-1000’ Length *Width •• • % # B. Garage m C. Driveway. # • D. Sidewalk E. Patio/Deck F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic . G. Other ( X X X X X X X X X X X X S.F. S.F. S.F. SJF. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. TOTAL HARDCOV'ER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZO X 100 S.F. A S.F. B PROPQSEn HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House______________X Length Width D. Garage C. Driveway D. Sidewalk E. PatioA^eck F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic G. Other X X X X X X X X X X X X S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. SJ. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. ’S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. ■ .'.V. ? 4 r' li & •r. TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE + B _ _ xlOO - S.F. S.F. S.F. % A B • / ■ : ,r-;j ;;.'S 5«*B4^’it^.-,'j -.1 v: * -•'mwsm. ~* ~*« H c a'ft '•v. • • 4 <i% ^'1 i*.i-~ s: ’^z\ l M O /I »=di. CS^,‘03^ r* • i: ‘A \^-o- t K,^;, ffc>5T ___\^ \-c«-*-v <>-•?• XX/* — ---------------------- V Ci^v o>;r?o^ vXv,^a\\lM1“ ^ij 1 ■i 1 I 1 <-c. \ '' 1 1 1 ( 1 i 1 ----------------------------------------------\\ # " \ \ ^0<p I 5 AtX>''^V . tVs'L'Jji t>6C-K YKAt^^^E/J KE5 r <iA5^:-e> J,H, Dahlmeier Engineering Inc, September 24, 1998 Paul Hanson 3105 Casco Circle Orono.MN 55391 Re: Boathouse 3105 Casco Circle Orono, MN Commission No. 98212 Dear Paul: The purpose of this leilei is to report the findings of a structural engineering review and provide corrective measures fo; your boathouse on your property. ASSIGNMENT J. H. Dahlmeier Engineering Inc. has been retained to provide a structural engineering review and report including necessary corrective measures for the boathouse on your property located at 3105 Casco Circle, Orono, MN, as directed by Paul Hanson, owner of the property. BACKGROUND The boathouse roof at lake side was severely damaged by the windstonn on May 15, l‘^98. In order to comply with the City of Orono ordinances, stonn damage repair can proceed only after a structural condition study followed by necessary repairs to provide a structurally sound structure. OBSERVATIONS AND COMMENTS 1. A site visit was conducted by J. H. Dalilincicr Engineering Inc. on September 10, 199S to review existing conditions. 2434 ConuiKsce Boulevard Mound, MN 55364 (6121 472-174G FAX (612) 472 4761 Paul Hanson September 24, 1998 Page 2 of 3 2. The following observations were made with respect to the foundation of the boatliouse: 3. a. b. c. d. e. f. The foundation is an S" thick concrete masonrv foundation system. The boathouse is built in the side of the hill vCiih grade at the roof line at the rear and grade at the slab height at the front with grade sloping along the side walls. The structure is ten courses high (7'-4"). The slab on grade provides space appro.ximaiely 10 feet deep with a transverse wood frame wall at this location with backfill approximately 3'-8" above the slab sloping up to the rear foundation approximately 6 feet away. No exploratory work w as done to detemiinc the depth of the footings. Horizontal cracks exist in the masonry side walls indicating frost heave with the wall out of level approximately 1/2" over its length. The rear foundation wall is severely damaged due to e.xcessive earth pressure and frost heave. The following corrective measures are required in order to provide a stRicturally sound toundation conlorming with the Minnesota State Building Code: a. Reconstruct the rear wall with 12" block on 16" x 8" looting a minimum of 5 feet below grade. Reinforce with #4 @ 32" vertical in center of wall with hook dowel into footing. b. Remove wood frame wall and construct new masonry wall 8" thick on 16" x 8" footing wth top of footing 4" below bottom of floor slab. Reinforce with #4 @ 32" vertical in center of wall with hook dowel into footing. Tie this wall to existing pilasters in side wall with #4 dowels @ 16" O.C. grouted in place. c. Underpin front foundation wall and side walls to provide a minimum of ^ feet to bottom of footing on exterior grade. Underpinning to be done in accordance with standard practice 4 feet wide strips. d. Tuckpoint and repair cracked block and other masonry to provide a solid W'all. e. Tooth rear wall to side walls to provide a rigid wall system. f. Construct wood roof system using standard carj>enlry procedures with roof plate anchored to masonry wall in accordance with the Code. g. Provide wood blocking @ 24" O.C. in first two joist spaces with nailing to rear wall top plate in accordance with the Code. 4.Since the boathouse is a utility structure, protection against frost on the interior is not recommended or required in my opinion. Paul Hanson September 24,1998 Page 3 of3 '’>■ ^ -Sis.ered profosional 6.Th;s report addresses foundation and structural condition and design Other iteni^ imv If you have any questions, please contact me. Sincerely, J. H. DAHLMEIER ENGINEERING, INC. H. Dahlmeier, P.E. JIlDilni I hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that 1 am a duly registered professional engineer under the laws of ihA State of Mirtnesota. Minn egistration No. 9212 RUN DATE 07/27/90 RATCH 503 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNERS LIST REPORT NO. PI^35<^01 PAGE PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR 30 20-117-23 39 0008 03129 CASCO CIR M J DOUGALL/NORWEST BK TRSTE NORWEST BANK N A PETER DOUGALL/06916200-0096 6TH B MARQUETTE MPLS MN 55979 36 20-117-23 93 0022 03205 CASCO CIR CONISTON ESTATES INC CONISTON ESTATES INC 7 BROAD ST CHARLESTON SC 29901 38 20-117-23 93 0025 03105 CASCO CIR J PRAUS t C K HAVILAND J PRAUS OCX HAVILAND 3165 CASCO CIR WAYZATA MN 55391 36 20-117-23 93 0026 03195 CASCO CIR B C DOWNEY I B A DOWNEY B C DOWNEY I B A DOWNEY 3195 CASCO CIR WAYZATA MN 55391 30 20-117-23 93 0020 00036 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED D C PLAIN B P L PLAIN D CHARLES PLAIN 3227 CASCO CIR WAYZATA MN 55391 oG 20-117-23 93 0023 03195 CASCO CIR ROBERT M B JUDITH G ROBERT M BOYLAN 3195 CASCO CIRCLE WAYZATA MN 55391 36 20-117-23 93 0026 03165 CASCO CIR G K B D M CARLSON GERALD K B DIANE M CARLSON 3165 CASCO CIRCLE WAYZATA MN 55391 36 20-117-23 93 0029 03135 CASCO CIR ROLAND C AMUNDSON ROLAND C AMUNDSON MINNESOTA JUDICIAL CTR 25 CONSTITUTIONAL AVE ST PAUL MN 55155 38 20-117-23 93 0021 03225 CASCO CIR DAIVD A DOTZENROTH DAVID A DOTZENROTH 3225 CASCO POINT CIR WAYZATA MN 55391 36 20-117-23 93 0029 03105 CASCO CIR J PRAUS B C K HAVILAND J PRAUS B C K HAVILAND 3185 CASCO CIR WAYZATA MN 55391 30 20-117-23 93 0027 03155 CASCO CIR BENJAMIN F ROBERTACCIO ET AL B F B M K ROBERTACCIO 3155 CASCO CIR WAYZATA MN 55391 36 20-117-23 93 0030 03133 CASCO CIR G C BECKER/T I MARCKESSAULT G C BECKER/T I MARCHESSAULT 3133 CASCO CIR ORONO MN 55391 * • U ' r •»- K.:* B II \ — s PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR 36 20-117-23 93 0031 00036 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED THE CASCO CO THE CASCO C'' -PANY ROBERT 0 MACNIE 3135 CASCO CIR WAYZATA MN 55391 TOTAL BATCH 503 00013 ■IKlSliT fiLt: f^ihr^Oo PERMIT NO. _^=SOl iial DATE PERMIT RECORD TYPE OF PERMIT lTITa,h,^ II q-<» P.-hJjj 4 oSCj 9-1'9 3l (go jg-Oi: P7-A^, Ldll 7 '5i-<y A 3^53- >0 Q ■ j! ^3-7 /, ■ ^.7 rq C^t^sU ■J '/ '^^-67 //:>(Ap 37£T? 4'377 C3Z -/7>7P ^•3 5?'l^ ’.’ •• • • * •’ « •- ■ - • • •• * •. ► V *•.•^r . • I j • • Cju.NC/lL REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION NOV 2 3 1998 CITYCFORONO Date; November 19,1998 Item No.8 Department Approval: Administrator Approval: Name: Michael P. Gaffron Title; Senior Planning Coordinator Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: #2417 TOLD Development Co., 2380 Shadywood Road - Request for Amendment to B-5 District Allowed Uses - Public Hearing Zoning District: B-5, Limited Neighborhood Business District Application: Request for an amendment to the B-5 Limited Neighborhood Business District to add a drugstore use to the list of allowed (permitted or conditional) uses. The B-5 District list of allowed uses currently does not include any uses which could be broadly interpreted to include a full-service drugstore as that proposed. Such a use is allowed as a permitted use in the B-1 Retail Sales Business Distric ind in the B-3 Shopping Center Business District. List of 1 .xhibits A - Memo and Exhibits of November 10,1998 November 16 Public Hearing A public hearing was held by the Planning Commission on November 16 to allow public comment on the proposed amendment. Notice was mailed to all property owners within 350' of the 2380 Shadywood Road site as well as all owners of propert>' zoned B-5 in Orono. Because the Planning Commission minutes will not be available for the November 23 council meeting, following is a synopsis of the public comments received: Margaret Jagodzinski. 2300 Olive Avenue - Expressed concerns regarding the condition of the existing site; expressed concerns about lighting, traffic and visual appearance of the final development; wants this project to have as little impact as possible on the neighborhood, and doesn't want a warehouse type building. John Ericson. 1620 Shadywood Road (owns vacant lots adjacent to site) - Doesn ’t have problem with the use but suggested it should not be open all night. #2417 - Amend B-5: Add Drugstore Use November 19,1998 Page 2 Chad Nilsson. 3324 Navarre Lane - Directly across Olive from site, wants site to be landscaped and screened to buffer his home from lights, noise, etc. John O'Sullivan, owner of adjacent Culver's site - Noted he had talked to many businessmen in Navarre and had a petition in favor of this use from both commercial and residential owners in Navarre area (petition was not submitted to staff). Noted that the B-5 zoning was chosen for this site to specifically avoid the B-1 and B-3 potential impacts. Noted that the Walgreen's drugstore use will have significantly fewer impacts than other possible uses. Noted that Walgreens will have a 20-year lease and is a one-tenant site, decreasing City concerns over ever-changing tenants. Noted that lighting will be off when store is closed. Spoke in favor of the zoning amendment. Applicant Comments Applicant Bob Cunningham of TOLD Development noted that the proposed 13,905 s.f. footprint is the smaller prototypical Walgreens building, with others ranging up to 16,000 s.f. He noted they would be willing to stipulate operating hours limited to 9:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. He noted that the normal market radius for Walgreens is approximately 1.5 miles, perhaps slightly greater for this site due to the lake impact on road systems. Plait ning Commission Comments and Recommendation Planning Commission noted an apparent general consensus that if allowed, the drugstore use should be a conditional use. There was discussion about the intent of the B-5 zone, and how this use might fit into other zoning districts as well as the other B-5 sites. A concern was expressed that the City is again asked to amend its zoning without the ability to commit a developer to completing the project that is driving the zoning amendment. Cunningham noted he expects to have Walgreen's committee action on this project on December 7. Mayor Gabriel Jabbour expressed concerns about the City amending its code at the request of individual developers without looking at the overall Navarre picture, 'fhere was also discussion regarding what was intended by adding "drugstore" to the list of conditional uses. Staff noted that the intent of the request was to allow a "full-service" drugstore that is the norm today, not just merely a pharmacy operation. A motion to recommend amending the B-5 district to allow "full-service drugstore" as a conditional use failed on a vote of 3 ayes arJ 4 nays. A second motion, to deny the request for such an amendment based on the proposed use not matching the intent of the B-5 district, carried on a vote of 4 ayes and 3 nays. It was noted that this item would be before the Council on November 23. Planning Commission also voted 7 0 to table the commercial site plan without review, pending a Council conclusion on the zoning amendment. Applicant agreed to this tabling (60-day extension will be formalized). L r #2417 - Amend B-5: Add Drugstore Use November 19, 1998 Page 3 Additional Discussion Please review the staff memo and exhibits of November 10. This is the lird recent zoning code amendment related to the Grace Baptist Church site. The first was rezoning from LR-IC to B-5, a reflection of the idea that this site is perhaps not appropriate for single family residential use given its proximity to Navarre, although it might have been an ideal site for a multiple family use such as townhomes. The second amendment was to allow coffee and bagel shops subject to a bunch of limitations and requirements, perhaps in hindsight an over-reaction to a specific developer's needs to make his development marketable. Both Council and Planning Commission have acknowledged a need to thoroughly review the zoning in Navarre, outside the context of tweaking the B-5 district uses. In staffs opinion, we should ultimately strive toward performance zoning rather than adding to or subtracting from our outdated lists of allowed uses as individual developers appear. However, we are again faced with a request to which we must respond. In staffs opinion the drugstore use is not a bad fit for the "serving the neighborhood, compatible with the neighborhood" intent of the B-5 district. It will not generate excess traffic. It will not have anywhere near the potential noise or lighting impacts of the restaurant or gas station/convenience store use next door. It will provide a use that is acknowledged by many people as needed in the area. However, it is difficult to separate the proposed use amendment from the constraints of this individual site, because this is the only individual site in the B-5 district with enough acreage to be considered for such a use. The B-5 zone contains very few properties, most of which are already developed. It would take the redevelopment of a combination of 2 or 3 existing sites in any of the other B-5 areas to accommodate the drugstore use as it exists in the 1990’s. As a result, it is relatively unlikely that one of those sites would attract a drugstore use. The fact that all of the properties in the B-5 district are subject to a 30% or 35% hardcover limitation due to their proximity to the lake, makes it that much more difficult to accommodate a 10,000- 15,000 s.f. retail building meeting parking and other site requirements. A significant share of the existing B-5 development does not meet the hardcover standards in effect today. Clearly, the church site is difficult to develop due to topography, shape, and the existing and future stormwater pond constraints. Further, it is relatively visible from the adjoining neighborhood, in that it is a 'through lot' bordered on 2 sides by a residential zone, and its slopes will make it somewhat aifficult to buffer from the neighborhood. The current proposal for development of the church site results in excess hardcover due to the building size and the resultant parking requirements, as well as the need to accommodate the delivery and drive-thru functions. As a result, stormwater management on site will likely be difficult, as will hiding the proposed massive retaining walls. #2417 - Amend B-5: Add Drugstore Use November 19,1998 Page 4 Staff Recommendation The "drugstore" or "full-service drugstore" use will not inherently cause a problem for the surrounding neighborhood in any of the B-5 zones, in staffs opinion. Many people have commented that Navarre needs a pharmacy. However, the constraints of this specific site and any of the other potential B-5 sites, make it inherently difficult to develop any B-5 site at the scale required for the drugstore use in its 1990's typical configuration, in a way that fully meets the City’s goals, policies and ordinances. Approval of this amendment will therefore be an acknowledgement that variances to existing City development standards are likely to be needed and likely will be granted. Options for Action 1. 2. 3. Deny the amendment to allow "drugstore" use in the B-5 zone. Direct staff to draft a resolution documenting the reasons for such denial. Approve an amendment to allow "drugstore" use in the B-5 zone as a Conditional Use, directing staff to draft an ordinance amendment for adoption. Table for further review or further information, notify applicant of 60-day review period extension (initial 60-day review period expires December 13, 1998). i CITY OF ORONO P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 473-7357 ZONING FILE #2417 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION DATE OF NOTICE: November 19, 1998 TO;Robert Cunningham TOLD Development Co. 6900 Wedgwood Road, #100 Maple Grove, MN 55311 COPIES: Adam Smith Co. 700 Cedar Street #121 Alexandria, MN 56308 TYPE OF APPLICATION: B-5 Zoning Amendment DATE OF MEETING: 11/16/98 VOTE: 4 FOR 3 AGAINST Planning Commission recommends the following: Denial of the proposed amendment to add "drugstore" to the list of allowed conditional uses in the B-5 Limited Neighborhood Business District, on the basis that the drugstore use is not a good fit in that district. NOTES AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS: Applicant's next scheduled meeting is confirmed as: City Council Monday, November 23, 1998; meeting starts at 7:00 p.m. If you desire certified copies of the official Planning Commission minutes, they are available from the City Recorder after review and approval by the Planning Commission. If you have questions, please call Mike Gaffron at 473-7357. —I r lA’-t ' I ‘li ■ V -J\rTr.«W/ ^ TO: FROM: DATE: Chair Smith and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator Michael P. Gaffron, Senior Planning Coordinator November 10, 1998 SUBJECT: #2417 TOLD Development Co., 2380 Shadywood Road - Request for Amendment to B-5 District Allov/ed Uses - Public Hearing Zoning District: B-5, Limited Neighborhood Business District Application: Request for an amendment to the B-5 Limited Neighborhood Business District to add a dru gstore use to the list of allowed (permitted or conditional) uses. The B-5 District list of allowed uses currently does not include any uses which could be broadly interpreted to include a flill-service drugstore as that proposed. Such a use is allowed as a permitted use in the B-1 Retail Sales Business District and in the B-3 Shopping Center Business District. List of Exhibits A - Application B - Plat Map of Applicant's Proposed Development C - Navarre Area Maps Depicting All Properties Zoned B-5. D - Letter of Request E - Zoning Code Section 10.44: B-5 Limited Neighborhood Business District (Updated to include recent amendments) F - Comprehensive Plan Excerpts Regarding Commercial Areas B-5 District Applicability Exhibit C depicts the 9 individual properties in Orono which are zoned B-5. While the applicant's 1.8 acre kite-shaped property abuts Shadywood Road, the remaining 8 properties all abut Shoreline Drive and are rectangular in shape and significantly smaller, ranging in size from 0.31 acre to 0.76 acre in area. The grouping of 3 parcels adjacent to the Hennepin County truck station totals 2.09 acres, with a depth of about 200'. The furniture store is located on the middle parcel of these three. The grouping of 4 developed parcels west of Navarre Avenue totals 1.54 acres, with a depth of 134.5'. TTie small office building east of Navarre Avenue is on a 0.31 acre parcel. There are no properties zoned B-5 outside of Navarre. The total area contained within the B-5 District is about 5.9 acres. By contrast, the total area of properties in Navarre zoned commercially (B-1, B-3, B-4, B-5) is about 33 acres. "2417 - Amend B-5: Add Drugstore Use November 10,1998 Page 2 B-5 District Purpose The B-5 District purpose as outlined in the zoning code is to "provide a district for businesses that supply commodities or perform a sen/ice primarily fc'' residents in the surrounding neighborhood, which businesses are not high traffic generators and do not necessitate an inordinate amount of hardc ver. The district may adjoin residential districts or other business districts which are subject to more restrictive controls. The district shall have immediate access to adequate highways and public sanitary sewer. Because of the location of the B-5 District as contemplated in the area known as Navarre in the City, the uses are limited in order to limit the hardcover in that area and to limit the future generation of traffic for that property in that use district since there is already a traffic problem in Navarre". Orono's Comprehensive Plan generally recognizes the Navarre area as one of only tvvo commercial areas in the City, noting that Navarre will provide "sufficient opportunity for neighborhood retail and service businesses, plus adequate professional offices, to serve the needs of most Orono residents." (CMP 4-26 "Urban Commercial Land Use") The Comprehensive Plan does not specifically address the intent of the B-5 district, but does note in Urban Land Use Policies (CMP 4-18, Item 6) as follows: "COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT WILL NOT BE PERMITTED TO ADVERSELY AFFECT NEIGHBORING RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY. The location and scale of commercial and industrial development will be controlled so as not to encroach upon the primary residential land uses in Orono. Whereever possible, natural land forms or buffers will be required between different land uses." The allowed uses in the B-5 District include both service and retail businesses, the majority of which are typically not major traffic generators. (See Exhibit E) The current list of conditional uses in B-5 was amended in October 1996 with the deletion of "home and garc. n equipment rental", which was concurrently made a permitted use in the B-1 District. The B-5 was again amended in March 1998 by adding "coffee or bagel retail stores" to the list of allow ed conditional uses, with a number of conditions related to maximum floor area, parking and seating. The list of B-5 conditional uses includes some which may involve higher traffic volumes, or somewhat more intensive use than the permitted uses. For instance, a "candy, ice cream, popcorn, nuts, frozen desserts, soft drinks store" such as the Dairy Queen, has a more intense use of the parking lot and drive thru, and has perhaps more lighting than most of the other allowed retail uses. B-5 also lists "kennels" as a conditional use, which has the potential for disrupting a neighborhood due to noise levels and possibly odors. The "home and garden equipment rental" use was moved out of the B-5 District on the basis that such use could be noisy or create noxious odors, involving the operation of engines, as well as tending toward fenced storage areas which could be visually disruptive. :■ i7 - Amend B-5: Add Drugstore Use November 10, 1998 Page 3 The B-5 District was created in 1975 apparently to accommodate existing businesses adjacent to single family residential areas. The apparent intent was to limit the intensity of uses in the B-5 District to those which would not only be good neighbors, but provide a valuable service to the surrounding neighborhood. Consequently, the number of properties zoned B-5 is extremely limited. Proposed DrugstoreUse The 'drugstore* use as listed in the B-1 and B-3 districts is defined as "Drugs, candv. ice cream, soft drinks, cosmetics and other other usual drug store merchandise ". This listing was apparently created as part of the 1975 zoning code revisions, since it doesn't appear in the 1967 code. The range of merchandise and services associated with a 'drugstore' use has probably changed somewhat since 1975, now' commonly including on-site 1-hour photo processing service and coolers for a range of perishable as well as non-perishable take-away foods. The drive-thru pharmacy is also a relatively recent concept. The sit-down soda fountain is less common than it was in the past. Is ’Drugstore* Use Appropriate in the B-5 District Generally? Planning Commission should consider the following questions in determining whether a drugstore use might be acceptable within the B-5 District: 1. 2. 3. 4. Is the drugstore use consiste.nt with the intent of the B-5 district: Does it supply commodities or perform a service primarily for residents in the surrounding neighborhood, or does it have a wider, more regional market base? Is it a low traffic generator or a high traffic generator? Does it necessitate a reasonable amount of hardcover or an inordinate amount of hardcover? How will the proposed drugstore use impact the neighborhood? Traffic? Lighting? Odors or noises? Hours of operation? On-site parking? Open space? Are these impacts a result of the drugstore use itself, or a result of the size, location, orientation and design of the building regardless of the specific use? Can the identified impacts be mitigated or avoided by adherence to existing performance standards? If not, would it be appropriate to establish additional performance standards? Would the drugstore use be appropriate generally on the other Orono properties zoned B-5, if a suitable B-5 site other than 2380 Shadywood was available? Are any/all of the properties zoned B-5 in Orono, located where a drugstore use would have acceptable impacts on the surrounding neighborhood? #2417 - Amend B-5; Add Drugstore Use November 10,1998 Page 4 5. Is there sufficient available land already appropriately zoned (B-1, B-3) in the Navarre area such that the drugstore use could/should be within one of those zones? 6. Will adding a drugstore use to the B-5 District change the character of the B-5 to such a degree that there is little to distinguish between the B-1 and B-5? How much real difference is there between the B-1 and B-5 now? Given the small size of the Navarre business area, is there any real justification for it to be saddled with 4 different zoning districts now?!? Analysis It is difficult to discuss the B-5 zone in terms of a distinct 'district', because it is made up of three widely separated groups of properties, in locations that inherently have perhaps only slightly more potential impact on adjacent residential uses than our existing B-1 or B-4 district locations. In this respect, there is no stark visual distinction between the existing B-1 and B-5, although our B-1 uses tend to be larger, multiple tenant retail/service buildings. On the other hand, the B-4 has remained primarily office uses as intended, without the retail activity. The B-5 District was created in 1975 to provide limited business activity compatible with the adjacent and surrounding residential uses. The B-5 was also intended to provide for businesses that serve "residents in the surrounding neighborhood" as opposed to a place for City-wide or regional oriented uses. Those uses would be reserved for the B-1 or B-3 Districts. The nature of existing uses in the B-5 to a great extent matches the B-5 goals, i.e. a Dairy Queen, an auto parts store, an animal hospital, low key retail, professional office, furniture store, and (albeit non-conforming) auto repair operation, all tend to serve the surrounding neighborhood. Likewise, the nature of the proposed drugstore use would serve the same general neighborhood ^ea. According to the applicant, the drugstore use would likely draw from a customer base that lives within 1-1/2 to 2 miles away typically, with perhaps a slightly greater distance for the Navarre area due to the linear nature of the road system created by the lake. The drugstore use will not be a regional draw as it is not a major destination and not part of a major shopping complex. In that respect, the drugstore use would seem to be in keeping with the neighborhood intent of the B-5 District. Certain facets of the 'drugstore' use could be inconsistent with the context of the B-5 District. The scale of the typical building constructed for a free-standing drugstore yields a 12,000-15,000 s.f footprint and the need for increased amounts of parking as compared to an office use, and in the case of the proposed Walgreen's, access for semi-trailer trucks and the drive-thru. This all translates to a high degree of hardcover, significantly more than was previously proposed/approved for the 2380 Shadywood Road site, and perhaps more than was contemplated when tlie B-5 zone was created. #2417 - Amend B-5: Add Drugstore Use November 10,1998 Page 5 The two largest existing buildings on B-5 sites in Orono are in the 6,000-8,000 s.f. range, with the remainder being considerably smaller. One of the impacts of larger buildings is the inherently more difficult visual transition to residential. Topography also plays a role here as we see with the Lowell's Auto Parts building with a massive retaining wall behind it. The 2380 Shady wood site is more than twice the area of any other individual B-5 parcel. As a comparison, note that the furniture store building covers about 23% of its site, and the Lowells Auto site has about 29% coverage by structures. The drugstore use proposed on the Shadywood Road site will have approximately 17% lot coverage. One option to consider is whether an upper limit should be established for the footprint size of any freestanding building in the B-5. Orono has not established such limits within the other 'B' districts, allowing the scale of buildings to be dictated by hardcover, lot coverage, parking, yard and setback requirements. However, a building size limit would be one way to maintain the 'neighborhood compatibility' intent of the B-5. Other factors which have a potential impact on the surrounding neighborhood, but which are perhaps less a function of the use and more related to the site planning, include: Change in the visual character of site - loss of trees, topography changes, new views of retaining walls, etc. Impact of lighting Drive-thru and service truck traffic - Hours of operation potentially extending past normal business hours. There are also social impacts to consider: Will the drugstore use become a 'hangout' for kids? - Will the drugstore use promote a more user friendly and vital Navarre? Is the use needed in Navarre? Are other properties available that are already correctly zoned to accomodate the use? - Are there any ramifications of letting the church site remain as-is until a development that is allowed in the B-5 district comes along? If the proposed drugstore use is recommended for approval, Planning Commission should consider whether additional conditional use standards are needed to limit the operation to a scope and level appropriate for the B-5 District. These might include a limit on building size, added screening requirements, limiting hours of operation, etc. Staff Recommendation Planning Commission should discuss whether an amendment to the B-5 district to allow a drugstore use is appropriate. If so, consider whether it should be a permitted use or a conditional use, and whether specific limitations should be established to keep the use within the intent of the B-5 district. #2417 Amend B-5: Add Drugstore Use November 10,1998 Page 6 As an alternative for this applicant, if Planning Commission concludes that the B-5 should not be amended, you may wish to provide some direction as to whether the 2380 Shad>'wood Road site is suitable for the drugstore via a rezoning to B-1, and the potential impacts of such a rezoning should the drugstore then not be constructed. The neighboring properties within 350' of the Shadywood Road site, as well as the owners of all properties zoned B-5; have been notified for this public hearing. It is staffs understanding that the applicant also intends to send a letter to the neighborhood introducing this proposal. Options for Action 1. 2. 3. 4. Recommend approval of the proposed amendment, defining whether the 'drugstore' use should be a permitted use or a conditional use in the B-5 district, and whether additional standards should be attached. Table, direct staff to develop standards to limit the use to be consistent with B-5 intent. Recommend denial, stating reasons. Other. /1-I Application # ^V/7 Date ReceivedT ^ W Amount Paid 3^(X^ CITY OF ORONO - GENERAL LAND USE APPLICATION PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address Highway 19 at (partially vacated) Navarre Lane Type of Application to be Filed ~Zog-iny Amendment______ __ Propert}’ Identification Number (P.I.D.) _______________________ APPLICANT Name told Development Company Phone (homel n/a ___________ ___________ Phone (work) (612)420-9000 Address Aonn PnaH, y/inn____CityMapip nmvp-----------Zip_552JJ— Attn: Robert Cunningham OWNER (if different than applicant) Name AHam Sml th Company Phone (home ) ____________Phone (work ) r32Q’> 763-3886 Address 700 Cedar Street. Suite 121 City Alexandria_______Zip 56308 Date Property Acquired Purchase Agreement executed 7/98_______ I ^^so own the adjacent parcels of land. FEES - CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS - ______S 75.00 For each variance request with CUP application ______SI75.00 Residential Accessory' Use ______'5250.00 Institutional (church, school, etc.) ______$225.00 Guest House/Guest Apartments ______$200.00 Duplex Credit/Bldg ______S300.00 CommercialAndustrial Use ______$250.00 Land Alteration _____ Grading and filling - designated wetland or floodplain _____ Grading and filling - 501 cu. yd. or mere _____ Grading, seawall, retaining walls within 75’ of lakeshore ______PRD/PID - see Fee Schedule ______$150.00 Renewal Fee (no change from original application) ______After-the-Fact Fee - Double Current Application Fee (month/year) S_r.M tTfsrvr^=1V 0 9 OTHER APPLICATIONS ______$250.00 Commercial Site Plan Review (+ consultant fees) ______$300.fy0 Vacation ______$200.00 Easement Vacation ______$100.00 Easement Vacation With Subdivision ______$350.00 Rezoning (PUD - refer to fee schedule) _____ $350.00 Comprehensive Plan Amendment ______$100.00 Appeals ^ . Other - see Fee Schedule ' 5-y REQUIRED SUBMITTALS 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. Completed Application Form. Describe request in detail. Certified Property Owners List of owners within 350', labels and plat map (you must obtain this list, labels and map from Hennepin County Department of Finance, A-603, Government Center, 348-3271). Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) - refer to handout for survey information. Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. Topographic survey (existing and proposed contours) if land alterations involve changes in elevation (grades). List of the legal names (include marital status) of all persons with an interest in the property. This would include nan)e(s) of applicant(s) if not current owner(s). Construction plan, if applicable (sec staff for requirements). As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you v\dsh notified of this application. you ARE REQUIRED TO SUPPLY 30 COPIES OF LARGE DOCUMENTS OR COPY FOR REPRODUCTION (11" X 17" OR SMALLER) FOR ALL DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED. (Staff will require to scale drawings of all documents, plans, etc. to be submitted.) The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your application is not complete if the above information has not been included. Certification by Clerical Department that Land Use Application is complete. Initials of Clerical Staff: Date APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment) and/or unusual expenses inOurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is,.(tijije|aid correct to the best of his^er knowledge. Applicant’s signature Date OWNER'S SIGNATURE The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorized reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents, commission members, and Council members for purposes of investigation and verification of this request. Owner's signature Date Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. REQUIRED SUBMITTALS 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. Completed Application Form. Describe request in detail. Certified Property Owners List of owners within 350', labels and plat map (you must obtain this list, labels and map from Hennepin County Department of Finance, A-603, Government Center, 348-3271). Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) - refer to handout for surv'ey information. Attach legal description to application if not included on required surv'ey. Topographic survey (existing and proposed contours) if land alterations involve changes in elevation (grades). List of the legal names (include marital status) of all persons with an interest in the property. This would include name(s) of applicant(s) if not current owner(s). Construction plan, if applicable (see staff for requirements). As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. YOU ARE REQUIRED TO SUPPLY 30 COPIES OF LARGE DOCUMENTS OR COPY FOR REPRODUCTION (11" X 17" OR SMALLER) FOR ALL DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED. (Staff will require to scale drawings of all documents, plans, etc. to be submitted.) The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your application is not complete if the above information has not been included. Certification by Clerical Department that Land Use Application is complete. Initials of Clerical Staff: _____________________.Date------------------------------------ APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment) and/or unusual expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is;|tijil; ^id correct to the best of his/her knowledge. f((.giU/^(--- Date pJMApplicant's signature 0^\^S^ER'S SIGNATURE The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorized reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents, commission members, and Council members for purposes of investigation and verification of this request. Owner's signature MAOkE Date Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meetmg. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commbsion and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please ma.ke arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. Aug-19-98 08:B1A Adam Smith Pr-oper-t. i es , l_LC FILE No. 622 08.'19 * 93 06:44 1D:T0LD DEVELOPrtNT 612 420 7574 P . 02 PwGE 2 A'3> REQUIRED SUBMITTALS 1. _____ Completed Application Fonn. 2. ______ Describe request in detail. 3. _____ Cenified Property Owners List of owners within 350*, labels and plat map (you must obtain this list, labels and map from Hennepin County Depanmeni of Finance, A-603, Government Center, 348-3271). 4. _____ Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) - refer to handout for survey information. ^ Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. Topographic survey (existing and proposed contours) if land alterations involve changes in elevation (grades). List of the legal names (include marital status) of all persons with an interest in the property. This would include name(s) of applicam(s) if not current owner(s). _____ Construction plan, if applicable (sec staff for requirements). _____ As an addendum to this application, please artach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. YOU ARE REQUIRED l O SUPPLY 30 COPIES OF LARGE DOCUMENTS OR COPY FOR REPRODUCTION (11” X 17'* OR SMALLER) FOR ALL DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED. (Staff will require to scale drawings of all documents, plans, etc. to be submitted.) The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please reiuember that your application is not complete if the above information has not been included. Certification by Clerical Department lhai Land Use Application is complete. Initials of Clerical Staff:___________________________Date------------------------------------- 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment) and/or unusual expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the inforrnation supplied is true and correct to the best of lusher lotowlcdge. Applicant's signature Date mmm • ■ •• • OWNER’S SIGNATURE The owner hereby aclcnowlcdgcs and agrees to this application and further authorized reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consuUanw, agents, coi^isaion members, and Council members for purposes of investigation and verincation of this lequesL Owner's signature wr ir iNa! rril 1 ADDENDUM Property owners include: North Central Conservative Baptist Association (deed holder) Adam Smith Company (contract for deed holder) Meridian Properties Real Estate Development LLC (d^/a TOLD Development Company) is the Purchaser under a Purchase Agreement by and between same and Adam Smith Company '11V.•fir. %VeJ>*2 |V> % Apr»> fc v/(6s/? ^ '^f<' 7(r ‘oV^2^ -t:5 V , . /i27/7i.f •*•'>- '-0^ ^'"' ~ 1 ;/V/7 ■ ^* Z." ;?>/ 35«/- -.PS.---/' n > .'y »■■/ ,^i' y v- /‘^\ ^ v>-' jc_! s6_ 7 ’^ 6 ^ (65) (64; 5C 50« >! 50u- p;V JO ^ i5^4 - (63)(62'/ * / 1 1 44-: [15^. • • a * 50 50 11 50 50 ®5 /\ ' 5C N50 (66^»r» '• 2!^22-!2’^ 1 V 1 • '11 • 1 V*, (M2) !0 50 OT 5*23*58 C79t^. C"'^> -oSlpiFY^ »\<"«' cc:lo: c (94) ****'’i*'****’ • .*.«. t*^«. r. . . .V.'.V.*.*.-.\ ««At •• «•« •« «. 4 • • J 7- 24 T 25 n' 2^^(W) I > ...i.... “pjr>S'55’sj65- -J»LL-2313__ a /nax \ 002^ X^ Wi^'- ^ h"9' T: \\ ^^J*/ (85) \ A' ^Cvi *> S (ICO) 1 [ 104 5 ! *:: I *______________• f y /i»3 ------------------3!5 32 -------------- (34) .•••• 3;5.?2 - ;!,, \ V , 24. r N? 20C5;09^ X . - - *y^“v fisi^ !■>.,N '. '•A c'^A \ 'C 66'^ ^—)5ItIss2 3 1 (46) ,.,^5'5'«- '?i» ^'V-'WC-ij- \'.S>s <p.4^* //? <X'B’ •X\^- 279 o 273.42 S67-25''yt (17)<?> ' O i^ •<!>. ^ ' X O'^/^.:,.’^^ hi)jSii / i / Project Description The applicant, Meridian Properties Real Estate Development LLC (d/b/a TOLD Development Company) is requesting i.) approval for the site plan, ii.) requisite text amendment to the B5 zoning to allow for the proposed use, and Hi.) variance for the hard surface calculation in order to construct a Walgreen ’s Drug Store at the northeast comer of Highway 19 and Navarre Lane (vacated). Submitted herewith are the following: Survey (Cl) Preliminary Grading and Drainage Plan (C2) Title Sheet (T.O) Site Plan (ASl) Landscape Plan (LI) Elevation (A2) The pr -osed project, as noted above, is a Walgreen ’s Dmg Store. The building is 13,905 square feet and is approximately 105' wide by 135’ long. The proposed building is predominately brick on all four elevations with some glazing and drivit on the south and west elevations. The site plan calls for 74 parking stalls. Additionally, the building features a two-lane drive-through prescription pick-up and drop-off lane on the east elevation and a truck pad and a trash enclosure on the north side of the building. The site totals 84,312 square feet. The applicant. Meridian Properties Real Estate Development LLC will own the building and lease the building to Walgreen Company on a long term lease. Therefore, we are proposing a building that meets the exact specifications and criteria of Walgreen Company. Walgreen Company has some 2,500 stores in 34 states. They are, therefore, by anybody ’s definition, a national retailer. However, it is important to note that their focus is being a neighborhood retailer. In traditional areas, r preponderance of their customers come from a mile and a half radius of the store. Given this particular store location, we would still consider Walgreens to be a neighborhood retailer, but serving a slightly larger geographic neighborhood due to the proximity of Lake Minnetonka and shopping patterns. The store is 135' deep by 105' deep and fits the prototypical Walgreen Company “footprint ”. This design is being replicated nation wide and is the result of painstaking store development and market analysis, which is intended to ser\'e the need of the Walgreen customer thoroughly and efficiently. The proposed drive-through prescription pick-up and drop-off, on a nation wide basis, serves a average of six cars per hour. Therefore, it is not comparable to either a bank or fast food driv'e- through facility in its intensity of use, as it is much less intense. The drive-through is intended as convenience to Walgreen ’s customers. Only prescription medications, and no other goods, will be sold through the drive-through. The north elevation features the trash enclosure and the delivery area. The trash enclosure shall be constructed of the same brick material as the building and will screen a trash compactor of moderate size. The delivery area is designed to accommodate a normal sized tractor-trailer delivery vehicle, as Walgreen Company distributes to their stores from a central warehouse in this marmer. A typical Walgreen’s store will have approximately one visit from a Walgreen’s delivery truck per week, with other deliveries being made by other vendors throughout the week. The delivery area is a concrete pad that is on grade (and does not have either a recessed truck dock or a raised truck dock). Access to the building at this location is through double steel doors. The building entry is oriented towards the intersection of Highways 15 and 19. There is signage planned on both the west elevation (Highway 19) and south elevation. There is an entry element on the proposed elevations that features the Walgreen’s logo of a mortar and pestle design, as well. Fin ally, we are proposing a pylon sign a south tip of the property. The parking field for the proposed project is predominately to the south and to lesser extent to the west of the building. This puts the parking away from the residential to the north and to the east of the site. The overall site plan shows a cross access agreement with the adjacent Texaco/Culvers property. The site plan also shows some face to face parking along the common property line of the site and the Texaco/Culvers. There is, however, no common ownership of the properties. There is circulation on all sides of the building. The circulation on the east and north sides of the building to allow for prescription drive-through traffic is appropriately sized to accommodate the turning radius of the aforementioned delivery truck. The storm water pond continues in its present location, but is reshaped to accommodate the site plan. Additional storm water detention may be required, and if so, will be accommodated underground. Due to the topography of the site and the surrounding area, there will be retaining walls both to the north and to the east of the site. There is a combination of grass and tree landscaping along the Highway 19 frontage and to the rear (north) of the building. Additional trees are planned on the parking islands. The landscaped areas will be irrigated to insure the health and vitality of plants and the grass area. Ingress and egress to the site is accommodated through a driveway located at the very north end of the site and with a driveway located at the very south end of the site. As aforementioned, there is a cross easement with the adjacent Texaco/Culvers, as well. We plan to have no access (other than pedestrian access) to Olive Lane. I We are pleased to be presenting this proposed development to the staff, planning commission, and city council of the City of Orono. We feel that the proposed Walgreen’s development will serve a need in the community and is well located as Highway 15 and Highway 19 can be considered the “Crossroads of the Lake Minnetonka Area”. As the area is already served by a supermarket, hardware store, bank, auto related businesses, and restaurants, we are convinced that a Walgreen’s Drug Store would be a positive addition to this location. Thank you for your consideration of this proposal. SEC. 10.44. B-5 LIMITED NEIGHBORHOOD BUSINESS DISTRICT. Subd. 1 . Purpose. The "B-5" Limited Neighborhood Business District is intended to provide a district for businesses that supply commodities or perform a ser\'ice primarily for residents in the surrounding neighborhood, which businesses are not high traffic generators and do not necessitate an inordinate amount of hardcover. The district may adjoin residential districts or other business districts which are subject to more restrictive controls. The district shall have immediate access to adequate highways and public sanitary sewer. Because of the location of the "B-5" District as contemplated in the area known as Navarre in the Cit>*, the uses are limited in order to limit the hardcover in that area and to limit the future generation of traffic for that property' in that use district since there is already a traffic problem in Navarre. ORONO CC 347 (4-1-84) § 10.44 e Subd. 2. Application. All applications for a building permit in any "B-5" Limited Neighborhood Business District shall be reviewed by the Council and referred to the Planning Commission for review'. Subd. 3. Permitted Uses. Within any "B-5" Business District, no structure or land shall be used except for one of the following uses or uses deemed similar by the Council: A. Municipal buildings. B. Offices. C. Clinics. D. Art and school supply store. E. Book and magazine store. F. Office supply store. G. Banks, loan company, insurance company, real estate office. H. Barbership, beauty shop. I. Camera and photograph supply store. J. Locksmith. K. Hobby shop. L. Gift store. M. Glassware and pottery. N. Antique store. O. Jewelry store. P. Watch repair. Q. Library. R. Museum. S. Record shop. T. Music store. U. Tobacco shop. V. Galleries. W. Pet shop. Subd. 4. Conditional Use. • A. Within any "B-5" Limited Business District, no structure or land shall be used for one of the following uses except by conditional use permit: store. 1. 2. J. 4. Candy, ice cream, popcorn, nuts, frozen desserts, soft drink Diycleaning store. Tailor shop. Pressing and shoe shine shop. ORONO CC 348 (4-1-84) § 10.44 5.Laundry and cleaning pick-up stations. ■Home and garden equipment rental. Deleted via Ordinance No. 152, 2nd Series Effective Date 10-28-96 7. Veterinary clinic. 8. Kennels. 9. Coffee or bagel retail stores, subject to the following conditions: a. No more than 50% of the gross floor area of any single building shall be devoted to coffee and/or bagel retail stores. b. No individual coffee or bagel retail store use shall exceed 2,000 s.f. of gross floor area. A combined coffee and bagel retail store use shall not exceed 4,000 s.f. of gross floor area. c. The number of incremental parking spaces required for the coffee and/or bagel retail store use shall be calculated using the zoning code parking requirement standard for restaurant uses. Applicant shall demonstrate that the total parking needs for the site will be met. d. An individual coffee or bagel retail store use shall be limited to a maximum of 45 seats. A combined coffee and bagel retail store use shall be limited to a maximum of 60 seats. Source: Ordinance 170,2nd Series Adopted: 3-23-98 B. Off-Street Parking. Off-street parking when the principal site of the off-street parking abuts on a lot which is in another "B" or "I" District and is in the same ownership as the land in the "B" or ”1" District and subject to those conditions as set forth in Section 10.61, Subdivision 4 and other such conditions as found necessary by the Council. C. Public Service Structures. Including, but not limited to, electric transmission lines in buildings such as telephone exchange stations, booster or pressure stations, elevated tanks, lift stations and electric power substations. Personal wireless services and commercial broadcasting antennas and towers shall not be considered essential services. Source: Ordinance 161,2nd Series , Adopted: 5-27-97 ORONO CC 349 (4-1-84) § 10.44 Subd. 5. Accessory Uses. Within any "B-5" Limited Neighborhood Business District, the following uses shall be permitted accessory uses: A. Garages, Etc. Private garages, off-street parking and loading spaces, as regulated in this Chapter. B. Signs. Signs, as regulated in this Chapter. C. Temporary Buildings. Buildings temporarily located for purposes of construction on the premises for a period of not to exceed time necessary' to complete said construction. D. Landscaping. Decorative landscaping features. E. Fences. Fences, as regulated in this Chapter. F. Incidentals. Any incidental repair or processing necessary to conduct a permitted principal use, provided that the incidental use shall not exceed 30% of the floor space of the principal building. G. Public Telephone Booths. Subd. 6. Area, Height, Lot Width, Setback Requirements and Design Requirements. A. Area. The minimum lot size shall be 20,000 square feet. B. Lot Width. The minimum lot width shall be 100 feet. C. Front Yards. The minimum front yard shall be 20 feet. D. Rear Yards. The minimum rear yard shall be 30 feet; side yard adjacent to "R" District shall be 15 feet; side yard adjacent to street shall be 10 feet. E. Setback Requirement*:. No building shall be nearer than 35 feet to any front lot line, 35 feet from any rear lot line, 15 feet from any side lot line, 35 feet to side lot line adjacent to street; except abutting or across the street from an "R" District, no building shall be less than 35 feet from such lot line. F. Fencing. WTierever a "B-5" Limited Neighborhood Business District abuts an "R" District, along the side or rear lot line, a fence or compact evergreen hedge no less than 50% opaque- nor less than six feet in height shall be erected along the abutting lines except within the required front yard. G. Building Design and Construction. In addition to other restrictions of this Chapter, the use, construction, alteration or enlargements to any building or structure within the district shall meet the following standards: 1. All exterior wall finishes on any building shall be: (a) Face brick, or, (b) Natural stone, or, (c) Specially designed precase concrete units if the surfaces have been integrally treated with an applied decorative material or texture, or. ORONO CC 350 (4-1-84) § 10.44 (d) Factory fabricated and finished metal- framed panel construction, if the panel materials be of any of those noted in Items (a), (b) and (c) above, or glass. (e) Other materials as may be approved by the Council. Combinations of such materials shall be permitted. 2. All subsequent additions and outbuildings constructed after the erection of an original building or buildings- shall be constructed of materials comparable to those used in the original construction and shall be designed in a manner conforming with the original architectural design and general appearance. • 3. No building or structure of a temporary character, trailer, basement, tent or shack shall be constructed, placed or maintained upon the property e.xcept as accessory to and during the construction of permanent bui'dings. H. Drainage. No land shall be developed and no use shall be permitted that results in water runoff causing floods, erosion, or deposits on adjacent properties. Site and drainage plans shall be submitted by the applicant in such detail as required by the Council and those plans shall be reviewed by the City Engineer before submission to the Planning Commission and Council for approval. Such runoff may be required to be properly channeled into a natural water course, ponding area, storm drain or other public facilities. Any change in grade affecting water runoff whether onto adjacent property or otherwise must be in compliance with the Surface Water Management Plan and shall be consistent with other applicable regulations or City Code provisions and subject to the approval of other agencies having jurisdiction over the area affected by the drainage. Source: Ordinance No. 172 Effective Date: 1-1-75 I. Height. No stmcture or building shall exceed 2-1/2 stories or thirty feet in height except as provided in Section 10.75. Source: Ordinance No. 188 Effective Date: 11-22-76 ORONO CC 351 (4-1-84) LAND USE JUNE, 1980 lAND USE GOALS AND POLICIES Pf- ^ H-zL> Orono's Land Use Plan is based upon the following goals and policies which in turn have been actively developed by Orono residents over the last 25 years. LAND USE GOALS 1. TO REINFORCE ORONO'S ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION COMMITMENT. 2. TO MAINTAIN THE HISTORIC IDENTITY AND CHARACTER OF THE SEPARATE URBAN AND RURAL NEIGHBORHOODS. 3.TO PROVIDE APPROPRIATE PLACES FOR A VARIETY OF LOCAL RESIDENTIAL, EDUCATIONAL, RECREATIONAL, INDUSTRIAL AND NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES. 4. TO PROTECT NEIGHBORHOODS FROM ENCROACHMENT OF INCOMPATIBLE LAND USES. 5. 6. TO COORDINATE ORONO'S LAND USES WITH THAT OF NEIGHBORING COMMUNITIES. TO COORDINATE LAND USES AND DEVELOPED DENSITY WITH THE FINANCIAL AND PHYSICAL CAPABILITIES OF THE CITY AND ITS CITIZENS TO PROVIDE THE NECESSARY PUBLIC FACILITIES AND SERVICES. GFNFRAL LAND USE POLICIES 1.THE METROPOLITAN URBAN SERVICE AREA (MUSA) IS FIXED. Orono's Urban Service Area (MUSA) and Sewer Service Area (MSSR) are fixed by this and the other elements of the Community Management Plan and are legally described by Resolution of the City Council as shown on Map No. 6. 2.ORONO'S LAND USE PLANS WILL BE BASED UPON ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION POLICIES. Land use and development must assure the conservation, protection and preservation of sensitive environmental resources in accordance with the goals and policies of the Environmental Protection Plan. Land use policies will encourage the wise use and management of natural resources while prohibiting their misuse, abuse, overuse or exploitation. CMP 4-12 i i i i ti i 8 I 1 LAND^SE JUNE, 1980 3. DEVELOPMENT DENSITY WILL BE LIMITED THROUGHOUT THE CITY TO A LEVEL WHICH WILL NOT OVERLOAD THE NATURAL SURFACE WATER DRAINAGE AND FILTRATION SYSTEM. Urbanization inert.ases the speed and quantity of surface runoff while decreasing the water quality. Developed land use densities will be determined by comparison between known levels of volume and pollution generation and known marshland capacity for ponding and nutrient assimilation. 4. THE WETLANDS AND MARSHLANDS OF THE CITY V7ILL BE PROTECTED AND PRESERVED AS WILDLIFE HABITATS, AS UNIQUE OPEN SPACES, AND AS THE ONLY ECONOMICALLY PRACTICAL METHOD OF FLOOD PROTECTION AND STORM WATER RUNOFF FILTRATION. Wetlands, drainageways and floodplains will be protected from encroachment and from alteration or destruction by filling, grading, excavation or drainage. Wherever possible, the City will acquire open space and flowage ease­ ments for conservation wl these lands. 5. PROTECTION OF LAKE RESOURCES WILL ALLOW REASONABLE ACCESS, USE AND ENJOYMENT WHILE PREVENTING OVERCROWDING AND EXCESSIVE ENCROACHMENT. In conformance with Mn. DNR Shoreline Management regulations for recreational development lakes, Orono will prohibit overly dense development within 1,000 feet of Lake Minnetonka. Lake use regulations will be promoted to limit excessive boat density and overuse of sensitive bays. Land use regulations will be developed to provide reasonable control over building density, land alteration and lakeshore encroachment. I I i I 6. LAKE SHORELINES WILL BE PROTECTED FROM ALTERATION. Shoreland areas, whether bluff, beach or floodplain, are sensitive environmental features with significant impact on lake water quality, aesthetic values and land use function. These same factors act to draw development which can be destructive if not properly regulated. Natural vegetation in shoreland areas will be preserved insofar as practical and reason­ able in order to retard surface runoff and soil erosion, and to utilize excess nutrients. Clear- cutting will be prohibited. In areas of soil or wave action erosion, material stone rip rap shoreline protection will be encouraged. CMP 4-13 I JUNE, 1980 LAND USE 1 7. Most of the C y within desi9nated applio.ble to ‘hose areas. in eddition whe« floodplains do °" °"®'“^^teration willlands construction, filling or htstrictly controlled so as to avoid flow damage or pollution dangers. 8. natural resource investigation will be required as part or ALL Development proposals. This topographical information, soil drainage plans, vegetation plans, erosion control measures and ® ® ^licrelated to each project, whether public or private 9. ORONO'S LAND USE PLAN WILL PROMOTE THE RESERVATION OF OPEN SPACE, ??GHT AND AIR. sufficient open spaces w^l ‘a p^ovldefir^ch neighborhood and on each lot ?rprevent overcrowding and to eE“‘‘ light, air and recreation for all residents. PUBLIC CONlKUii. including open space and stewardship of the 1*"^' j^’ored over and many types of best and most S:n^fLran"e^re:L"oriht%roperty owner and the public, providing for more responsive and economical land manag 11.all land oilers must have E9UE^^° oeortunities . NO land owner should be denied the right to develop his land tSie banking or no-growth P „ithin thedevelopment can be accomplished within tne perforLnce standards, ments of the Community Management Plan. FUTURE DEVELOPMENT MUST ENHANCE THE land development should respect and -h^ca neighboring properties and ‘“‘‘‘”|be c!ty! character of the neighborhood and the City, preserving the value of the land ‘‘a integrity, stability and beauty of the community. CMP 4-14 a g a i a i n a [AND USE JUNE, 1980 a a a a a 13. FUTURE DEVELOPMENT MUST ENHANCE THE ENVIRONMENT. Land development should respect and enhance the unique natural features of the site and the general environmental assets of the community. Preservation of natural views, vegetation, drainage and general respect for unique site features always produces more aesthetic results and lasting value for the property owner and the community than does wholesale alteration of the landscape or mathematical division to the highest possible density. 14. PHYSICAL IMPROVEMENTS REQUIRED TO ACCOMMODATE NEW DEVELOPMENT MUST BE PROVIDED BY THE DEVELOPER. Whenever required. Improvements must be provided by the developer. Because the City has limited staff and limited bonding potential, physical improvements such as roads, drainage and utilities required to accommodate new subdivisions or development should be designed, financed and installed directly by the benefited developer as a precondition to increased land use density. In addition, this philosophy includes developer responsibility for special fire protection equipment or devices in the case of unusual land uses or building configura­ tions, and/or special security services in the case of unusual public safety situations. 15. ALL PHYSICAL IMPROVEMENTS MUST CONFORM TO CITY STANDARDS. Physical improvements related to health, safety or community systems such as roads, pathways, drainage or utility systems will be designed, located and constructed to uniform. City- established standards to ensure proper functioning and compatibility with overall City plans. 16. DEVELOPERS MUST DEDICATE LANDS REQUIRED FOR PUBLIC USE. Land subdivision or any development that results in increased land use density, and hence increased demand for municipal services, will be expected to include public dedication of lands necessary for additional road rights of way, parks, playgrounds, open space, ponds or storm water holding areas whenever such facilities are directly used by the subdivided land or required by such density increase. SI CMP 4-15 JUNE, 1980 land U.^ r€ the individual development’s density increase ?™Lnt irrelatively small, or the layout rs or impact xs r ^^nd dedication, then innot conducxve to public lana ae ^o„„ired to lieu of lands the developer may be Tuc^ t or ?ne‘tnr rer»rty^r:rean r:rr'x"pre%.au a=vaiop.ents. c2a^Se MSTI« AlTsSl^^rP^R ^rPROPoipUSriHSM^CE Bhii rra;acrrara tr-Traa-rr n:: • safely used for the intended purpose , aanoer ll health, without peril from fire, flooa or other occurrence ana without unaue impact upon neighboring properties• No land will be permitted to be subdivided or Sru=rhrLrr^ri^ra ra-rL! ar^oraf «ptr?t?rr :r:nyr?L^ to be harmful to the health, safety, « the future resiaents of the proposea subaivrsion or of the community. ^^pp/VN I AND POLICIES. 1.or :s.!“ “.ss™ “““““ of sensitive environmental * i^°ter t^ multi-family residential uses wxll locations near existing shopping an P qq services, but will not be appropriate within 1,000 feet of the shoreline of Lake Minnetonka. CMP 4-16 3 LAND USE JUNE, 1980 a a u a n * 2. LIMITED COMMERCIAL AREAS WILL BE PROVIDED FOR NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICE BUSINESSES. The primary function of Orono's commercial areas will be to provide those retail, commercial and service businesses which are directly necessary to serve Orono's urban and rural residents. Commercial development will be limited to areas where full urban services. Including municipal sanitary sewer and adequate transportation are available. Commercial development of a regional nature which would duplicate existing services in the neighboring town centers will be discouraged. 3. LAKESHORE COMMERCIAL AREAS WILL BE PROVIDED FOR PUBLIC ACCESS AND LIMITED LAKE-USER SERVICES. Orono's residents and other lake users require lake access, fishing supplies, boat service and boat repair facilities which are unique to our location on a recreational development lake. Orono's Land Use Plan will provide locations for such special-purpose businesses where appropriate from both the land use and the lakeside environmental standpoint. Mo use or location will be permitted to adversely affect the lake quality or the public's general usage of the lake. All lakeshore commercial Is to be limited to areas where full urban services. Including municipal sanitary sewer, and adequate transportation are available. 4. a a I 5. THE CITY WILL ENCOURAGE PRIVATE UNIFICATION AND COORDINATION OF THE EXISTING COMMERCIAL AREAS. Unplanned strip commercial developments will be discouraged. Coordinated projects designed to aesthetically enhance, unify and Identify the business areas will be encouraged. V7^ FUTURE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT WILL BE LIMITED TO THE AREA OF THE EXISTING INDUSTRIAL PARK. No other location in Orono combines the availability of transportation and public utilities with remoteness from sensitive environmental features. In addition, this land use Is entirely consistent with Long Lake's neighboring industrial development. CMP 4-17 LAND USg JUNE, 1980 6. COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT V7ILL NOT BE PERMITTED TO ADVERSELY AFFECT NEIGHBORING RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY. The location and scale of commercial and industrial development will be controlled so as not to encroach upon the primary residential land uses in Orono. Wherever possible, natural land forms or buffers will be required between different land uses. 7. PUBLIC URBAN SERVICES MUST BE AVAILABLE FOR ALL FUTURE COMMERCIAL, INDUSTRIAL AND URBAN-RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT. Commercial, industrial and urban-density residential uses will be permitted only where municipal sanitary sewer, adequate transportation, police and fire protection services are available. In addition, commercial, industrial and multi-family residential development will be permitted only where a municipal water system is available for adequate water supply and fire protection. 8. URBAN DEVELOPMENT WILL UTILIZE THE CAPACITY OF EXISTING PUBLIC FACILITIES. New land uses and development will be allowed to infill existing vacant properties within the urban service area consistent with environmental limitations and with the existing capacities of water, sewer, drainage transportation and recreational facilities. New development will not be permitted to overburden these services at the expense of the existing users. New urban development will not be permitted if it requires additional unplanned local or regional facilities capacity. 9. THE EXISTING URBAN AREA WILL NOT BE EXPANDED. Orono's Community Management Plan is not a staged growth plan. The urban service area will not be expanded into the rural area and urban services and facilities will not be extended into the rural area for purposes of fostering or allowing increased development in those areas. 10. THE DESIGN AND DENSITY OP URF>vN DEVELOPMENT WILL BE CONTROLLED TO ASSURE PROTECTION OF LIGHT, AIR AND SOLAR ACCESS FOR NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES. Requirements for minimum lot size, amounts of open space, minimum yard setbacks, and maximum building heights will be designed to assure protection of these values for all urban residents. CMP 4-18 I d i LAND USE JUNE, 1980 i 11. A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF NATURAL WOODLANDS AND OPEN SPACE WILL BE RETAINED ON EACH PROPERTY. Retention of the natural environment requires careful siting and preservation of trees and open space on each urban property. 12. LAND USE STANDARDS WILL LIMIT THE IMPACT OF URBAN ENCROACHMENT ON LAKE MINNETONKA. Minimum lot width will space out docks and structural encroachments while increasing areas of natural vegetation. Lake use regulations will limit the number of boats per property and the amount of public waters available for private docking and boat storage. 13. RETENTION OF NATURAL VEGETATION WILL LIMIT THE IMPACT OF URBANIZATION AS VISIBLE FROM THE LAKE. Building heights will be limited to less than the typical tree height. Minimum green belts will be provided with pro­ hibitions against clearcutting or excessive thinning of vegetation. Natural vegetation will be preserved on slopes and retaining walls will be discouraged except when absolutely necessary to prevent erosion, in which case they will be screened with natural vegetation. RURAL LAND USF POLICIES i i i 1. OROHO'S RURAL SERVICE AREA WILL BE RESERVED FOR PERMANENT LOW-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL LAND USE. Orono's rolling rural .area is not suitable for commercial agriculture. Likewise, the delicate balance of storm water nutrient loading vs marshland assimilative capacity preclude expansion of the urban service area without major environmental problems for Lake Minnetonka. Therefore, the ideal land use for that portion of Orono located outside of the Urban Service Area (MUSA) is the planned low-density rural residential land use. Commercial and industrial uses will not be permitted in the rural area. a CMP 4-19 LAND USE JUNE, 1980 URBAN COMMERCIAL LAND USE y Urban commercial development is limited to two areas which are provided with all the necessary urban services and facilities. The major commercial center of Orono will continue to be the crossroads center of Navarre. This area will provide sufficient opportunity for neighborhood retail and service businesses, plus adequate professional offices, to serve the needs of most Orono residents. Accessory functions such as offices and owner- oocupied living units or limited multi-family developments will be considered appropriate in or near the Navarre commercial area. An additional limited commercial area is designated on Highway 12 adjacent to similar land uses in the City of Long Lake. This area has utilities available from the City of Long Lake and will provide neighborhood services complimentary to those available in that City. LAKESHORE COMMERCIAL LAND USE Lake access and lake user service businesses are appropriate for a lakeside community and require a lakeshore location. Special performance standards are necessary to assure protection of the lake environment and protection of neighboring properties. The primary purpose is to permit those functions that are directly necessary to support normal lake-use activities such as boat launching, boat service, boat repairs and fishing supplies. Lakeshore commercial areas are not intended for typical retail activities, including boat sales, which could be accomplished away from the lake. Accessory functions such as parking, winter storage and caretaker facilities will be appropriate in the lakeshore commercial areas. One lakeshore commercial are* is inoicated on the Land Use Plan along Maxwell Bay where resorts an ! *»»-inas have historically existed. Sanitary sewer is available for boat, //a-ti ;.ation purposes. Expansion of the existing facilities is limited however by surrounding residential neighborhoods, lack of public transportation, and environmental constraints including a crowded bay. Therefore, only the one contiguous area is considered appropriate for dedication to this use. Additional lakeshore commercial facilities do exist along County Road 15 north of Tanager Lake Bridge. This area has fewer transportation and environmental problems than Maxwell Bay, but it is not designated in this Plan for commercial use because municipal sewer and other urban services are not available. This area would be considered for future lakeshore commercial designation should sanitary sewer become available as projected in the CSPP Facilities Plan. CMP 4-26 ^TOLD DEVELOPMENT COMPANY l>-t August 19,1998 City of Orono 2750 Kelly ParUay Orono, MN 55356 Dear Sir or Madam: TOLD Development Company is making application for Site Plan Review and an Amendment to current zoning code (or re-zone) for the propert>' located along County Road 19 (partially vacated) at Nevar Lane. We are proposing to; 1) demolish the existing, abandoned church, 2) re-grade the site, 3) construct a free standing Walgreens Drug Store. The Walgreens Drug Store will total approximately 13,905 square feet with approximately 67 parking stalls and a dual drive through prescription lane. The building will be brick on all four elevations and will include a brick wall for screening the truck loading area and the trash storage area. The building meets all set back requirements and parking requirements found in the Cit>* of Orono code, but does not meet the hard surface requirements. We therefore seek a variance to the hard surface requirements. The overall impervious surface calculations are found elsewhere in this application. The elevations included in this application are Walgreens protot>pe. We can modify the elevations to address any design concerns of the City. The entire parcel is presently zoned B5. It is our understanding that B5, as presently written, does not allow diug store use. It does, however, allow some of the ancillar>' items found in a drug store.3^ Therefore, we are making application for either; 1) a modification of what is permitted under B5 zoning allow ‘'drugs, candy, ice-cream, soft drinks, cosmetics and other usual drug store merchandise”, or 2) to tl i allow' the parcel to be re-zoned to Bl. Enclosed are applications that are complete for both the Site Plan Review and Zoning Amendment, e.xcept for the labels, which are ordered and will be shipped directly to you from Hennepin County to the City'. '.J We will be available in the coming weeks to provide additional information as required or requested by thef City'. We also can provide any additional drawings, elevations or other clarifications required by the City ‘ Verv' ti^v vours. Vice President - Dwelopment RHC/kmm Enclosures MIliMEAPOLIS • MILWAUKEE WEDGWOOD COMMERCE CENTRE • 6900 Wedgwood Road. Suite 100. Maple Grove. MN 55311 • (612) 420-9000 Fax (612) 420 7574 ^TOLD DEVELOPMENT COMPANY I>-2. AJMAAnV(f October 8,1998 JizD OCT 1 3 1998 Mr. Mike Gaffron Ms. Liz VanZomeren City of Orono 4750 Kelly Parkway Orono, MN 55356 CiTY Or C.iOKO Re: Application #4043 Dear MQke and Liz: I have enclosed for your review the following information: Protypical Walgreen’s store layout. Protypical Walgreen’s pylon sign. Narrative description of the proposed development. Please do not hesitate to call on me if you have any questions or require any further information. Veryt jly yours, Robert H. Cunninghl Vice President - Development RHC.cst Enclosures MINNEAPOLIS • MILWAUKEE WEDGWOOD COMMERCE CENTRE • 6900 W«dgv.ood Road. Suit* tOO. Maple Gfov*. MN 553U • (612) 420-9000 Fa* (612) 420-7574 rV ' > :\ «\J 4 ./ lx :\^E^ r-TWy-^ so. ,v /' « \ V a f y.* ••rf»- L%.v y ■^]?5< m M ^ - / .. •r • ^ « > o. J V ; tfh ' •« <*•< \ ViSm V <v5 rx-a Mi '^:5' X *?, h ) • • ^ ^ ‘‘if ^ S <• 1.W __.>i__j|j.2,‘^ W Si 13^11 ■!l S-fl ‘' I .•1 «j/ ‘TOirc?ca \ \i• • fi^ir ,^9J^4^»•* tt.»«« «•. .« » M ui T% 4J^1>- y<iku'vr N'\- ’ l- "”1 /• »• !> ••If* V »^ /7^•*H •//«iv*% ** 1 X* ii*^ • V __ . f••r: r c^ r SB!S i f ••IV •5/ # 4 . .* ’^njKjr \ •• i,r\ rxm-r--x;,_a_^ :•• •»» .* ✓ V 7^' ^ y' xvx •' » o» .ii " • 1% w ,rn '■'r “T • •q^ •ch •V ^ . • .••• • »# I • • . y • • •« • M0 - • . i . . *T •. %.•• • %••• • *• . . •'•if-•• • • • • ‘ •• / •f •• , • r> •* »-4 * I : •• V. -1 \m.-i \ v< \4. -fcwnn i :i • •9- .,.1* - r •y \ 1*7 tr» H ' *^•1 ^1 Tv n UVi‘—■mif 1 •L • • f w1 'II-i __zjr*c!i __u2_?2 __.>__A \l\ 1 M 4 0 •. ti.. H# A _ •t:. A •. '• at the Navarre Church location. BUS I MESS ^<4A«-p^tovo s 2. r> \ 11 aa \ 'n mui^ i- I g ■ \y'\A f“^ fS’\ FT \ GV.fe - -tSi ^/n!' ic-lc yihMLL— Tt./? 6'iaA i^c^c ^,-h C,tA-TE fiicm //JSuutj4^Jc£, M7| z/7/ - y/ ?/ V7/- ^7/' fy:-?'/ 7/w-y//?^ l/L( M/rJ/JLro^k^ /2e^ntrL,^7/.7?oo ^llg <-f7h?Fr^' ,'U /L.'J c/Am.<-tl/ Ic /c ^Asc^l>i/(£cr Tydc.■^7/-SSS/ HI I - gjggg V7/- ^7ASSS^ fit-1^0^ fv./:V __Hi 1-9 7 7 _ V7/ 7 i' 6*^-’ '/ // *- /'_____ /^^c./\u^aTV-^ C/6i7fy7<^S I 7 L A^, ' // P’viM^rs mi-om Ll kj\ /ttKxL dlFyth'ica^ AdALL^y.^— A-r>;/- November 23, 1998 Orono City Council 2750 Kelley Parkway Orono, Minnesota 55356 Dear Councilmembers: I am the broker for RE/MAX A-1 Excellence, a company of 52 real estate agents who do most of their business in the Mound and Orono area. I am writing this letter to strongly encourage the rezoning of the land on County Road 19, just North of County Road 15 as requested by John O’Sullivan. As Realtors, we serve many new persons tiying to move into our area. One of the most common complaints is the lack of shopping services. Currently there are no drugstores from Mound to Wayzata. A new pharmacy at this location would not only be an attraction to new people, but also it will provide a much-needed service to the existing residents. I also want to comment on the “best use” of land issue. As a broker with 15 ycare experience in this area, 1 believe this property will never make a good residential sight due to the adjacent commercial properties. Again, 1 urge the council to vote for the rezoning proposition, fhank you for your consideration. David E. I'eerhusen Broker/Owner Excellence 2477 Shadywood Road Lake Minnetonka Orono, Minnesota 55331 Office; (612) 471-0722m k .1 fi tlfiK o If*ij.'i • Owr^eil and Opt*^ itivl 7 TO: FROM: DATE: Chair Smith and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator Liz Van Zomeren. City Planner/Zoning Administrator October 15,1998 COUNCIL r/i£T!A3 NOV 2 3 1998 crrYcrcRONo SUBJECT; #2426 George Stickney, having an interest in Lot I, Block 1, Bill Kelley's Land on Willow Drive South (03 117 23 32 0006) Preliminary Plat--Class 11 Subdivision Zoning District: RR-IB One Family Rural Residential District (2 acre) Lot Area:6.57 acres Application:The applicant is proposing to subdivide a 6.57 acre parcel into two zoning lots. Lot 1 would be a 4.02 acre lot and Lot 2 would be a 2.57 acre lot. The application has been sent to appropriate agencies and City staff for review and comment. Pertinent Ordinances: Section 10.28, Subd. 5, (B) RR-IB District Standards Section 11, Subd. 12, Class II Preliminary Subdivisions # 2426 Stickney. .v:v.\:v iVillow Drive South PC-lO/19/98 page-1 ANALYSIS Lot Area and Yards RR-IB District Standards Lot Area Lot Width Front Yard Side Yard Rear Yard 2 acres 200'50'30' 50' Subject Property Lot Area and Yards Lot Lot 1 Lot 2 Lot Area 4.02 acres 2.57 acres Lot Width 302 ’ 201' The proposed lots will meet the minimum lot width and lot area requirements. Suitable areas exist within the required setbacks for a building pad that will not result in any variance^. ANALYSIS Septic Sites The sep*^ reports for this preliminary plat have been received and are being reviewed by the On-Site Septic Systems Manager. There initially were issues with the proposed design due to a seasonally high water table. Steve Weckman met on-site with the applicant's septic systems designer and determined suitable locations for septic sites. Access The preliminar)' plat does not indicate where the driveways would be located. The consultant engineer has indicated that any driveways should provide adequate sight lines to ingress/egress from Willow Drive. The applicant may want to consider one shared driveway for the proposed lots. The driveway(s) shall not have « slope greater than 10% nor be located closer than 5' to either the north or south property lines of either lot. The Public Services Director shall approve the driveway access for the northerly lot and the southerly lot if the existing access is relocated. # 2-t26 Slickney. XYXX Willow Drive South PC-1 0/19.9S page-2 Drainage City staff has received verbal comments from Jim Hafner, MCWD, that no stormwater ponding would be required. A drainage map, and grading/ erosion control plan will need to be provided before the final plat is submitted. Drainage easements shall be provided across all wetlands, ponds, and drainageways. Easements Utility easements shall be shown as 10' along the exterior lot lines and 5' on the internal lot lines. Park Dedication Fee The Park Commission recommended a park dedication fee in lieu of land. The proposed plat has been sent to the City Assessor for determination of the value. STAFF RECOMMENDATION To approve the Class II preliminary plat subdivision, subject to the On-Site Septic Systems Manager approval of the septic systems design. Attachments A B C D E Application Plat Map Engineer's letter Preliminar}’ Plat Weckman memo # 2426 Stickney. X\XX Willow Drive South PC-10/19/98 page-3 1 I A RESOLUTION GRANTING PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF A CLASS II SUBDIVISION OF LOT 1, BLOCK 1, BILL KELLEY ’S LAND - FILE NO. 2426 WHEREAS, George Stickney and J. O. Stickney (hereinafter the "subdividers") on September 22, 1998, filed a formal subdivision application with the City for approval of a two lot residential plat of property legally described as: Lot 1, Block 1, Bill Kelley's Land, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, after due published and mailed notice in accordance with Minnesota Statutes 462.358 et. seq. and the City of Orono's Zoning and Platting Codes, the Orono Planning Commission held a public hearing on October 19, 1998, at which time all persons desiring to be heard concerning this application were given the opportunity to speak thereon; and WHEREAS, at their regular meeting held on November 23, 1998, the Orono City Council considered this subdivision application noting the following facts and findings: 1 The property is located within the RR-IB. One Family Rural Residential District requiring a two acre minimum of contiguous dry ’-uildable land within each lot. The property contains a total of approximately 6.59 acres. The proposed plat contains two lots exceeding the minimum lot area requirement as follows: Lot 1 = 4.02 acres Lot 2 = 2.57 acres. Each lot has been tested by a licensed on-site evaluator and found to have suitable soils for both a principal and alternate on-site sewage disposal system. Page 1 of 3 i 4.A driveway access is currently provided by an opening from Willow Drive South for Lot 2. A new driveway access will be needed for Lot 1 from Willow Drive South. The Public Services Director shall approve a driveway cut for Lot 1 prior to the issuance of a building permit. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that based upon one or more of the findings, the City Council of the City of Orono hereby approves the preliminary plat of George W. Stickney and J. O. Stickney at 4XX Willow Drive South (38 03-117-23 32 0006) per survey dated January 6, 1998, most revised date November 3, 1998, by Mark S. Gronberg of Coffin and Gronberg, subject to the following conditions; 1.The driveway access for Lot 1 shall be approved by the Public Services Director prior to issuance of a building permit. 2. The driveway for both Lot 1 and Lot 2 shall be at least 5' from property lines. The following list of final submittals shall be submitted to the Zoning Administrator two weeks prior to the regularly scheduled Council meeting on the second and fourth Mondays of each month Required tbmittals are as follows: 1. Record plat drawings in the form of two (2) mylar copies and one (1) copy reduced to 1" = 200', Drawing to include: A.Lot lines platted per preliminary survey by Mark S. Gronberg of Coffin and Gronberg, Inc. dated January 6, 1998, most revised November 3, 1998. B Dedication of "drainage and utility easements", 5' each side of new internal lot lines and 10* along external lot lines. C. Naming of plat. Legal documents required: A.Title opinion addressed to the City. All owners, mortgage holders or others with property interest indicated therein shall sign the plat and all other documents affected by such interest. Page 2 of 3 B The sub».-lviders shall provide certified copies of all recorded easements currently affecting the property. 3. Fees to be paid: Total due: ^ A. Final plat fee = $ B. Legal review and filing fee = C. Park Dedication Fee = * Upon approval of preliminary plat, the subdivision shall be referred to the City Assessor to determine the value of the undeveloped property in accordance with Section 11.62. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held this 23rd day of November, 1998. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) Gabriel Jabbour, Mayor The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 23rd day of Novem.ber, 1998, by Gabriel Jabbour & Linda S. Vee, Mayor & City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public Page 3 of 3 Application H Date Received ^--ZX ^ Amount Paid — CITY OF ORONO - SUBDIVISION APPLICATION PROPERTY LOCATION Site address XX'/■<C• * ' i Property Identification Number (PID) 7 'l.'i 3z.o'J o 6 Please check one - Property X abstract or torrens? Attach legal description to application. Zot / ^/oc/r. I /3> ll APPLICANT Name Address City __ C Coy ^4r r, ‘At OK Phone (home) V7-S~- LlsS O r \ ■ X^ ■Zip ^ Phone (work) OWNER (if different than applicant) Nsune____________^ io o 'JC^ CiU'Zip Phone (work) (attach list if more than one) EXISTING LAND USE Number of Tax Parcels /CD Development Size 6 ^-3 /?<rnv Acres Dry Land O Acres Wet Land Present use (check)Kya -o/ Acres Total, all parcels Residential: no. of units \o "v: Other fspecifv)*" ! Present Zoning District 2 Ac, S . r.Xv ••• J PROPOSAL Division for Tax Purposes Lot Line Rearrangement Only (no new buildling sites) . / Subdivision for New Building Sites Number of Building Sites ^ Existing Units CQ 1 /New Units 'Z.Total Units Proposed Gross Density Minimum Lot Size z.Units per*^ o Acres Aer'l'Sq. Ft. Dry Buildable Land Proposed Use (check)X.r-Residential Otlier (specify) i MINIMUM NL\TERIAL REQUIRED FOR COMPLETE PRELIMINARY APPLICATION 1. Pa>'ment of fees (refer to "application fees" listed below. 2. Completed application form. 3. Preliminary plat information on Certificate of Survey. 4. Certified Property Owners List of owners within 350' (you must obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-605 Govt. Center 348-3271). MINIMUM MATERIAL REQUIRED FOR COMPLETE FINAL APPLICATION 1. Payment of fees (refer to Preliminary Subdivision Approval resolution and park fees if appicable). 2. Signed Certificate of Survey or mylar copies of formal plat. 3. Title opinion. 4. Easements, covenants, etc. 5. Developers Agreement and Letter of Credit. Zoning Official's Signature _______________________________ APPLICATION FEES (Zoning Administrator to check [X] those which apply) A. Application Base Fees: _____ Sketch Plan Review (Class I, II & III) S250.00 _____ Subdivision of a Lot Line Rearrangement $350.00 y. Subdivision Application (Class I & II) $350.00 _____ Preliminary Subdivision Application $375.00 + $25.00/lot (Class III & all non-residential) _____ Final Plat Application (Class III) $200.00 _____ Legal Review and Filing: _____Subdivision only $75.00 _____Subdivision w/easements and covenants min. $200.00 _____ Park Fees (to be determined per Section 11.62) _____ Legal and Engineering Review lets (as incurred) _____ Renewal of Class I and II Subdivision Application $200.00 (No change from original application) -------- Renewal of Class III, Preliminary subdivision Application $200.00 (No change from original application) Renewal of Final Class III Subdivision Application $150.00 (No change from original application) Totals 2^ B. Special Improvement Fees: _____ Proposed Private Roads $600.00 + S.50/lineal ft.; _____ Proposed Public Roads $900.00 + $.50/lineal ft.; . lin. ft. X .50 " $, lin. ft. X .50 = $ _____ Request for City' to Accept Existing Private Road $900.00 _____ Proposed Sanitary Sewer Main Extension $250.00 + $25/stub _____ Proposed Watermain Extension $250.00 + $25/stub _____ Proposed Storm Sewer System (excluding culverts) $200.00 - I On-Site System, Site Evaluation Review (applicable to rural subdivision applications) $50.00/per lot x / new lots C. Flexible Application Fees/Misc. Fees _____ Variance S220.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) _____ Easement Vacation Associated with Subdivision $100.00 _____ PRD Application with Subdivision $30.00/Dwelling Unit A) The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zon'mg Administrator, City Engineer, City Attorney, Planning Commission and Council necessary to process this application and further agrees to pay all additional fees established by ordL-.ance. ^ . /// Applicant's Signature Owmer's Signature Date F Ux/=\ r Date f Applicant must have all submittals into the City Office 25 days before the Planning Commission meeting. Planning Commission meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. RUN DATE O^/OZ/^BBATCH 50b PROP ADOR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER NANE/ADDR PROP ADDR OWNER NANE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR PROP ADDR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR PROP ADDR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR ZB 03-117-23 23 001<# 00<c«00 WILLOW DR S ARTHUR S EDITH NELSON ARTHUR S EDITH NELSON ^00 WILLOW DR S LONG LAKE HN 5S35b ZB 03-117-23 32 0012 OO'iBO WILLOW DR S ANN L WHITE ET AL ANN L WHITE ^50 WILLOW DR S LONG LAKE HN 5535b 38 03-117-23 32 0015 02340 rox ST J T « L J ROBERTS JOHN 8 LORI ROBERTS 2340 FOX ST ORONO HN 5535b Za 04-117-23 41 0001 00505 WILLOW DR S WILLIAH G ROBINSON WILLIAH G ROBINSON 505 WILLOW DR S LONG LAKE HN 5535b HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORHATION SYSTEH ^NJOPtRT^Y OWNERS LIST REPORT NO. PI435401 PAGE 35 38 03-117-23 32 0006 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNFD G W STICKNEY 8 J 0 STICKNEY G W STICKNEY * J O STICKNEY 25«0 COUNTRYSIDE DR LONG LAKE HN 5535b 38 03-117-23 32 0011 00440 WILLOW DR S RICHARD JR i DEBBIE PERRY RICHARD JR I DfBBIE PERRY 440 WILLOW DR S LONG LAKE HN 5535b 38 03-117-23 32 0013 02300 FOX ST E CUNNINGTON 8 K CUNNINGTON E CUNNINGTON 8 K CUNNINGTON 2300 FOX ST LONG LAKE HN 5535b 38 03-117-23 32 0014 02280 FOX ST H R KAHLER/M B HITHUN KAHLER RICHAEL R KAHLER 8 HARY B HITHUN KAHLER 2280 FOX ST LONG LAKE HN 5535b 38 03-117-23 32 0016 02320 FOX ST BRUCE R 8 IRHA J KELLEY BRUCE R 8 IRHA J KELLEY 2320 FOX ST LONG LAKE HN 5535b 38 04-117-23 14 0003 00405 WILLOW DR S K H 8 W R PRIEDEHAN JR K H 8 W R PRIEDEHAN JR 405 WILLOW DR S LONG LAKE HN 5535b TOTAL BATCH 50b 00010 I CERTIFY THAT THE .-ACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORHATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY DFPARTHENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION, TO THE BEST OF HY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF. Q DATE '&LUL Q /I Qft ^ Bonestroo Rosene Anderlik & Associates Engineers & Architects October 14, 1998 Bonestroo. Rosene Anderhk r»nj AiiocMres. inc n t*n Aftirrruftn e Acrton Opportunity Employer PnnciptUs Otto G Bonestroo. PE • Joseph C Anderlik. PE • Mt»rvin L Sorv*il.i, PE • R(Ch«srd E Turner. PE • Glenn R Cook PE • Robert G Scnunrchi PE • Jerry A Bourdon. PE • Robert W Rosene. PE -^nj Sus,»n Vt Eberim C PA Senio^^ Consult <nts Aisocu^tc Principally Hort»!fd A Sonfo'd. P£ • Keith A Gordon PE • Robert R Pfcfterle. PB • Rich/srd W Foster. PE • Dovid O Loskot.i. PC • Robert C Russek Al A • M«^rk A M.^nson. PE • Mich,^ei T Rautm^nn. PE • Ted K Fteid. PE • Kennetn P Anderson PE. • Mark R Rolfs PE • Sidney P Willumison. PE. L S • Robert F Kot'.rniih • Agnes M Ring • Michael P Rau. PE • Allan Rich Schmid!, F £ Offices St Paul. Roc*'ester Wiiimar and St Cloud MN • Milwaukee Wi WePsite ww wbonestroo com c Elizabeth VanZomeren City Planner/Zoning Administrator City of Orono Post Office Box 66 Crystal P ly, MN 55323 Re: Stickney Subdivision File No. 139-2426 Dear Liz: We have reviewed the preliminary plat for the proposed two-lot subdivision for George Stickney. The site is located on Willow Drive South just south of 450 Willow Drive in the south half of Section 3. We have the following comments in regards to engineering matters. 1. Access: There currently is no well defined access to the site. Proposed access locations should provide adequate sight distance from the high point on Willow Drive located approximately 180- feet south of the site. It may be appropriate from a safety perspective to combine two driveways and have a shared access onto Lots 1 and 2. Maximum driveway grades should not exceed 10 percent. 2. Utilities: The existing grades may make it difficult to locate primary and alternate septic sites. City staff should review the proposed septic locations. 3. Grading: A grading and erosion control plan for the entire site should be submitted for review. Erosion control measures should be in place prior to any grading. 4. Drainage: The draft version of the City’s Compiehensive Storm Water Management Plan (SWMP) shows that the site drains both east and west. The westerly portion of the site drains westerly to an existing wetland identified as FR-P19. The remainder of the site drains easterly u.) an existing wetland identified as TL-Pl 1. According to current Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD) rules, subdivisions larger than 2 acres require the construction of a NURP pond to treat stormwater from the site. This subdivision is larger than 2 acres and the MCWD should review the plans. Depending on MCWD comments, ponding alternatives such as buffer strips may be r^prop-’.ate for this site. Phosphorous loadings leaving the site should be limited to a maximum of 0.28 pounds/acre/year. A drainage area map with pre and post development calculations should be submitted for review. 5. Easements: Utility easements should be shown 5-feet wide along the interior lot line. Drainage easements should be provided across all wetlands, ponds and drainage ways. 2335 West Highway 3*'' ■ St. Paul, MN 55113 ■ 612*636-4600 ■ Fax: 612*636-1311 6. Financial Guarantee: When the plans have been completed we will prepare an estimate of the total cost for the site improvements to determine the amount of the financial guarantee required. Please contact me at (604-4863) if you have any questions regarding this matter. Yours very truly, BONESTROO* ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC. Tom Kellogg Cc: Greg Gappa, City of Orono 1. I — \. trCAL prsCRlPTiQN OF PREMISES^: Lot 1. Block 1. BILL K£LLEY‘S LAND o (94b 6) (Jenoles iron rnorker denotes existing spot elevation, mean sea Icve' datum denotes existing contour line, mcon seo level dotum Bcorings shown ore bosed upon on ossumed dotum. survey intends to show the boundaries o< the above described property. »h ‘j 'ncotion nn existing shed, and the topoqrophy thereon. It does not purport to st'ow ony other improcements or cncroochrncnls Ut.StCNtl>MV HIVISKV4 IIAII 1 n *4 KirlU IN ! 1 <r>f t* ff /A At 1 • OHAW.r BY • • •mm. ••.J CoFnN & gronberg. Inc. Ctwisfi/Z/My; Euy/t/tv/s. Lt/ul bfn:viA>r>. Site PliWncr> 4S2 Titmar.tck Au*nuo • 1 lu ri*bv ivriilv itui this suf\i*v w.is tu nu’ i»i lUKkf niv Uifwl sujvf- %isK*n. jih! iKii t .im j »lulv n*);idcn\l L i%ii I n>;iiuv# and UikI Sum vui under the ul Ihf Mall* of Miniu*M»tJ I 61247.V414I Mark S Cronberjj Minni'wta Liernse Number 12755 sc AIL.''•■v >*r*w lun \-^9S lOtNO r CT' 4 TO; DATE; Liz Van Zomeren, City Planner/Zoning Administrator FROM; Stephen Weckman, On-Site Systems Manager October 19,1998 SUBJECT; Septic Review for Application #2426, George Stickney - Preliminary Plat The proposed two lot plat requiies the use of on-site sewage treatment systems. Site evaluation/design has been completed for primar>’ and alternate drainfield sites on each lot. The site evaluation/design information provided for lot 1 is approved as submitted. The informatiori provided for lot 2 can not be approved as submitted due to slopes exceeding 6 percent over more than half of the mound area. During a meeting today on lot 2 the designer and myself found suitable soils and slopes for two drainfield sites in the apple orchard. The slopes range from 0 to 6 percent and the soils found were not filled. The sites would meet aU City and State Standards. Based on the above information, staff recommends approval of the application on the condition that tlie additional site evaluation/design information is submitted to the City one week before the date of the City Council meeting. The city requires the drainfield sites to be fenced off prior to any grading or land alteration. Application Date: Completion Date: 60 Day Deadline: 9/23/98 9/23/98 Extended to 1/21/99 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION COUNCIL r/*l££TiNG NOV 2 3 1998 CITYCFCRONO DATE: 11/18/98 ITEM NO.: / O Department Approval: Name Paul Weinberger Title Assistant Zoning Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: #2428 Terrance Maurer on behalf of David and Christine Hardten 2515 Kelly Avenue Variances-Public Hearing Zoning District: LR-IB Lot Area:43,170 One Family Lakeshore Residential District (1 Acre) square feet (.99 acres) _____ Application: The applicants have proposed to remove the existing house and detached garage on the property to build a new residence with attached garage. The applicants do not intend to remove the existing boat house with stairs along the lakeshore. The Planning Commission reviewed this application on October 19, 1998 and recommended approval of variances to allow the new site plan with the condition the applicant reduce hf'xdcover in the 75-250' lakeshore setback to 27% from the proposed 28.9%. At the November 9,1998 City Council meeting the Council recommended the applicant revise the site plan to reduce hardcover in the 75-250' lakeshore setback to the allowed 25%. Tnc applicants have revised the site plan reducing hardcover to 24.8%. This application requires the following variances: 1. Accessory structure to remain op the property without a principal structure. 2. Hardcover in the 0-75' lakeshore setback. The applicants are requesting 924 s.f. (6.3%) where none is allowed. 3. Hardcover in the 250-500' lakeshore setback. The applicants are requesting 1,761 s.f (30.6%) where 1724.4 s.f (30%) is allowed. Lot Area and Yards ANALYSIS LR-1B (1 acre) Lot Area Lot Width Lakeside Yard Side Yard Street Yard Required 80% of 43,560 s.f. 80% of 140' 75’10'35' Proposed 43,170 s.f 170'Existing: 110' Proposed: 115' Existing: 27.7' Proposed: 10' Existing: 73' Proposed 161' Section 10.03, Subd. 6(A)(1) of the Zoning Code states that lots under one acre serviced by public sanitary sewer and platted prior to the date of the zoning chapter are only required to meet 80% of lot area and lot width standards. This lot does meet the criteria listed in the above referenced section of the Zoning Code. Therefore no variances are required for lot area or lot width. Hardcover Distance from Shoreline Total Area in Setback Existing Hardcover Allowed Hardcover Proposed Hardcover Variance Requested 0-75’14,727 s.f 924 s.f (6.3%) none (0%) 924 s.f (6.3%) yes 75-250'22,695 s.f 6,692 s.f (29.5%) 5,673 s.f (25%) 5,635 s.f (24.8%) none 250-500’5,748 s.f 3,878 s.f (67.5%) 1,724.4 s.f (30%) 1,761 s.f (30.6%) yes 500-1000’0 0 0 (35%) 0 none 0-75' The property contains a boathouse and steps in the 0-75' setback. The boathouse would remain on the piwperty upon completion of a new residence. Any approval of a site plan on the property would create a legal structure, therefore a variance should be approved to allow the hardcover to remain. The Code would not allow the boathouse to remain on the property following removal of the principal residence. A variance would have to be approved to allow the structure to remain on the propeity without a principal structure. The zoning code does allow a stairway to access the lake. This hardcover is legal. 75-250* All hardcover in this setback would be removed and replaced at the time of new' construction. The applicant has proposed 5,635 s.f, (24,8%) of hardcover. No variance is needed. 2SQ-5Q0 ’ The existing lot contains 67.5% hardcover. The existing detached garage (proposed to be removed) and drivew'ay are located over this portion of the lot. Structural Coverage Total Lot Size Total Structural Coverage Percentage 43,170 s.f.Existing: 4,151 s.f Proposed: 4,712 s.f 9.6% 10.9% The lot would not exceed the 15% allowed lot coverage. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION; The Planning Commission recommended by a 7 to 0 vote to: Approve the variances as presented with the condition the hardcover in the 75-250 ’ setback be reduced to 27%. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED To approve or amend the enclosed resolution o// /' GlTYof ORONO Municipal OfHces Street Address: 2750 Kelley ParVway Orono, WN 55356 NOTIFICATION OF 60 DAY EXTENSION Mailing Address: P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 0066 November 10,1998 David and Christine Hardten 2515 Kelly Avenue Excelsior, MN 55331 Re: Application #2428 State law requires that Cities shall decide on zoning applications within 60 days from the date an application is considered con-.plete. The review period may be extended by notification to the applicant. Your application date is, September 23. 1998. The 60 day review period expires on November 22. 1998. You requested s our application be tabled at the November 9, 1998 Council meeting to allow time to revise the site plan for your property, for the purposes of conforming to City hardcover regulations. The new expiration date is January 21. 1998. The earliest potential date that the City Council could take action is November 23, 1998. Please do not hesitate to contact me should you have questions. Sincerely, CL*.—^ Paul Weinberger Assistant Zoning Administrator cc; Terrance Maurer 201 West Travelers Tr. Burnsville. MN 55337 Telephone (612) 473-7357 • FAX 473-0510 Scale ^ »>30^ MPERVIOUS AREA A LOT AREA = 5,748 SO. FT. BITUMINOUS AREA = 1,761 SQ. FT. IMPERVIOUS SURFACE COVERAGE = 30.6% LPERVIOUS AREA - B LOT AREA = 22,695 SQ. FT HOUSE AREA = 3,578 SO. FT. DECK AREA = 397 SQ. FT BITUMINOUS AREA - 1,520 SO. FT. STOOP AREA = 60 SO. FT. PORCH AREA = 80 SQ. FT. IMPERVIOUS SURFACE COVERAGE = 24.8% MPERVIOUS AREA - C LOT AREA = 14,727 SQ. FT BOAT HOUSE AREA = 737 SQ. FT SIDEWALK AREA = 187 SQ. FT. IMPERVIOUS SURFACE COVERAGE = 6.3% LOT AREA = 43,170 SQ. F 'OTAL IMPERVIOUS AREA = 8,798 SQ. MPERVIOUS SURFACE COVERAGE = 20.3% (95^0> (^8.8) “959.17 = 950.50 = 959.50 = DENOTES EXISTING ELEVATION DENOTES PROPOSED ELEVATION INDICATES DIRECTION OF SURFACE DRAINAGE FINISHED GARAGE FLOOR ELEVATION BASEMENT FLOOR ELEVATION TOP OF FOUNDATION ELEVATION VJ . */r a'cJ 9^ no. 9- A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.03, SUBDIVISION 9 (A); SECTION 10.22, SUBDIVISION 2; SECTION 10.56, SUBDIVISION 16 (L) (1) AND SECTION 10.56, SUBDIVISION 16 (L) (2) FILE NO. #2428 WHEREAS, David Hardtcn and Christine Hardten (hereinafter "tlie applicants") are the owners of the property located at 2515 Kelly Avenue within the City of Orono (hereinafter "the City") and legally described as follows: Trat-t C of R.I..S. No. 1428, Hennepin County, MN (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, after due published and mailed notice in accordance vrith Minnesota Statutes and the City of Orono Zoning and Planning Codes, the Orono Planning Commission held a public hearing on October 19, 1998, at which times all persons desiring to be heard concerning this application were given the opportunity to speak thereon; and WHEREAS, the applicants have applied to the City for variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.03, Subd. 9 (A) to permit an accessor)' building to remain on the lot without a principal building; Section 10.22, Subd. 2 and Section 10.56, Subd. 16 (L) (1) to permit 924 s.f. (6.3%) hardcover where 924 s.f (6.3%) exists; and to permit 1,761 s.f (30.6%) of hardcover within the 250-500' lakeshore setback where 1,724.4 s.f (30%) is allowed. NOW, THEREJORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: FINDINGS This application was reviewed as Zoning File #2428. The property is located in the LR-IB Zoning District, where 1 acre or 43,560 s.f is tl:c minimum lot area. The property consists of ,99 acre or 43,170 s.f I he Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on October 19, 1998 and recommended approval by a vote of 5 to 0. Page 1 of 5 lii 1 4. The Planning Commission made the following findings of fact; 5. 6. A.The lot does meet lot area and lot width requirements. The lot is only required to meet 80% lot area and lot width because it is sewered and was platted prior to the adoption of the zoning code. B. The boathouse would remain on the property. C.The lot shares a driveway with the adjacent property to the south, 2523 Kelly Avenue. The entire shared portion of the driveway is located on the 2515 Kellv Avenue lot. D.The applicants have proposed to reduce hardcover on the lot from 11,494 s.f. to 8,798 s.f E.The Planning Commission recommended reducing hardcover in the 75- 250' lakeshore setback to 27%. The applicants originally proposed 28.7% hardcover. F.The lot is pieshaped, limiting the lot area within the 75-250' lakeshore setback. G. The proposed development is consistent with the development in the locality. H. Letters in support of the applicants' proposal were submitted by property owners at 2509, 2525, and 2523 Kelly Avenue. The City Council reviewed the application at their November 9, 1998 meeting and recommended the applicant revise the plan to meet the City's allowed hardcover in the 75-250' lakeshore setback of 25%. The City Council finds that the conditions e.xisting on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variances would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely Page 2 of 5 i serve as a convenience to the applicants, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicants; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. 7. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicants and the effect of the proposed variances on the health, safety and welfare of the community. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono Cit., Council hereby grants variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.03, Subd. 9 (A) to permit an accessory building to remain on the lot without a principal building; Section 10.22, Subd. 2 and Section 10.56, Subd. 16 (L) (1) to permit 924 s.f. (6.3%) hardcover where 924 s.f. (6.3%) exists; and to pemiit 1,761 s.f. (30.6%) of hardcover within the 250-500' lakeshore setback where 1,724.4 s.f (30%) is all.v,^'cd. Approval was subject to the following conditions: 1. 2. 3. Authorities granted by this variance run with the property not with the applicants, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit within one year of the date of Council approval, or this variance will expire on that date (November 23, 1999). Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this variance shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. The undersigned applicants have read, understood and hereby agree to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of themselves, their heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agree to the recording of this resolution in the Chain of Title of the property. Page 3 of 5 Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held on the 23rd day of November, 1998. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Gabriel Jabbour, Mavor Property Owner (s) STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 23rd day of November, 1998 by Gabriel Jabbour and Linda S. Vee, Mayor and City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public Page 4 of 5 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this day of , 199_before me a Notary Public within and knownfor said county, personally appeared_____________________________________ to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this day of_____, 199 before me a Notary Public within and for s'>id county, personally appeared _________________________________________ known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC Page 5 of 5 Application Date: Completion Date: 60 Day Deadline: 9/23/98 9/23/98 mum REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: 11'^'IS ITEM NO.: ^ Department Approval: Name Paul Weinberger Title Assistant Zoning Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: #2428 Terrance Maurer on behalf of David and Christine Hardten 2515 Kelly Avenue Variances Zoning District: LR-1B One Family Lakeshore Residential District (1 Acre) Lot Area:43,170 square feet (.99 acres) Application: The applicants have proposed to remove the existing house and detached garage on the property to build a new residence with attached garage. The applicants do not intend to remove the existing boat house with stairs along the lakeshore. This application requires the following variances: 1. Accessory structure to remain on the property without a principal structure. 2. Hardcover in the 0-75' lakeshore setback. The applicants are requesting 924 s.f. (6.3%) where none is allowed. 3.Hardcover in the 75-250' lakeshore setback. The applicants are requesting 6,113 s.f. (26.9%) where 5,673 s.f (25%)is allowed. 4.Hardcover in the 250-500' lakeshore setback. The applicants are requesting 1,761 s.f (30.6%) where 1,724.4 s.f (30%) is allowed. i i ANALYSIS Lot Area and Yards LR-IB 0 acre) Lot Area Lot Width Lakeside Yard Side Yard Street Yard Required 80% of 43,560 s.f. 80% of 140' 75'10'35' Proposed 43,170 s.f.170'Existing: 110' Proposed: 115' Existing: 27.7' Proposed: 10' Existing: 73' Proposed 161' Section 10.03, Subd. 6(A)(1) of the Zoning Code states that lots under one acre serv iced by public sanitary sewer and platted prior to the date of the zoning chapter are only required to meet 80% of lot area and lot width standards. This iot does meet the criteria listed in the above referenced section of the Zoning Code. Therefore no variances are required for lot area or lot w-idth. Hardcover Distance from Shoreline Total Area in Setback Existing Hardcover Allowed Hardcover Proposal Ul Proposal U2 per Planning Commission Recommendation 0-75'14,727 s.f.924 s.f. (6.3%) none (0%) 924 s.f. (6.3%) 924 s.f. (6.3%) 75-250' 22,695 s.f.6,692 s.f. (29.5%) 5,673 s.f. (25%) 6,530 s.f. (28.7%) 6,113 s.f. (26.9%) 250-500'5,748 s.f.3,878 s.f. (67.5%) 1724.4' (30%) 1.907 s.f. (33.2%) 1.761 s.f. (30.6%) 500-1000 ’0 0 0 (35%) 0 none 0-75’ The property contains a boathouse and steps in the 0-75' setback. The boathouse would remain on the property upon completion of a new residence. Any approval of a site plan on the property would create a legal structure, therefore a variance should be approved to allow the hardcover to remain. The Code would not allow the boathouse to remain on the property following removal of the principal residence. A variance would have to be approved to allow the structure to remain on the property without a principal structure. The zoning code does allow a stairway to access the lake. This hardcover is legal. 75-250’ Proposal #1 requested 6,692 s.f. (29.5%) of hardcover. The Planning Commission felt the addition 4.5% of hardcover was excessive, but considered the shape of the lot and the property containing 100% of a shared driveway was a hardship placed on the property. The Commission would be in favor of the request if the total hardcover in this setback be reduced to 27%. The applicants have redesigned their plan to meet the Planning Commission recommendation. (Proposal U2). All hardcover in this setback would be removed and replaced at the time of new construction. The applicant has proposed 6,113 s.f. (29.6%) of hardcover. The City allows 25% in the setback. This would require a variance to allow the increased hardcover. The applicant has stated the pie shape of the lot is restrictive as the lot width at the 75' setback is 180' and the lot width at the 250’ setback is 82 ’. 250-500’ The existing lot contains 67.5% hardcover. The existing detached garage (proposed to be removed) and driveway are located over this portion of the lot. The lot also will contain a shared driveway used for access to the neighboring property. The request for 33.2% hardcover (1907 s.f.) Proposal UI was changed by the applicants to 1,761 s.f (30.6%). Structural Coverage Tc:al Lot Size Total Structural Coverage Percentage 43,170 s.f Existing: 4,151 s.f Proposed: 4,712 s.f 9.6% 10.9% The lot would not exceed the 15% allowed lot coverage. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission recommended by a 5 to 0 vote to; Approve the variances with the condition the hardcover in the 75-250’ setback be reduced to 27%. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED To approve or amend the enclosed resolution. ATTACHMENTS A B C D E F Notice of Planning Commission Action Resolution Hardcover Worksheet for existing residence Proposal #1 Hardcover (Planning Commission) Proposal #2 Revised Plan (Reducing overall hardcover) Planning Report I 1 A CITY OF ORONO P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 473-7357 ZONING FILE #2428 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION DATE OF NOTICE: October 21, ) 998 TO: David and Christine Hardten 2515 Keliy Avenue Excelsior, MN 55331 TYPE OF APPLICATION: COPIES TO: Terrance Maurer 201 West Travelers Trail Burnsville, MN 55337 \'ariance DATE OF MEETING: 10/19/98 VOTE: 5 FOR Planning Commission recommends the following: Approval subject to conditions noted below. 0 AGAINST NOTES AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS: 1. The applicants reduce overall hardcover in the 75-250' setback to 27%. 2.The property contains a shared driveway providing for additional hardcover on the applicants' lot that serves the adjacent lot. Additional information is requested, as follows: 1. Existing hardcover calculations. 2. Revised plan to indicate removal of hardcover, resulting in 27% for the 75-250' setback. Applicants' next scheduled meeting is dependent upon receipt of additional information. Deadline for the October 26, 1998 meeting is 12:00 p.m. on October 21, 1998. Applicants' next scheduled meeting is confirmed as; City Council October 26, 1998, meeting starts at 7:00 p.m. If the applicants have trouble obtaining additional information, please contact the Zoning Department (473-7357). If you desire certified copies of the official Planning Commission minutes, they are available from the City Recorder after review and approval by the Planning Commission. X:\APPS \VPWIN60 \VPIXKS C.VROLE PC.\CTIOV2428 PevnoviA B A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.03, SUBDIVISION 9 (A); SECTION 10.22, SUBDIVISION 2; SECTION 10.56, SUBDIVISION 16 (L) (1) AND SECTION 10.56, SUBDIVISION 16 (L) (2) FILE NO. #2428 WHEREAS, David Hardten and Christine Hardten (hereinafter "the applicants") are the owners of the property located at 2515 Kelly Avenue within the City of Orono (hereinafter "the City") and legally described as follows; Tract C of R.L.S. No. 1428, Hennepin Countv', MN (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, after due published and mailed notice in accordance with Minnesota Statues and the City of Orono Zoning and Planning Codes, the Orono Planning Commission held a public hearing on October 19, 1998, at which times all persons desiring to be heard concerning this application were given the opportunity to speak thereon; and WHEREAS, the applicants have applied to the City for variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subd. 9 (A) to permit an accessory building to remain on the lot without a principal building; Section 10.22, Subd. 2 and Section 10.56, Subd. 16 (L) (1) to permit 924 s.f. (6.3%) hardcover where 924 s.f. (6.3%) e.xists; Section 10 22, Subd. 2 ^d Section 10.56, Subd. 16 (L) (2) to permit 6,113 s.f. (26.9%) hardcover within the 75-250' lakeshore setback where 5,673.7 j (i5%) is allowed, ana to permit i,/oi s.f. yiu.dVo; uf hardcover within the 250-500’ lakeshore setback where 1,724.4 s.f. (30%) is allowed. Minnesota: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #2428. 2. The property is located in the LR-IB Zoning District, where 1 acre or 43,560 s.f. is the minimum lot area. The property consists of .99 acre or 43,170 s.f. Page 1 of 5 J.The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on October 19, ’998 and recommended approval by a vote of 5 to 0. 4. The Planning Commission made the following findings of fact: A. The lot does meet lot area and lot width requirements. The lot is only required to meet 80% lot area and lot width because it is sewered and was platted prior to the adoption of the zoning code. B. The boathouse would remain on the property. C. D. E. F. The lot shares a driveway with the adjacent property to the south, 2523 Kelly Avenue. The entire shared portion of the driveway is located on the 2515 Kelly Avenue lot. The applicants have proposed to reduce hardcover on the lot from 11,494 s.f. to 8,798 s.f. The Planning Commission recommended reducing hardcover in the 75- 250’ lakeshore setback to 27%. The applicants originally proposed 28.7% hardcover. The lot is pieshaped, limiting the lot area within the 75-250' lakeshore setback. G. The proposed development is consistent with the development in the locality. H. Letters in support of the applicant's proposal were submitted by property owners at 2509, 2525, and 2523 Kelly Avenue. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variances would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicants, but is necessar}' to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficult)’; is necessary to preserve a substantial Page 2 of 5 property right of the applicant; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. 6. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicant and the effect of the proposed variances on the health, safety and welfare of the community. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subd. 9 (A) to permit an accessory building to remain on the lot without a principal building; Section 10.22, Subd. 2 and Section 10.56, Subd. 16 (L) (1) to permit 924 s.f. (6.3%) hardcover where 924 s.f. (6.3%) exists; Section 10.22, Subd. 2 and Section 10.56, Subd. 16 (L) (2) to permit 6,113 s.f (26.9%) hardcover \\ithiiTlHe*7^-2My_iakeshore_setback_where ^^^67T75_s^T^^^25%2,js^^a^ to permit 1,761 s.f. (30.6%) of hardcover within the 250-500 ’ lakeshore setback where 1,724.4 s.f (30%) is allowed. Approval was subject to the following conditions: % 1. The applicants reduce hardcover in the 75-250' lakeshore setback to 27%. 2. 3. 4. Authorities granted by this variance run with the property not with the applicant, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit within one year of the date of Council approval, or this variance will expire on that date (November 9, 1999). Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this variance shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. The undersigned applicants have read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of themselves, their heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the Chain of Title of the property. Page 3 of 5 Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held on the 9th day of November, 1998. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Gabriel Jabbour, Mayor Property Owner (s) STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 9th day of November, 1998 by Gabriel Jabbour and Linda S. Vee, Mayor and City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public Page 4 of 5 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this day of , 199 _before me a Notary Public within and knownfor said county, personally appeared _____________________________________ to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this__day of_________________, 199 _before me a Notary' Public within and for said county, personally appeared ________________________________________ know'n to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC Page 5 of 5 c EXISTING MPERVIOUS AREA - A LOT AREA = 5,748 SQ. FT. BITUMINOUS AREA = 3.084 SQ. FT. GARAGE AREA = 794 SQ. FT IMPERVIOUS SURFACE COVERAGE = 67.5% MPERVIOUS AREA - B LOT AREA = 22.695 SQ. FT HOUSE AREA = 2.620 SQ. FT. BITUMINOUS AREA = 1,152 SQ. FT. SIDEWALK AREA = 1,385 SQ. FT. POND AREA = 151 SQ. FT. DECK AREA = 580 SQ. FT. ROCK AREA = 804 SQ. FT. IMPERVIOUS SURFACE COVERAGE = 29.5% IMPERVIOUS AREA - C LOT AREA = 14,727 SQ. FT BOAT HOUSE AREA = 737 SO. FT SIDEWALK AREA = 187 SQ. FT. IMPERVIOUS SURFACE COVERAGE = 6.3% LOT AREA 43,170 SQ. n TOTAL IMPERVIOUS AREA 1,494 SQ. F MPERVIOUS SURFACE COVERAGE = 26.6% LEGAL DESCRIPTION: TRACT C OF R.L.S. NO. 1428, HENNEPIN COUNTY. MINNESOTA. ADDRESS : 2515 KELLY AVENUE PROPOSED 9/23/98 0 PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION HARDCOVER FROM 28.7% TO 27.0%. TO REDUCE MPERVIOUS AREA - A LOT AREA = 5.748 SO. FT. BITUMINOUS AREA = 1,907 SO. FT. IMPERVIOUS SURFACE COVERAGE = 33.2% MPERVIOUS AREA - B LOT AREA = 22.695 SO. FT HOUSE AREA = 3,578 SO. FT. DECK AREA = 397 SO. FT BITUMINOUS AREA = 2.555 SO. FT. IMPERVIOUS SURFACE COVERAGE = 28.7% IMPERVIOUS AREA - C ■ LOT AREA = 14.727 SO. FT BOAT HOUSE AREA = 737 SO. FT SIDEWALK AREA = 187 SO. FT. IMPERVIOUS SURFACE COVERAGE =6.3% LOT AREA = 43,170 SQ. R OTAL IMPERVIOUS AREA = 9,361 SQ. FT. MPERVIOUS SURFACE COVERAGE = 21.6% <95^0> (Sa.8) 959.17 950.50 959.50 DENOTES EXISTING ELEVATION DENOTES PROPOSED ELEVATION INDICATES direction OF SURFACE DRAINAGE = FINISHED GARAGE FLOOR ELEVATION = BASEMEm’ FLOOR ELEVATION = TOP OF FOUNDATION ELEVATION E /cf2 REVISED PLAN 10/23/98 MPERVIOUS AREA - A LOT AREA = 5,748 SQ. FT. BITUMINOUS AREA = 1,761 SQ. FT. IMPERVIOUS SURFACE COVERAGE = 30.6% MPERVIOUS AREA - B LOT AREA = 22,695 SQ. FT HOUSE AREA = 3,578 SQ. FT. DECK AREA = 397 SQ. FT BITUMINOUS AREA = 2,078 SQ. FT. STOOP AREA = 60 SQ. FT. IMPERVIOUS SURFACE COVERAGE = 27.0% MPERVIOUS AREA ~ C LOT AREA = 14,727 SQ. FT BOAT HOUSE AREA = 737 SQ. FT SIDEWALK AREA = 187 SQ. FT. IMPERVIOUS SURFACE COVERAGE = 6.3% LOT AREA = 43,170 SQ. F 'OTAL IMPERVIOUS AREA = 8,798 SQ. FT. MPERVIOUS SURFACE COVERAGE = 20.3% <955o> (^8.8) 959.17 950.50 959.50 DENOTES EXISTING ELEVATION DENOTES PROPOSED ELEVATION INDICATES DIRECTION OF SURFACE DRAINAGE RNISHED GARAGE aOOR ELEVATION BASEMENT FLOOR ELEVATION TOP OF FOUNDATION ELEVATION u>-o /18* MAPU ^OWSERV.*r® » / ' \ I T 1 33* wpy^^' 21* MAra FO IP \ \ o nps^O-^^'-^y / » • Ui 5y =i= ^r,Jr ^ ;• MAPLE ........... \ \ *»• "i •'V '• /> ' ~( \ • y^v* *' Sv \ \ \\ \\ ’2K maple V ra* maple ‘s \\ v\d ^ \ MAPr^i ' > o- V ^iNV' > 25* »4V^lxO'^'%!^/ \ /J ^1 ■-' 0‘ * ^ 31 ! * A4 To?/ \ V \3a‘6. '« \\\ '' 24* maple \ '^A % e \ %V V. <^ /q \ \ <«?» ■>. V?r> <n :v X\ ^ ' -1x%i--.\ '•»c N A> V \H S>^ -7 Jjc DENOTES PINE TREE □ DENOTES CONCRCTE SIDEWALK (§52.50 DENOTES AS BUILT ELEVATION I /5" TO:Chair Smith and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM: Paul Weinberger, Assistant Zoning Administrator DATE:August 5, 1998 SUBJECT:#2428 Terrance Maurer on behalf of David and Christine Hardten 2515 Kelly Avenue Variances-Public Hearing Zoning District: LR-1B One Family Lakeshore Residential District (1 Acre) Lot Area:43,170 square feet (.99 acres) Application: The applicants have proposed to remove the existing house and detached garage on the property to build a ne\\' residence with attached garage. The applicants do not intend to remove the existing boat house with stairs along the lakeshore. This application requires the following variances: 1. Accessory structure to remain on the property w ithout a principal structure. 2. Hardcover in the 0-75' lakeshore setback. The applicants are requesting 924 s.f. (6.3%) where none is allowed. 3.Hardcover in the 75-250' lakeshore setback. The applicants are requesting 6,530 s.f. (28.7%) where 5,673 s.f. (25%)is allowed. 4. 1/107 Hardcover in the 250-500' lakeshore setback. The applicants are requesting AllWS s.f. (33.2%) where 1724.4 s.f. (30%) is allowed. ^242 S Terrance Maurer on behalf of David and Christine Hardten 2513 Kell) Avenue Variances 10/19 93 Page I F i Pertinent Ordinances: Section 10.22, Subd. 1(A): Lakeshore Setback Regulations Section 10.03, Subd. 9(A): Accessory Structures Section 10.03, Subd. 6(A)(1): Undersized Lots Section 10.03, Subd. 14(C): Lot Coverage Section 10.56, Subd. 16(L)(2): Allowed Hardcover Section 10.22, Subd. 1(B): Allowed Hardcover i^2428 Terrance Sfaurer on behalf of Christine Hardten 2313 Kelly Avenue Variances 1 0/1 9m Page 2 i ANALYSIS Lot Area and Yards LR-IB (1 acre) Lot Area Lot Width Lakeside Yard Side Yard Street Yard Required 80% of 43.560 s.f. 80% of 140' 75'10'35' Proposed 43,170 s.f.170 ’Foisting: 110' Proposed; 115' Existing: 27.7' Proposed: 10' Existing; 73' Proposed 161 ’ Section 10.03, Subd. 6(A)(1) of the Zoning Code states that lots under one acre ser\'iced by public sanitary sewer and platted prior to the date of the zoning chapter are only required to meet 80% of lot area and lot width standards. This lot does meet the criteria listed in the above referenced section of the Zoning Code. Therefore no variances are required for lot area or lot width. Hardcover Distance from Shoreline Total Area in Setback Existing Hardcover Allowed Hardcover Proposed Hardcover Variance Requested 0-75' 14,727 s.f.924 s.f. (6.3%) none (0%) 924 s.f. (6.3%) yes 75-250' 22,695 s.f.To Be Removed 5,673 s.f. (25%) 6,530 s.f (28.7%) yes 250-500’5,748 s.f.To Be Removed 1724.4' (30%) 1,907 s.f yes 500-1000 ’0 0 0 (35%) 0 none 0-75’ The property contains a boathouse and steps in the 0-75' setback. The boathouse would remain on the property upon completion of a new residence. Any approval of a site plan on the property would create a legal structure, therefore a variance should be approved to allow the hardcover to remain. The Code would not allow the boathouse to remain on the property following removal M2423 Terrance Maurer on behalf of David and Christine Hardten 25 IS Kelly Avenue I ariances 10//9/9S Page y of the principal residence. A variance would have to be approved to allow the structure to remain on the property without a principal structure. The zoning code does allow a stairway to access the lake. This hardcover is legal. 75-250 ’ All hardcover in this setback would be removed and replaced at the time of new construction. The applicant has proposed 6,530 s.f. (28.7%) of hardcover. The City allows 25% in the setback. This would require a variance to allow* the increased hardcover. The applicant has stated the pie shape of the lot is restrictive as the lot width at the 75' setback is 180' and the lot width at the 250' setback is 82’. 250-500' The existing lot is well over 50% hardcover. The existing detached garage (proposed to be removed) and driveway is located over this portion of the lot. The lot also will contain a shared driveway used for access to the neighboring property. The request for 33.2% hardcover (1907 s.f.) seems reasonable due to the driveway being of minimum size to allow' access to the applicant's property and the adjacent property. Structural Coverage Total Lot Size Total Structural Coverage Percentage 43,170 s.f.Existing: 4,151 s.f. Proposed: 4,712 s.f. 9.6% 10.9% The lot would not e.xceed the 15% allowed lot coverage. ANALYSIS Variance STATEMENT OF HARDSHIP The applicant's have included their statement of hardship in Exhibit A. The applicant should also be asked for their testimony regarding this issue. ^242S Terrance Maurer on behalf of Da\id and Christine Hardten 2515 Kelly Avenue Variances 10 19'98 Page 4 1. 2. 3. The property contains a boathouse that would remain on the property following removal of the existing residence. The proposal would meet required setbacks for the zoning district. Although the lot is undersized for the zoning district, it would not require a lot area variance for new construction. Properties under 1 acre serviced with sanitary sewer are only required to meet 80% of the standard. 4. 5. 6. The lot is pie shaped creating a hardship for lot area in the lakeshore hardcover setbacks. The proposal would decrease overall hardcover on the lot from 10,110 s.f. to 9,361 s.f. Two letters in support of the proposal have been submitted and are attached to this report. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of variances to allow the boathouse to remain on the property and for 924 s.f. of hardcover in the 0-75' lakeshore setback. Staff recommends approval of a variance to allow 1,907 s.f. (33.2%) hardcover in the 250- 500' lakeshore setback to allow a shared driveway to remain on the property. Staff recommends the applicant to reconfigure the house on the lotto conform with allowed hardcover of 25% in the 75-250' lakeshore setback. U242S Terrance Maurer on behalf of David and Christine Hardten 2515 Kelly Avenue Variances 10/1 ms Page 5 Attachments A B C D E F G H I J K L Application Plat Map Location Map Site Topography Current Survey Proposed Survey Hardcover Calculation Worksheets Elevation Views Floor Plans Letters of Support Property Owners List Permit Record I1 Terrance Maurer on behalf of David and Chrisitne Hardten 2515 Kelly Avenue Variances 10.19.98 Page 6 A • • Application # Date Received Amount Paid. $>9oO CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee $250.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $150.00.. (no change from original application) Variance for non-conforming structures $250.00 After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) PROPERTY INFORMATION Site Address KPiiy avpnnp Property Identification Number (T.I.D.’l 38 20-117-23 12 0038 _______ Attach legal descript'on to application if not included on required survey. Date Property Acquired,(month/year) 1 ^R) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. Present use of property: x residential ___pother (specify) Zoning District:_____________________________________ APPLICANT Name _ Address Phone (home) /~ SAME AS PhoneQvoric). Zip: OWNER (if different than applicant) Name David R. Hardten ___ Address: 2515 Kelly Avenue City:. Phone (home) (612) 471 9543 Phone (work) (612) 336 5782 _______________Zip:________ DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $ $650^000.00, Describe request in detail: Remove existing .house and replace with new home. (attach additional sheets if necessary) VARIANCES REQUIRED ^ Lot Area ___Lot Width Setback:Front Side Hardcover Rear Lot Coverage Average Lakeshore Other (specify) HARDSHEP/DESCRIPnON OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY COOTITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty or unusual property condifions preventing compliance with Zoning Code requirements: .«;hapg> nf hho ih tmpr\.Q.«;ihig> to meet current hardcover requirements and maintain a home consistent with ,,^e npighhorhood (attach additional sheets if necessary) A mm nting aaitile th the IP -m ly-^T^’-A a.. 4| Spsrn \ Isp-a-esj ■ >3t5 -'•S.-.r:i>->-^.r r ^ • ■* »~* ^ -V ^ V /®>Ci 4J, 'fllO«r* • rt % m ?/ «V^T.V CBlBBf • ^ ^ • - I •^om %}••^1^; Crystal •*.. 'agern£3sFaini ICKSOM " -ym Tolo AVI CJ Lt ■0 "' Spring <2.\SN0KUillI O «Park • ^ »#*• ••• • • ^ • V MINNETONKA 1EZ9Tsl=n Fwp^oin -' • .* \ AWW .^V v» •»• 24C 15 on ysE • '• .■:i ISLAND BEACH ^ V<J.-.‘;::;t*cT5rv '>• »A •. % ••**. I • *—* ■*!• • *•- CASCO w V « • - ^ W ^•% > *m~\. . • jr . *^ •. ,• ,- :JJ . T*,-i•■ *.* ‘‘f"* . • *^ •» * uJfl • i V s < • ^ • »' c V-.» t *v < .<r /^SPRAY pcA Locke Point I- * ^ #« lv<^ \ * * * ■- • • / m V--o <cc V" 5 V/) 00cr VI ^ Xu v>' LL 0«oII Cc N \ lAj 90 Scale r = 30 ’ IMPERVIOUS AREA - A LOT AICA -> 0.746 ta FT. BTUMOIGUS - 1.107 SO. R. IMPCHViaUS StfiTACC OCMRAflC - 1121 IMPERVIOUS AREA - B LOT AICA -MiHISa R house : MCA - 9LS76 SO. R. DCa( MCA • 967 sa R BIUliNauS MCA - 2.500 Sa R. BOAT HOUSE AICA WO R SOCWALX MICA • 107 SO. R. mnRvious surface ocmrage IMPERVIOUS AREA - C LOT MCA - 14.727 SO. R BOAT HOUSE AREA • 797 Sa R 90CWMX MCA - 107 SC R. IMPERVIOUS SURFACE COVERAGE • 691 LOT AREA « 43J70 SQ. FT. TOTAL IMPERVIOUS AREA « 9.361 SQ. FT. IMPERVIOUS SURFACE COVERAGE « 21.6% % % ______ OCMJm RHE TRCE oiiRna ooNCRCii sotiauc OEMOm AS MT CLDAMIQM 'f SSSt'^STTls. ho. HENNEPIN COUN1Y. MINNESOTA MORESS : a9l9 HOLY AVENUE ROM M€€IIMG COMMNY. MC -r^FTF; PVMO rcn OEOWCE a liAUHERooHsr. STS' HAKDCOVE^pft^J-CULATION WORKSHEET SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) ^0-7^/ 75-250’ 250-500*500-1000’ EXISTING HARDCOVER TN ZONE A. House Bo i* \lcas€» B. Garage C. Driveway D. Sidewalk E. Patio/Deck F. Laudscape Uaderialu By Plastic Or Fabric Leog^ X X X X X X X X X X G. Ocher TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A B . PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House _____ _______ X f/ouse B. Garage C. Driveway D. Sidewalk E. Patio/Dcck F. Landscape Underlain By Plastl: Or Fabric Leogch X X X X X X X X X X X X G. Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZON*E A ____ B . I ^hf: WIddx 737 I S7 xIOO Width 711 I&l S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. /V/727 S.F. S.F.St;% S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. A B xlOO 92V S.F. A y V S.F. B HARDCOVER CALCUL, SETBACK ZONE; (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75’ EXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House X RKSHEET 250-500’500-1000’ Leojth B. Gange C. Driveway D. Sidewalk E. Pacio/Deck F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic Or Fabric X X X X X X X X X X X X G. Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A - B . PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House _____________ Leogth B. Garage C. Driveway D. Sidewalk X X E. Patio F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic Or Fabric X X X X X X X X X w I Viddi G. Other TOTAL HARDCOVER LN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE a -i- B S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. X 100 S.F. S.F. S.F. % 7,S7fi S.F Width S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. 3.SSS' S.F. S.F. 3 i7 S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. X lOO A B A B i HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORK SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75’ 75-250’ ^250-5 EXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House Length % X X B. Garage C. Driveway X X D. Sidewalk X X E. Paclo/Deck X X F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic Or Fabric X X X G. Ocher TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE B PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House Length X X X B. Garage C. Driveway X X D. Sidewalk X X E Patio/Deck X X F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic Or Fabric X X X G. Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE B 500-1000’ s.f; 6 3-r Width S.F. S.F. S.F. xlOO Width S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. % S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. i ^07 S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. X 100 A B /^0*7 S.F. A ^S.F. B 4 A H cn S sg 1^ ro cn ^ cn CO •— rn 3: O gS m S 3 ^ S m r- ^ s o tn .—< M l.fZ J ,# O " ... .. • V %• •J *<• I 2^1 October 4, 1998 n Charles and Ceindice Nadler 2509 Kelly Avenue y\;\ V) 7 Excelsior, MN 55331 471-0275 QW'i City of Orono 2750 Kelley Parkway, P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 473-7357(phone) 473-05 lO(fax) Dear Michael Gaffron, Charles and I have reviewed the initial plans for the new home that Dr. David and Christine Hardten are planning at 2515 Kelly Avenue. We are writing to support the design plans that we reviewed for a lovely new home that will certEiinly enhance the property and our community of Orono. The Hardten ’s have been very committed to keeping their property beautifully landscaped. This new home will certainly be full of lovely plamts and trees that will preserve our lakeshore environment. I hope that in the future our commerclad areas in Navarre will be held to the same type of standau'ds for preserving our environment that the residents are. We need to raise the bar for new commercial development in our resldentlad au ’eas. We must develop the natured beauty of our incredible geographic location cmd enhance our community with areas of green grass, plants, scrubs, and trees rather than condone retail centers of blacktopped blight. Please feel free to call us regarding any issues with the building of the Hardten ’s proposed plans at our home (471-0275) or at my office (542-4853). Sincerely, (^uck and Candice Nadler City of Orono 2750 Kelley Parkway PO Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Jn Dear City Council Members and Members of the Planning Commission: We have become aware of the variances that David and Christine Hardten of 2515 Kelly Ave are requesting to make improvements to their property. We live two houses from them and are aware of the unusual shape of their lot, tuid the problems that this presents. We believe that the proposed plans would enhance the appearance of the property without negatively affecting the adjacent properties. We are in favor of the improvements that they have suggested. Sincerely, / Ken & Rita Heimbach 2525 Kelly Avenue Excelsior, MN 55331 Cc: David R. Hardten RUN DATE 08/14/98ATCH SOSPROP AODR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NANE/ADDR PROP AODR OWNER NANE TAXPAYER NANE/ADDR 38 20-117-23 11 002202525 KELLY AVE K C HEIHBACH t R E HEIHBACH K C HEINBACH 8 R E HEINBACH 2525 KELLY AVE EXCELSIOR NN 55331 36 20<117-23 12 0038 02515 KELLY AVE DAVID R HARDTEN DAVID R HARDTEN 2515 KELLY AVE EXCELSIOR NN 55331 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNERS LIST38 20-117-23 11 003200038 ADDRESS UNASSICNED DAVID J DELANEY DAVID J DELANEY 4800 CASANITA RD EXCELSIOR NN 55331 38 20-117-23 12 0039 02523 KELLY AVE BRADLEY A HOYT BRADLEY A HOYT 253 LAKE ST E WAYZATA NN 55391 REPORT NO. PI435401 PAGE 438 20-117-23 12 003702509 KELLY AVE CSC NADLER CHARLES t CANDICE NADLER 2509 KELLY AVE EXCELSIOR NN 55331 \ 38 20-117-23 12 0046 02505 KELLY AVE BRADLEY A HOYT BRADLEY A HOYT 253 LAKE ST E WAYZATA NN 55391 PROP ADDR OWNER NANE TAXPAYER NANE/ADDR TOTAL BATCH 503 00006 I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION, TO THE BEST OF NY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF. DATE 6//7/9B Permit No. 3mt PERMIT RECORD Date Type of Permit C, -Pi-lZf. /4> -/7-7 7 34 ^ '32 '~?9 <V«'£eC ’xnr>^ , 7 '’TyuLyd/^ Date of Application: 10/26/98 Date Complete: 10/26/98 60 day limit: 12/26/98 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION COUNCIL M££T1MG NOV 2 3 1998 cnyoFGacNO DATE: November 18,1998 ITEM NO.:. // Department Approval: Name Liz Van Zomeren Tide City Planner Administrator Reviewed: Item Description: #2430 Paul R. Phillips 2140 Sixth Avenue North Class II Preliminary Subdivision Agenda Section: Zoning Zoning District: RR-IB Lot Area: One Family Rural Residential District (2 acres) 4.5 acres Application:The applicant is proposing to divide his 4.5 acre homestead parcel into two lots. Each lot would contain 2.0 acres served by a .5 acre outlot. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission recommended on a 5-2 to approve the preliminary plat. The majority opinion felt that the proposed subdivision met the intent of the zoning and subdivision ordinance and that a cul-de-sac was not necessary based on the location of the existing residences and driveway. The minority opinion was concerned about the lack of a cul-de-sac and whether the rear lot should be considered a backlot which would require increased setbacks and a lot area of 3 acres for the existing ••'•sidence. Please note that the Planning Commission did not have the benefit of the Police Chiefs viewpoint which was received 11-18-98, after the Planning Commission meeting. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: To adopt or amend the attached resolution. Attachments A RESOLUTION GRANTING PRELIMINARY APPROVAL FOR A CLASS II SUBDIVISION AT THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2140 SLXTH AVENUE NORTH - FILE NO. 2430 WHEREAS, Paul R. Phillips and Mary B. Phillips (hereinafter the "subdividers") on October 26, 1998, filed a *brmal subdivision application with the City for approval of a two lot reside">|i«l plat of property ’egally described as: Lot 1, Block 1, Phillips Woodland Terrace, Second Addition, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, after due published and mailed notice in accordance with Minnesota Statutes 462.358 et. seq. and the City of Orono's Zoning and Platting Codes, the Orono Planning Commission held public hearings on November 16, 1998, at which time all persons desiring to be heard concerning this application were given the opportunity to speak thereon; and WHEREAS, at their regular meeting held on November 23, 1998, the Orono City Council considered the subdivision application of the subdividers noting the following findings of fact: 1. The property is located within the RR-IB, One Family Rural Residential District, requiring 2 acres of contiguous dry buildable land within each lot. 2. The property contains a total of 4.5 acres, including a low area on the proposed Lot 2 which impacts the suitable area for septic systems. 3. The proposed plat contains two lots as follows; Lot 1, located in both Orono and Medina, with an existing residence, proposed at 2.0 acres. Page 1 of 4 Lot 2, proposed to be 2.0 acres. Outlot A, to provide access to three zoning lots (the new lot, 2140 and 2160 Sixth Avenue North). 4. The property is not located in the Metropolitan Urban Service Area and shall be developed under rural standards. 5. Septic testing has been approved by the City and confirms that each lot has suitable " : Lr the development of a primary and alternate septic system. 6. Hennepin County has approved access to the new Lot 2 via an e.xisting curb cut. 7.Lot 2 can be developed for residential use without the need to grant variances to the applicable zoning standards. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that based upon either one or more of the findings, the City Council of the City of Orono hereby approves the preliminary plat application of Paul R Phillips and Mary B. Phillips for the property located at 2140 Sixth Avenue North per the survey dated September 23, 1998, most revised October 26, 1998, by Mark S. Gronberg of Coffin and Gronberg, Inc., subject to the following conditions; 1. NiC* more than three residential units may be served by the proposed Outlot A. 2.Access to 2140 and 2160 Sixth Avenue North and the new lot (Lot 2) shall be via the existing driveway. 3. Septic sites shall be staked and protected prior to construction The following list of final submittal: shall be submitted to the Zoning Administrator two weeks prior to the regularly scheduled Council meeting on the second and fourth Mondays of the month Required submittals are as follows: 1. Record plat drawings in the form of two (2) mylar copies and one (1) copy reduced to 1" = 200'. Drawing to include: A.Lot lines platted per preliminary survey by Mark S. Gronberg of Coffin and Gronberg, dated September 23, 1998, most revised October 26, 1998. Page 2 of 4 B C. D. Dedication of "d’ainage and utility easements" 10' wide along all perimeter property lines and 5' each side of internal property lines. Naming of plat. Maintenance and ownership agreement for Outlot A. 2. Legal documents required: A. Title opinion addressed to the City. All owners, mortgage holders or others with property interest indicated therein shall sign the plat and all other documents affected by such interest. B. The subdividers shall provide certified copies of all recorded easements currently affecting the property. C. The subdividers to dedicate to the City a road and utility easement granting permanent access, improvement, and utility easements over said Outlot A. D. The subdividers have crea^ 1 non-exclusive ingress, egress, drainage and utility easements over said Outlot in favor of all abutting and/or benefitting lots including a declaration of certain maintenance covenants wherein all abutting and/or benefitting owners agree to permanently maintain and pay the cost of maintenance for said future Outlot A. 3. Fees to be paid; Total due; $5,100* A Final plat fee = $200 B. Legal review fees = $200 C. Park dedication fee = $4,700 • Upon approval of the preliminary plat, the subdivision shall be referred to the City Assessor to determine value in accordance with Section 11 62 of the Subdivision O'^dinance. Page 3 of 4 Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held this 23rd day of November, 1998. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Gabriel Jabbour, Mayor I STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 23rd day of November, 1998, by Gabriel Jabbour & Linda S. Vee, Mayor & City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was ex^'cuted on behalf of the City. Notary Public Page 4 of 4 TO: Chair Smith and Orono Planning Commissioners FROM:Liz Van Zomeren, City Planner/Zoning Administrator DATE:November 12, 1998 RE:#2430 Paul R. Phillips 2140 Sixth Avenue North (County Rd. 6) Preliminary Subdivision for a 2 lot subdivision—Public Hewing Zoning District: RRl-B One Family Rural Residential District (2 acres) L ot Size:4.5 acres Application: The applicant is proposing a subdivision of his homestead propert>'. The existing parcel is 4.5 acres. The proposed division would create a new lot adjacent to Sixth Avenue North. Each lot would be 2.0 acres serv'ed by an outlot. Pertinent Ordinances: Section 10.28, Subd. 5, (B) RRl-B, One Family Rural Residential District Standards Section 11.10, Subdivision Procedures Legal Description: The current legal description is Lot 1, Block 1, Phillips Woodland Terrace. Lot Area: The proposed lot meets the minimum 2 acre lot size requirement for the RR-IB district, if Lot I is not considered a backlot. If Lot 1 which is proposed to contain the existing residence is defined as a backlot, it is then subject to greater setbacks and a minimum lot area of 3 acres rather than 2 acres. U2430 Paul Phillips Preliminary’ Plot November 16. 1998 page-1 A "backlot" is defined as: A lot typically separated from a public or private road by another lot and which gains access to the public or private road via a narrow corridor. Such a separated lot is considered to be a "back lot" when the corridor is platted as an outlot . A separated lot is considered to be a "flag lot" when the corridor is platted as part of the lot. When the corridor is merely an ea.sement over another lot, the separated lot is considered to he an "easement back lot". Originally in the sketch plan review, the existing residence was platted as a flag lot. The subdivider was advised to create an outlot to serve the existing landlocked lot at 2160 Sixth Avenue North, 2140 Sixth Avenue North and the new lot. A .5 acre outlot was designed which does not include a cul-de- sac. The subdivision ordinance requires that a private street that serves 3-6 units include a 50' right-of- way and a minimum pavement width of 24’. The proposed outlot is platted at 50'. The existing driveway is not paved at a 24' width. The Police Chief has advised that the roadway be developed to provide emergency access to include a turnaround. Sewer and Water The property is not currently served by city sewer or water. The proposed septic sites have been reviewed and approved by Steve Weckman, On-Sites Septic System Manager. See his memo in Exhibit F. Drainage The City Engineer's letter in Exhibit C notes an existing lov.- area on the new lot. He suggests that an area exists for a water quality pond. The Minnehaha Creek Watershed District has indicated via a telephone call that they will not require stormwater ponding for this subdivision. Flowage and conservation easements will be required across low-lying areas. Drainage and utility easements are required along the internal and external lot lines. Access and Driveways The current driveway serves two properties. An easement exists for the property owner at 21 -0 Sixth Avenue North to use the driveway that serves 2140 Si.xth Avenue North. The subdivision ordinance requires that a separate outlot be platted to serve three lots. The outlot as platted does not include a cul-de-sac. The City Engineer has recommended a cul-de-sac for emergency purposes. H2430 Paul Phillips Preliminary Plat November 16. I99S page-2 The Police Chief has recommended a paved width to provide adequate width for emergency vehicles and a turnaround. The location of a ftiture possible cul-de-sac is limited by the shape of the lot, the wetland, and the proposed septic sites for the new lot. The subdivision ordinance requires a cul-de- sac of 100 feet in diameter, 50 feet radius. The private road outlot will require the subdivider to provide a homeowner's association agreement for the maintenance of the private road. Park Dedication Fee The Park Commission has recommended a park dedication fee in lieu of land. The new parcel is being created out of Lot 1, Block 1 Phillips Woodland Terrace Second Addition. The lot was platted in 1986 as part of a larger subdivision involving land in Orono and Medina. Records indicate that $400 was paid for the park dedication fee for the entire subdivision at the time. The proposed plat has been referred to the Hennepin County Assessor to determine the fair market value of the undeveloped parcel. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff finds that the proposed preliminary plat meets the zoning and subdivision ordinance with the exception of the outlot not showing a cul-de-sac. The Planning Commission should discuss the need for a cul-de-sac and emergency access. Attachments: A B C D E F G Application Plat map Engineer's letter Woodland Terrace plat map Preliminary Plat Septic Report Topo/Wetland Map it2430 Paul Phillips Preliminary Plat November 16. 1998 page-3 ■Doc^ 1^/2C^(98 A CITY OF ORONO - SUBDIVISION APPLICATION PROPERTY LOCATION Siteaddress S/iC CCuSjTf Ro. ^ Property Identification Number (PID) Please check one - Property ✓ abstract or Attach legal description to application. ^7- //.<f ‘ CC ^13 torrens? 'P^:(,f^: f <; T^iiKfic-u 5Xxv,(. t> U( i i APPLICANT Name FA^/I- /?. FH-, ________________________________ Address OCx •7j~^ City_ 'XtHC Cc Rt> C-Phone (home) ^f’?3 S '7'y? Loxg A/lMC ML Zip Phone (work) OWTHER (if different than applicant) Name Address City __Zip Phone (home) Phone (work) (attach list if more than one) EXISTING LAND USE Number of Tax Parcels Development Size Present use (check) Present Zoning District PROPOSAL Acres Dry Land Acres Wet Land Acres Total, all parcels Residential; no. of units Other (specify)______ Division for Tax Purposes Lot Line Rearrangement Only (no new buildling sites) Subdivision for New Building Sites Number of Building Sites / / Proposed Gross Density Minimum Lot Size Proposed Use (check) / / Existing Units New Units Total Units Units per 2. Acres Sq. Ft. Dry Buildable Land Residential Other (specify)_________ r, •* t t / w* ' *.Nr ;• - MINIMUM MATERIAL REQUIRED FOR COMPLETE PRELIMINARY APPLICATION 1. Payment of fees (refer to "application fees" listed below. 2. Completed application form. 3. Preliminary plat information on Certificate of Survey. 4. Certified Property Owners List of owners within 350' (you must obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Govt. Center 348-32711. 5. .As ar. addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. Zoning Official's Signature ______________________________________ Date________________________ MINIMUM MATERIAL REQUIRED FOR COMPLETE FINAL APPLICATION 1. Pavment of fees (refer to Preliminary Subdivision Approval resolution and park fees if appicable). 2. Signed Certificate of Survey or mylar copies of formal plat. 3. Title opinion. 4. Easements, covenants, etc. 5. Developers Agreement and Letter of Credit. Zoning Official's Signature _______________________________________Date ________________ I. APPLICATION FEES (Zoning Administrator to check [X] those which apply) A. Application Base Fees: _____ Sketch Plan Review (Class 1, II & III) S250.00 _____ Subdivision of a Lot Line Rearrangement S350.00 X Subdivision Application (Class I & 11) S350.00 _____ Preliminary Subdivision Application S375.00 + S25.00/lot (Class III & all non-residential) _____ Final Plat Application (Class III) S200.0C _____ Legal Review and Filing: _____Subdivision only S75.00 _____Subdivision w/easements and covenants min. S200.00 _____ Park Fees (to be determined per Section 11.62) _____ Legal and Engineering Review Fees (as incurred) _____ Renewal of Class I an d II Subdivision Application S200.00 (No change from original application) _____Renewal of Class III, Preliminary Subdivision Application S200.00 (No change from original application) _____Renewal of Final Class III Subdivision Application SI 50.00 (No change from original application) B. Special Improvement Fees: Proposed Private Roads S600.00 + S.50/lineal ft.;_____lin. ft. x .50 = S______ Proposed Public Roads S900.00 + S.50/lineal ft.;_____lin. ft. x .50 = $______ Totals 3SC^ Request for City to Accept Existing Private Road S900.00 Proposed Sanitary Sewer Main Extension S250.00 + S25/stub Proposed Watermain Extension S250.00 + S25/stub Proposed Storm Sewer System (excluding culverts) S200.00 On-Site System, Site Evaluation Review (applicable to rural subdivision applications) S50.00/per lot x / new lots C. Flexible Application Fees/Misc. Fees _____ Variance S220.00 (S50.00 per each additional variance) _____ Easement Vacation Associated with Subdivision SI00.00 _____ PRD Application with Subdivision S30.00/Dwcl'.,ng Unit SO m & The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, City Engineer, City Attorney, Planning Commission and Council necessary to process this application and further agrees to pay all additional fees established by Date y/v'i /?v Date ^7 Applicant must have all subminals into the City Office 25 days before the P'^nning Commission meeting. Planning Commission meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to anend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agent anend in your place and to advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. RUN DATE 09/08/98 BATCH 503 PROP ADDR OWNER NAHE TAkPAYkR NANE/ACi)R PROP ADDR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER NANE/ADDR PROP ADDR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR PROP ADDR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR PROP ADDR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR PROP ADDR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORHATION SYSTEH PROPERTY OWNERS LIST 38 27-118-23 31 0002 02060 SIXTH AVE N TRINITY ENG EVAN LUTH CH INC TRINITY LUTHERAN CHURCH 2060 6TH AVE N LONG LAKE tm 55356 38 27-118-23 31 0017 02160 SIXTH AVE N PETER C WELLES PETER C WELLES 2160 SIXTH AVE N LONG LAKE HN 55356 38 27-118-23 31 0022 01090 COX FARH RD L 0 EVERSON OKA EVERSON LANCE 0 t KRISTI A EVERSON 1090 COX FARH RO LONG LAKE m 553S6 38 27-118-23 32 01180 PHILLIPS T H FOSTER I E L THIEL FOSTER 1180 PHILLIPS DR LONG LAKE HN 55356 0008 DR FOSTER 38 27-118-23 32 0016 01115 COX FARH RD C D I J K GARDNER CHRISTOPHER I JOLYNN GARDNER 1115 COX FARH RD LONG LAKE HN 55356 80 27-118-23 29 0001 00080 ADDRESS UNASSIGNtU DEPT OF NATURAL RESOURCES DEPT OF NATURAL RESOURCES 1200 WARNER RD ST PAUL HINN 55106 38 27-118-23 31 0005 02135 SIXTH AVE N RICHARD C VALITON ET AL RICHARD I SALLY VALITON 2135 COUNTY ROAD 6 LONG LAKE HN 55356 38 27-118-23 31 0019 02085 SIXTH AVE N J R HARESH I D J HARESH JOHN R 8 DIANE J HARESH 2085 CO RD 6 ORONO HN 55356 38 27-118-23 31 0023 02190 SIXTH AVE N PAUL R PHILLIPS TRUSTEE PAUL R 7 HARY B PHILLIPS JOX 755 LONG ntKE HN 55356 38 27-118-23 32 0009 0120r PHILLIPS DR J I K L EVANSON JEFFREY I KRISTIN EVANSON 1200 PHILLIPS DR LONG LAKE HN 55356 38 27-118-23 32 0021 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED FULLERTON PROPERTIES INC FULLERTON PROPERTIES INC 608 2ND AVE S HPLS HN 55902 80 27-118-23 29 0003 02160 SIXTH AVE N PETER C WELLES PETER C WELLES 2160 SIXTH AVE N LONG LAKE HN 55356 r; // . f tt REPORT NO. PI935901 PAGE 5 38 27-118-23 31 0019 02195 SIXTH AVE N DANIEL G I RUTH G HCPHERSON DANIEL G I RUTH G HCPHERSON 2195 6TH AVE N LONG LAKE HN 55356 38 27-118-23 31 0021 01120 COX FARH RD JAHES F I JOANNE H HILLIER JAHES HILLIER 170 BROWN RDN LONG LAKE HN 55356 38 27-118-23 31 0029 02100 SIXTH AVE N ORONO WOODLANDS INC ORONO WOODLANDS INC 2160 6TH AVE N LONG LAKE HN 55356 38 27-118-23 32 0010 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED HARY B PHILLIPS HARY B PHILLIPS BOX 755 LONG LAKE HN 55356 80 27-118-23 23 0002 01200 PHILLIPS DR J K I K L EVANSON JEFFREY I KRISTIN EVANSON 1200 PHILLIPS DR LONG LAKE HN 55356 80 27-118-23 29 0005 01250 PHILLIPS DR HARY B PHILLIPS HARY B PHILLIPS AQX 755^ LONG LAKE HN 55356 c " Vn u RUN DATE 09/08/98 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNERS LIST REPORT NO. PI^SS^Ol PAGE 6 BATCH 503 PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/AODR 80 27-118-23 29 0006 01280 PHILLIPS DR B G t L ^ BIXBY BRADLEY 6 E LOUISE M BIXBY 1280 PHILLIPS DR LONG LAKE MN 55356 80 27-118-23 29 0009 00080 ADDRESS PENDING PAUL R PHILLIPS TRUSTEE PAUL R E MARY B PHILLIPS BOX 755 55356 TOTAL BATCH 503 00020 TONU LAR€> MN r .« 11 • V i1 J u ■i•4\ r p* I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORHATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF HENNEPIN COUNTY OEPARTHENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION. TO THE BEST OF DATE ^ I Bonestroo Rosene Anderlik & ivll Associates Engineers & Architects doneitroo Roiene. Andcftt^ Inc is ^n AffnmMive Action Squ^t Opportunity Employer Princip€*is Otto G Bonestroo. PE • Joseph C Anderlik. PE • .*.uvm L Sorv<iI^. PE • Richard F Turner. PE • G«enn R Cock. PE • Rcdert G Srhumcht. PE • Jerry A Bourdon. PE • Rcoe*’ V Rosene PE and Susan M Eberlin. C ®A Senior Consultants Assocuite Pnncipt^is Ho.vard A Sanford. PE • Kvith A Cordon PE • Robert R Pfefferle PE • Richard W fo-ier PE • David O Loskota PE • Rcbcrt C Russer, a i A • Mark A Hanjon. PE • Michael T Rautmann. PE • Ted K Field. PE • Kennet» p Anderson PE • Mark R Rolfs P’ • Sidney P Wiliiarrson. PE. L S • RoCcrr F Kotsmith • Agnes v! Ring • Michael P Rau. PE • Allan Rick Schn'icJ:. PE Offtces St Paul Rochester. Vl/iiir^ar and St Cloud • Milwaukee Wl Uebs'fe w.vw bonestico com October 14, 1998 Elizabeth VanZomeren City Planner/Zoning Administrator City of Orono Post Office Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Re: Paul Phillips Subdivision File No. 139-2430 Dear Liz: We have reviewed the preliminary plat for the proposed two lot Phillips subdivision. The site is located north of County Road 6 between North Brown Road and Willow Drive in the southwest quarter of Section 27. We have the following comments in regards to engineering matters. 1. Access: An existing driveway along the west side of the property currently provides access to this site and to the properly located north and west of the Phillips property. Access to the proposed Lot 2 would either be from ttie existing driveway or directly off of County Road 6. The private driveway should be reconstructed to a minimum paved width of 28 feet to meet current City standards for a private street serving 3 to 10 units if access to Lot 2 is from the shared driveway. The private street design should include a cul-de-sac to provide room for emergency vehicle turning movements. An Outlot with adequate right-of-way should be platted for the proposed private driveway. Hennepin County should review and comment on the proposed access. Plans and specifications for any street improvements should be provided for review. 2. Grading: A grauing and ero.sion control plan for the entire site should be submitted for review. Erosion control measures should be in place prior to any grading. Additional erosion control will be needed during construction of the house and septic system. 3. Drainage: The draft version of the City’s’ Comprehensive Storm Water Management Plan vSWMP) shows that the site drains westerly to an existing wetland identified as LL-P4. Phosphorous loadings leaving the site should be limited to a maximum of 0.28 pounds/acre/year. A majority of the site currently drains to an existing low area west of the septic locations on Lot 2. This depression may provide an ideal lof.aiion for a water quality pond that could provide rate control and nutrient removal of siorni water leaving the site. Plans should be submitted to the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District for iheir review. A drainage area map and pending calculations should be provided witii the iuiai plan ser 4. Easements: Drainage a'^d utiiity easements should be provided 5 feet wide along all interior lot lines and 10 feet wide along the roadway rig.nl-of -ways. Drainage easements should be piovided across all wetland, drainage w'ay and pond areas. 2335 West Highway 36 ■ St. Paul, MN 55113 • 612-636-4600 • Fax: 612-636-1311 c I 5. Financial Guarantee: When the plans have been completed we will prepare an estimate of the total cost for the site improvements to determine the amount of the financial guarantee required. Please contact me at (604-4863) if you have any questions regarding this matter. Yours very truly, BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES. INC. /O?^ Tom Kellogg Cc: Greg Gappa, City of Orono rniLLirb WUUULAIMU l LKHAU 1 A LLIPS UL PHILLIPS 1. BLOCK 1. PH ERRACE SECOND ADDITION I COUNTY. MINNESOTA {' /r\ \j~ • ^ f Orolnoo^ and utity ------------ ^ •V L., %%8' j 2.ootj>c ii.VI S ^rrf^ \ \ l4->.v^.y 23.0 S 88»45*30" 7.4^' «1» V •*'*»•*' u. ' - " \ s V ••••J n 8 '' Tt ■' ^ X I A • tt^6 ^I€Um(0 4/4^f^ r 2.00t*i 83.00 N 88*45'30" W / • >0rdbo9« ond utBty —/ S 89*54‘ 07'* W 422.18 TO:Liz Van Zomeren, City Planner/Zoning Administrator FROM:Stephen Weckman, On-Site Systems Manager DATE:October 16, 1998 SUBJECT: Septic Review for Application #2430, Paul Phillips - Sketch Plan Review The proposed two lot subdivision requires the use of on-site sewage treatment systems. The site evaluation/design for the existing residence at 2140 Sixth Ave. N. was completed in 1990 and is still valid. The existing mound system me ts City and State standards and the future drainfield site remains adequate for this lot. Site evaluation/design for the future lot has been submitted for a five bedroom residence. The sites meet the minimum City and State Standards, but a small amount of fill must be removed from the south end of the future site before a system is installed there. The fill is most likely from the construction of Sixth Ave. N.. Based on the above information, staff recommends approval of the application. The city requires the drainfield sites to be fenced off prior to any grading or land alteration. XF.PTIC SYSTEM INVENTORY Address: 2140 Sixth Ave. N. PID: 27-118-23 31 0018 Building Type residence #BRs/GPD: 4 #Systems 1 Units Billed 1 Permit#: 3361 Date of Permit: 10/26/90 Installer: Quickway Exc. System Type mound Experimental: no Appliances lndry,dshw SYSTEM CONDITION Conformity: 1 Tank Condition: 5 DF condition: 11 Failure Pot: low SEPTIC TANKS Material: precast concrete Setback to Bldg: 15 Capacity: 1000,1000,1000 Cesspool: no DRAINFIELD Length of Lines 160 # Lines: 3 Trench Width: 10 Treatment Area: 85*36 Type of Filter rock,clean sand Soil Boring: yes Tile Size: 1.5 Under Tile 9 Perc Rate: 41 Setback DF-Bldg: DFHt above Wt: 3.2 Soil Type: loam, clay loam Limitations: water table WELL DA TA Setbacks - Well-Tanks: Pump Type: subm. Well-DF: Depth: 175 Report in File yes Diameter: 4 Method: drilled INSPECTION RECORD DATE 10/26/90 9/5/91 5/16/95 9/24/98 DESCRIPTION installation final inspection no surfacing compliant PUMPOUT RECORD COMPLIANCE DATE GALLONS 7/1/91 1000 1 3/12/94 1 1 2000 I »'• • » ^ J c<-< -r' A V ^'. \ W 'j •'. '«'••• #>* v% %. \, • ^ vV^ w ’ - 7.00 . ^ ) - V* • ol •4 *- 11. VSll - CC ' ■> - » \ \ u> Wl VV-- .^^.V->’v.-A $5 t^iv-AC<;'''\ .\ ' tr ,-v.ow< ^ ^ V«»H • %-^ < - J _ „ . -------------_v_ • \' ^ '3o'\ \ .V*'7 > \- 3 ' > V Vvofot^v--^ ^.\ »*,•?.<'.V gV% \ ®''-vV ■*». |Vi \ % 101.5 ' I ^ Li • \n /< .\ ^ • ..J ...30 / y o r> \ 5 W<KLt^\vT> s Ak / .>"<,• ‘\v" « ^ fy ^Q-- i I ^ &9<U C««»v l>«,t• 5 /, / -Pv-l v.f, VJ 7»________?^v>»>'*v.i5as*fe^ \<J8.* *U . J ■ j • • 7r f I *<‘^w\ *• O'?* VoV^ Qv^>^ ovi yO^^rr U>vA^ ^W>oV>f\» ^ ~€>U 100.00 1^iv" »;-^boc! ®(Vcoio!ioo Tests QSoil Bortngs ® Bench Mork u^d-i wr>. Stole:.'*. So' V‘•'s:4' -.TX /I Note: This system is to be constructed to meet the Wnnesolo Pollution Control Agency Chapter 7080 & I«ocal Ordinance ^ “2 4___SI'* _______ _ -'i!r_ r^. Check all underground utilities ---------------------------> property riF; Pf^vAV- PU^LUPS I'lA-O fn.kP.L, SoorrH LoT O'lot'v^O y VAC.nL tst ■ Cr.. J (a ... ~('~ S-P TESTING f^C. Designed ($?>, — nn*^:t^/>)/^ PM Ri? ./1Q7_-^*;r« S-P TESTING, INC.Steven B. Schirmers & Debra M. Schirmers 951 Katydid Lane NE • St. Michael. MN 55376 • (612) 497-3566 FAX(612)-497-5011 State License #394 June 23, 1998 Paul Phillips 2140 Co.Rd.6 South lot Orono, Henn. Co., MN .... / •Vi.. /V' . . A 1. This on-site sewage treatment system is designed for a Type 1, five bedroom home, in accordance with the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Chapter 7CS0 and local ordinances. Approval will be needed from the city official for a 10’ setback from the 50' driveway easement. ' y The soils on this site are SCS soils mapped - HcC2 - Hayden clay loam bordered by Gc - Glencoe silty clay loam. The seasonally saturated soils were located at 20" to 34".3 - (mottled soil). Due to the seasonally saturated soils, a Pressurized Mound System will need to be Installed to treat ticptic effluent. The bottom of the treatment area must be located at least 3' above the saturated soils. The soils at a depth of 12" have a percolation rate averaging 4.6 mpi. A pumping chamber will need to be installed to lift the effluent to the treatment area. The power supply and switches must be located outside the manhole and pumping chamber in a weather proof enclosure. A warning device must be installed with a light and sound device, this is in case of a pump failure. The manifold and supply line pipe must have back drainage to the pumping chamber. The distribution pipes shall have their ends capped. Be sure the rock and sand fill material are clean. The sod layer below the entire mounded area must be turned over, just break up the sod, be sure not to over work. 1 i1 Keep all heavy equipment off of the proposed treatment area before and after construction. The treatment area should be marked off before construction. This Design is not valid & the system will need to be relocated if failure to protect the areas proposed for On-Site Sewage Treatment occurs. With proper installation and maintenance, this system should have no problem in treating septic effluent effectively. Nothing other than human waste, toilet tissue, laundry, showers, water softener etc. should be disposed of into the septic tanks. Iron filters must be diverted out of the system. Garbage disposals are not recommended, due to adding more solids & fine solids passing through to the system. Excessive amounts of soaps, cleaning agents & chlorine agents may kill the bacteria needed to treat septic effluent. Additives are not recommended. Recommend to pump & clean your tanks through the manhole by a cfcitified pumper every 2 years. Check with your pumper to set up a schedule. Steven B. Schirmers * ^__ *.N . V e •’ 5 ** •• • A' *K ' •, •: V - G- NNclkS PhifilpS |4CV> LOT •.» '■ *i •KMC3 churck ^ ftOieC.Pi*)iC r" fMf.M- or -c ^ i rtv' rv •> 1 c N/ . H I r*• » • » *. ^ • — NATIONAL WETLANDS INVENTORY UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Mi COUNCIL MEETING Application Date: Completion Date: 60 Day Deadline: 10/21/98 10/21/98 12/20/98 NOV 2 3 1998 f rjY O ' 0R0N.0 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: 11/18/98 ITEM NO,/Jl Department Approval: Name Paul Weinberger Title Assistant Zoning Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: #2435 Jeff Litzen - Lutz Construction 3433 Livingston Avenue VarianceS"Public Hearing Zoning District: LR-IC One Family Lakeshore Residential District (1/2 Acre) Lot Area:10,113.75 square feet (.23 acre) Application: The applicant has proposed to construct a house with detached garage on a lot that does not meet lot area or lot width requirements. The lot is serv ’ed by sanitary sewer and has been vacant since the original house was removed in 1992. This application requires the following variance: 1.Lot Area. The lot is 10,113.75 s.f. where 21,780 s.f. is the minimum lot area for the LR-IC zoning district. Lots of one acre or less serv iced with public sanitary sewer and platted prior to the adoption of the zoning chapter are only required to meet 80% of the lot area requirement (17,424 s.f.). 2.Lot Width. The lot is 75' wide where 100' is the minimum lot area for the LR-IC zoning district. Lots of one acre or less serviced with public sanitar>' sewer and platted prior to the adoption of the zoning chapter are only required to meet 80% of the lot width requirement (80'). PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission recommended by a 7 to 0 vote to: Approve the variances as presented. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED To approve or amend the enclosed resolution. 4 CITY OF ORONO P.O. Box 66 Crj'stal Bay, MN 55323 473-7357 ZONING FILE #2435 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION DATE OF NOTICE; November 18, 1998 TO: Jeff Litzen 1241 Kadler Avenue NE St Michael MN 55376 COPIES: TYPE OF APPLICATION: Variance DATE OF MEETING:11/18/98 VOTE; 7 FOR 0 AGAINST Planning Commission recommends the following: Approval as submitted. NOTES AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS: Applicant ’s ne.xt scheduled meeting is confirmed as: City Council November 23, 1998; meeting starts at 7:00 p.m. If you desire ertified copies of the official Planning Commission minutes, they are available from the City ‘.ecorder after review and approval by the Planning Commission. jig f A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCE TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.25, SUBDIVISION 6 (B) FILE NO. #2435 WHEREAS, Jeff Litzcn (hereinafter "the applicant") is the owner of the property located at 3433 Livingston Avenue within the City of Orono (hereinafter "the City") and legally described as follows: Lot 4 and West half of Lot 3, Block 5, Navarre Heights, Hennepin County, MN (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, after due published and mailed notice in accordance with Minnesota Statues and the City of Orono Zoning and Planning Codes, the Orono Planning Commission held a public hearing on November 16, 1998, at which times all persons desiring to be heard concerning this application were given the opportunity to speak thereon; and WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City for variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.25, Subdivision 6 (B) to permit a residence with detached garage to be constructed on a lot that is 75' wide where 80' is required, and a lot size of 10,113.75 sq. ft. where 17,424 sq. ft. is required. Minnesota; NOW. THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #2435. 2. 3. The property is located in the LR-IC Zoning District, where 1/2 acre or 21,780 sq. ft. is the minimum lot area. The property consists of .23 acre or 10,113.75 .sq. ft. The Planning Commission reviewed this application on November 16. 1998 and recommended approval by a vote of 6 to 0. 4. The Planning Commission made the following findings of fact: Page 1 of 4 A. Tlie lot was previously developed as a residential site until the house was removed in 1992. B. The locality is developed consistent with the applicants proposal. C. The proposed development would conform to all lot coverage and set back requirements. D. The lot is provided with sanitary sewer. E. The lot was platted prior to the adoption of the zoning code. 5. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are j,.-»''.uliar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variances would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicants, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicant; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. 6. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicant and the effect of the proposed variances on the health, safety and welfare of the community. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants variances to Municipal Zoning Code Nection 10.25, Subdivision 6 (B) to permit a residence with detached garage to be constructed on a lot that is 75' wide where 80' is required, and a lot size of 10,113.75 sq. ft. where 17,424 sq. ft. is required. Approval w'as subject to the following conditions: 1.Authorities granted by this variance run with the property not with the applicant, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit within one year of the date of Council approval, or this variance will Page 2 of 4 expire on that date (November 23, 1999). 2.Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this variance shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 3.The undersigned applicant has read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of himself, his heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the Chain of Title of the property. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held on the 23th day of November, 1998. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Gabriel Jabbour, Mayor Property Owner (s) STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 23th day of November, 1998 by Gabriel Jabbour and Linda S. Vee, Mayor and City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notar>’ Public Page 3 of 4 X STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this day of , 199 _before me a Notary Public within and for said county, personally appeared_______________________________________ known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) NOTARY PUBLIC On this day of , 199 _before me a Notary Public within and for said county, personally appeared _________________________________________ known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC Page 4 of 4 TO:Chair Smith and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM: Paul Weinberger, Assistant Zorang Administrator DATE:November 6, 1998 SUBJECT: #2435 Jeff Litzen - Lutz Construction 3433 Livingston Avenue Variances-Public Hearing Zoning District: LR-IC One Family Lakeshore Residential District (1/2 Acre) Lot Area:10,113.75 square feet (.23 acre) Application: The applicant has proposed to construct a house with detached garage on a lot that does not meet lot cirea or lot width requirements. The lot is served by sanitary sewer and has been vacant since the original house was removed in 1992. This application requires the following variance: 1.Lot Area. The lot is 10,113.75 s.f. where 21,780 s.f. is the minimum lot area for the LR-IC zoning district. Lots of one acre or less serviced with public sanitary sewer and platted prior to the adoption of the zoning chapter are only required to meet 80% of the lot area requirement (17,424 s.f.). 2.Lot Width. The lot is 75* wide where 100' is the minimum lot area for the LR-IC zoning district. Lots of one acre or less serviced with public sanitary sewer and platted prior to the adoption of the zoning chapter are only required to meet 80% of the lot width requirement (80’). Pertinent Ordinances: Section 10.25, Subd. 6(B): Minimum lot requirements. Section 10.03, Subd. 6(A)(1): Lot size. 1^2435 Jeff Lilzau - Lutz Constructian 3433 Livings ton .4 venue ianances ////6'VS Page I ANALYSIS Lot Area and Yards LR-IC (1/2 acre) Lot Area Lot Width Side Yard Street Yard Rear Yard Required 17,124 s.f.80’10'30’1 O' acc/bldg Existing 10,113.75 s.f.151.9'34’22'10' acc/bldg Variances are required for lot area and lot width. The proposed development would not require any setback variances. Hardcover The subject property is not located in the shoreland overlay district, Structural Coverage Total Lot Size Total Structural Coverage Percentage 10,113.75 s.f Existing: 0 s.f Proposed: 1,468 s.f 0% 14.5% The lot would not exceed the allowed lot coverage of 15%. Surrounding Properties The properties surrounding the applicant's lot are undersized lots that do not meet the required area in the zoning district. Most lots are 50’ wide where the applicant's lot is 75' wide. The rear lot line is adjacent to a developed City of Orono park. Issues 1.The lot was previously developed as a residential site until the house was removed in 1992. 2. The locality is developed consistent with the applicants proposal. U2435 Jeff Litzau - Lutz Construction 3433 Livingston Avenue Variances 11/16/98 Page 2 3. The proposed development would conform to all lot coverage and setback requirements. 4. The lot is provided with sanitary sewer. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of variances from lot width and lot area resulting in a hardship on the property due to the lot being developed prior to the adoption of the zoning code, and the lot is provided with a sewer unit. Attachments A B C D E F G H I Application Plat Map Location Map Survey/Site Plan Site Topography Elevation View Sewer Map Property Owners List Permit Record U24S5 Jeff Litzau - Lutz Construction 3433 Livingston Avenue Variances 11/16/98 Page 3 A Application U • • Date Received ir>- Amount Paid. CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE^PLICATION Initial Application Fee $250.00 ) • (S5O.00 per each additional variance) £c Renewal Variance Fee $150.00.. i'I •> (no change from original application) '‘ V- ^ *,;) 3 Variance for non-conforming structures 325^^0 ^ ^ ^ After-±e-Fact Fees (Double application fee) PROPERTY INFORMATION Sit.. Address UVlMr^STTOkl Property Identification Number l~7— IH-2,3--OOCpStt. Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. Date Property Acquired. -------------------------^(month/year) I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. Present use of property: residential ___pother (specify). Zoning District: Crte. “Rlrrvdi^ j 7.. j:: fi/c Ci^-/ /Vr < OWNER (if different than applicant) Name _________________ Phone (home). Phone (work)_ Address:City:.Zip:. DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Describe request in detail: Estimated Construction Cost S_ (attach additional sheets if necessary) VARIANCES REQUIRED ')C Lot Area V Lot Width Hardcover Lot Coverage Setback:Front Side Rear Average Lakeshore Other (specify) HARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty or unusual pro^rty conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code requirements:^______________________________________ (attach additional sheets if necessary) 7 'AYLOP.I. ''•^(144)^/ 13.49 ^/i2) (va : b m6 m:sc . p 55!)\ \ \1a 5C 50 35 50 50 50. 1 *^y i**- ! 2) 140} ' 5 s y 1C 0 l4 C4 o5 9 r- 00^ 0> rsj — (12) oi «*.iw (11) 5C '^so • 50 '* 50 50 z i 5>/Ta •\j 23 c >•12 42). ^::c “Tl rvj (»33)f'J 50 1 50 m 1 SO 53 50 50.3 50.3 5^ 5 3i (9) ^cr (8) 4 -; (7) 50 50 50 s 'tsf > \ (5).n rvi I \- — \ \ ^ s 1^: TOM AVE 50 5C 50 50_ •£ • KT (69) 7^e V 5tn SOir.t ^ SC so ;-i 3:?q 58) (59) 5C 50 (71) (72)(73) 1/»/ (65) (64) (63) :(62) 23'w! (>«) (77) (78) 2s; 154. / S/<’* 9. '>■ >;•■ ^c. ^ 'G' v ?- ) /: , / r ‘ ' .vH 6«> ^7->, / ; ioi)( *00' 5C 3: 23 ( ! 14 ‘ 24 ^ 50 y^- • 50^ (90) 50 “5 (89) SO^ 1^' (88) • • 56-f\r (67) 5C /^' 50 ep tr 50 7'c^ (85) so^ cn —iT- “i• 50 (^84} • 50 (83) 50 3 Cl 50 ’ 5 c*. 46. \ •y 50 S7-- • • •‘*50 50 €./\ 50 5C •\50 50 50 50 50 »n ?!5 (91) ^ —. -,^ (92) IT^ (93)(94) P (95) v' • t-n y- (86) 2’9 • O' •r »T» 22- (142) •1 *< 1 ‘li 1 Cl 1 1 ^ uv ?24- (961 25p C’ —5 Cl i 2^(99' t* • V Ih 52 50 50 1 so 50 50 52 50 50 » ^^r- -■ ViT r -C Ai r;, '^(77)^}}3..:. (8>..-"''V'>J, \ ■*/ .-"" ' ■'\ s\ = e? - \\ v-X , (V /i-"9' 'll y 5(ioo)i! ^ 'P\</' 104. 5 T.32 \ V ' ' *' ** -> •> V' '- -^''4 - !• : *2-- /^tirV?r^5/ I » 5 «a ' ■ 'Ml • -m0 'C-*..'nr* ORONd ^ A ' « \ < wr • ^It'./--- «yf.>r'7‘. ^ V • 1 • ■l J* 9 t»« \S2iX* ,«oH />V?-.'iT';: ;lOHiis ‘.Win? g ;:-.v.r5r’', ^ / j-. -^V.t S • ;V>r t ►. *• • • .V 1' r. '^• V4rm • • ^ • • •• • • * « clij. •** i^-. <” . ■«-*;:• y ^ AShadBa^PoifU S-t i-'^''~'iK'*/^/ , \ « Mi ^ •-:? . •j'-- / Ck / \V : H deerjng Qg'^ ^•* rcn iMOBr. .. 0 2l _ "----------'Vi \.- ‘-..v.>.;- ■• I I— X . • *. ' • .' —iiciso*'' X-, _• • ' V AVI TdO RD S /I >anl 240(5 cn <MINN • >.•. • • *•, 7 1-’ ;i;a ■I .\ Btad^L^t I '■TBUOeil Spring Park ^XiHowum o >\ o<o r> .240 15 >:V V • •« ^ « «i •V* '. 4* • . • -• -” ••• » .•* ;rt .. I ^ • 4f • . , * / tf .^ * .s /Carman I .Pd&n Point C-^acc^V ISw A.: N / L- -Fj • • V ^ .GOOSE • ■' • ■ ISLAND . • * w’ • • f •.•• 4* •* • i . • « , • «•: .4 , 4^* .* .!-rW . r. > ^ :• • »- ^ . ... . r. > *^ •• J n R O -'V'' • •■'• - ^' • ■'' ‘A • ' .'* •.* J /XSPRAY fo*'• ■' Locke p^?***^%'* :*V,. A XJ-, • • . • * . . ■• * * T SURVi:][ H)l(! J A I. Ilomrs. Inc.m:«>rKli*Tlcm: A ^ W.-.I ll.ill of l.ot 3, IIIncK 5, NAVAKKK IIMt.lli:* , llcnncpht Count y, Hi nor'.f*! a . ^ini & ^liOciaUt, fine,mo» • (AHO •*cm% AMUl>MROCVCLOfMCM« COMMA (6t2) 421-9126 ixt^i viMCMfuouLAin:(IAVIOM MNV<l/r D o Denntrs Iron Honiimcnrn a Ucnotcft SplkuN set lot* Control xKx.s Denotes Exlstlni; (;rouii<l elevations (xxx.x) Denotes Propsoed Final Grades PROPOSED TOP FOUNDATION !=:i.r.V. PROPOSED GARAGE FLOOR ELEV. 975"*/ PROPOSED LOWER FLOOR ELEV. t IV^TE; Verify oil proponed grades and dimensions with all actual final plans. Lot Area « iO|ll3*73 Sq. Ft. Mouse, Garage & Drive 2,A28 ♦- Sq. ft. percent of coverage * 24X4— rTr'N./v/ • * \ \ \L lfc^cs'/"'20 Of- L ly^^OST^OA/ Ml f 71? « i f(»7 LD , ^ lav.* fi7 * hereby certify that this survey was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I an a duly Licensed Professional Land Surveyor under thiv^TaWn of the S^lc of Minnesota. Dated 9/24/98 My c.Minnesota License No. 12267 / C loX VOidtS' 1^' Lo4 A vca ' /OJD.1^ ... \0A\^ - IJctj’ r :V.,XcVC\c\x. ^ ^ci- C,.v,yro.^ Z ^llt ua»* A Lei" ( Cvj>^v\»y*c IHlIf 4f.. O /'•* 7T /^9 ^ .1 953.y o \ 962.4 962. I o969.2 967.3 975.0 / 968.7 973.9 972 \ m —• 958.7 961.4 > 960.1 O _ n 961 . __________________Q- - _ X r —»\959.4 X 960.7 X 961.2 X 958.8 958 TF^ A1 ) 1/8" =1-O' 1.(2 *12\ i5 Fascia m Fascia & Soflits Typ Trim-' T wrapped wood Ir.m Dbl 5" vinyl Siding od grids @ ‘font wdw's only jOist (R-3C)-. thur-max below joist Alum Solfit ent and 50% Area Tabulation Sheet Index Lower Level 804 sq It A1 Exterior Elevations & General Notes Mam Level Upper Level 804 sq It 820 sq ft A2 Foundation Plan W/ Cabinet Elevation Sub Tctal 2.428 sq ft A3 1st & 2nd Floor Plans Porch eosqft A4 Building Section Deck Garanp 133 sqft 484 sq ft A5 Electrical Plans g‘* vr p HT .»• ............. • • 1 • ... . . •• • ‘ • .•<•••• * * • • *• . • •6 _ • MH ,.• ..»• •• • 98 ( • •• • .. • » .• ••• * • ■ h/ 1 • • • • . .H. 86 1 !I ' «. • • • •••••••*••* w 948.83 S 948.70 f 133' 8" VCP o» 1.20% 947IC X Btvu • * • • • <•« • ••• •••**« 1 •• t •< «••••••»« »• . •• •• •• •>. • • •« •«. • • . M »•«•»« • •• ••••** • •> •• . ... •ii■______i a aaa • «• a • a.a«aaaa»* • • a.aaa . a • f • a. • *a. • . » a >« *• aa*a«a« • aaaaa a «■#.* aa a##*aa a «“ a-. a • -aa aa** • • ... a a.a . aa ‘ aa • - • a a • . a«a a a - a« • ............ *• 1 . . ... ..»• .' .... ••••* ......... ................. . . . •*• •• ••• .............. . !aaa aa------------- « • 1 ..................... I •aa.«a aaaa* • •'* ► *.aa aa a- a»a* •» a • ' ..-•-.a* .. a*a a ............................ .•a«a.aaa aa a aa a* *a • a a •aa a«aaa • aa«*aa.#aaa•aa ,aa-a* a. a.*-a* •• a...aa a i aaa •••aia.a'- • •• a.aa *a •a* a 1 • • • • •*. aa a . • • » a.a *a a*aaO»- * aa*a-.aa • #aaaa • aaa aa *aa a •• •# a^a a« aa • • • • • • • *•«••• • • • •• • •• «••• ... . .. 1 « • •••• •• *»•••• « • .«*••• , . • . • • » « t > . . . . • • •• a...*. • • •• a l. ■' •• •• •• • #• *• .»•••1.. . ... • ^ • a. aa« • a a ••• a. a . a. • a-. ^aaa • a • •.a ••• ••• 'a**.**..*. « a*-* ta«a a«a« i .a^a• 1 * . a a • »aa •• • • . . . ^ / • ;r ' V • TT^;.^ a. .‘.a a a^ aa a • a . ^ ^ a** ................................................ >.• .. .... • . • y ' •. •" • .. .......... y.....—^... . aaaa.a ..............................................* . • »a> a -a« • •••••• ... a^ •-% ■ a *^a »a-a* •• a»a .# • • .•.a^a»'^^#« a ••a.a.aa.^a aa 'a^a aaaa *>aaaa* a* aaaa . .a a .a t aaaaa* ........ .................. ^ aa* a a«.•* a * a ... a. • a**aa a a •* #a aa a •• • •aa a.aa aa a • ** • •• • • • •• . • • •• • • •« • a a • - - • a ■a « .a aa . .a • a : ■a . a aa* aa «. • -aa - a • . . a a- . ....a a • . . • a r • a ► • •• • ................... • * .-•aa*#* a. ...a- a a « • - • • * i • ' ' 1 ! RUN DATE 10/21/98BATCH 505 TROr AODR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR PROP ADDR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR PROP ADDR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR PROP ADDR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR PROP ADDR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR PROP ADDR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORHATION SY5TEH PROPERTY OWNERS LIST 38 17-117-23 93 0009 02293 SHADYWOOD RD K W I S A RODEWALD KEVIN W t SHIRLEY A RODEWALD 2293 SHADYWOOD RD WAYZATA HN 55391 38 17-117-23 93 0021 0393b LIVINGSTON AVE ROXANN H DEISCH ROXANN H DEISCH 3936 LIVINGSTON AVE WAYZATA HN 55391 38 17-117-23 93 0062 03933 LIVINGSTON AVE JEFFREY A t LINDA H LITZAU JEFFREY A 8 LINDA H LITZAU 1291 KADLER ST HICMAEL HN 55376 38 17-117-23 93 0065 03995 LIVINGSTON AVE CAROLYN M TILLOTSON CAROLYN H TILLOTSON 3995 LIVINGSTON AVE WAYZATA HN 55391 38 17-117-23 93 0078 03922 LYRIC AVE DANIEL E SWANSON DANIEL E SWANSON 3922 LYRIC AVE WAYZATA HN 55391 58 17-117-23 93 0081 03908 LYRIC AVE HENNEPIN FORFEITED LAND CITY OF ORONO P 0 BOX 66 CRYSTAL BAY HN 55323 38 17-117-23 93 0019 03999 LIVINGSTON AVE PATRICIA J GOAR PATRICIA J GOAR 3999 LIVINGSTON AVE WAYZATA HN 55391 38 17-117-23 93 0022 03922 LIVINGSTON AVE D A SERNA SDL SHELDON D A SERNA SDL SHELDON 3922 LIVINGSTON AVE WAYZATA HN 55391 38 17-117-23 93 0063 03935 LIVINGSTON AVE D V S E N BRUCE DENNIS V S EVELYN N BRUCE 3935 LIVINGSTON AVE WAYZATA HN 55391 38 17-117-23 93 0076 03999 LYRIC AVE F L S S E HITTELSTAEDT HR/HRS FRANK L HITTELSTAEDT 3999 LYRIC AVE WAYZATA HN 55391 38 17-117-23 93 0079 03908 LYRIC AVE HENNEPIN FORFEITED LAND CITY OF ORONO P 0 BOX 66 CRYSTAL BAY HN 55323 38 17-117-23 93 0082 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED TOWN OF ORONO CITY OF ORONO PO BOX 66 CRYSTAL BAY HN 55323 REPORT NO. PI93590I PAGE 16 38 17-117-23 93 0020 03938 LIVINGSTON AVE LANE W HOORE LANE W HOORE 3938 LIVINGSTON AVE WAYZATA HN 55391 38 17-117-23 <*3 0023 03414 LIVINGSTON AVE ROSEMARY P BURHASTER ROSEMARY P BURMASTER 3414 LIVINGSTON AVE WAYZATA MN 55391 i 38 17-117-23 93 0069 03993 LIVINGSTON AVE DENNIS L HEGER DENNIS L HEGER 3993 LIVINGSTON AVE WAYZATA HN 55391 38 17-117-23 43 0077 03438 LYRIC AVE LOIS M HUDLOW LOIS MARIE HUDLOW 3438 LYRIC AV WAYZATA MN 55391 !■ A 1 QJ38 17-117-23 93 0080 03908 LYRIC AVE HENNEPIN FORFEITED LAND CITY OF ORONO P 0 BOX 66 CRYSTAL BAY HN 55323 38 17-117-23 93 0159 03905 LIVINGSTON AVE SHERYL A PATTEN SHERYL A PATTEN 3905 LIVINGSTON AVE WAYZATA HN 55391 - H LL ,/._S.i/ esxr..'s §k v>^i.f2 fH O m Kl K %y iH M 3*‘‘/33 Z-4 V//I c; PERMIT RECORD Permit No.Date Type of Permit C'JUNGiLMESTiMQ Application Date: Completion Date: 60 Day Deadline: 10/21/98 10/21/98 12/20/98 NOV 2 3 J9S8 C)TVO^GP.OMO REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACl ION DATE: 11/18/98 ITEM NO./3 Department Approval: Name Paul Weinberger Title Assistant Zoning Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: #2437 Jeff Martineau 2565 North Shore Drive Variances—Public Hearing Zoning District: LR-1A Lot Area:64,250 One Family Lakeshore Residcuiial District (2 Acre) square feet (1.47 acre) Application: The applicant has proposed to construct a 3' by 13' addition to the residence located within the 0-75' lakeshore setback. A basement wall would be extended to allow the addition above the new foundation. The existing wall has been determined to be in poor condition. The property owner has stated that a portion of the lakeside deck would be removed to decrease hardcover. The house currently has a hipped roof line on the lake side. The applicant has proposed to change the roof line to a gabled style. The height of the new roof would not increase the height of the structure. The gabled roof line would be an extension of the e.xisting gable. This application requires the following variance: 1.Average Lakeshore Setback. The roof line within the average lakeshore setback would be raised to allow a gabled style rather than the existing hipped roof. Allowed Hardcover in the 0-75' lakeshore setback. The applicant has proposed to add a 3' by 13' addition to the existing residence for living space. However, a portion of the existing deck would be removed. Overall hardcover would be reduced from 2,775 s.f. (22.99%) to 2,439 s.f. (20.21%). PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission recommended by a 7 to 0 vote to: CITY OF ORONO P.O. Box 66 Crjstal Bay, MN 55323 473-7357 TO; Jeff Martineau 2565 North Shore Drive Wayzata MN 55391 ZONING FILE #2437 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION DATE OF NOTICE: 11/17/98 COPIES: TYPE OF APPLICATION: Variance DATE OF MEETING: 11/16/1998 VOTE; 7 FOR AGAINST Planning Commbsion recommends the following: Approval as submitted. NOTES AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS: Applicant's next scheduled meeting is confirmed as; City Council November 23, 1998; meeting starts at 7:00 p.m. If you desire certified copies of the official Planning Commission minutes, they are available from the City Recorder after review and approval by the Planning Commission. jig j. y/C' mo mM (lunumfi. dw M , mm 4 0 k W(M mfMmmct) mo(mMMa, (Di^fo 'p. ^j)f^K/^ 'pd (JuiMdJ) /M0f(f upi (kh- WllJttiMlM . ' (immk A(j^^ do. ^kik yi- 3.The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on November 16, 1998 and recommended approval by a vote of 7 to 0. 4. The Planning Commission made the following findings of fact: A. The residence was constructed prior to the adoption of the zoning ordinance. Most of the structure is located within 75' of the lakeshore. B.Removal of the concrete patio and a portion of the lakeside deck would decrease the overall hardcover in the 0-75' lakeshore setback by 336 sq. ft. C. F. G. H. An extension of the gabled roof would increase the height of the residence towards the lake. Although, the hipped roof is directing water directly to the lake. The gabled roof would divert water to the sides of the residence. The 39 sq. ft. addition to the residence would require moving the basement wall out 3 ’. The applicant has stated the replacement of the existing wall would be an improvement to the residence as the existing wall is in poor condition and of substandard construction. The proposal would not change any hardcover outside of the 0-75' lakeshore setback. The property contains a large wetland over most the north half of the lot. A letter in support of the proposed project was submitted by the property ovNTier located adjacent to the applicants property at 2625 North Shore Drive. Ed Callahan, 2545 North Shore Drive, was present at the Public Hearing and spoke in favor of the proposal. Page 2 of 5 A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.56, SUBDIVISION 16 (C) (6); SECTION 10.22, SUBDIVISION 2; AND SECTION 10.56, SUBDIVISION 16 (L) (1); FILE NO. #2437 WHEREAS, Jeff Martineau (hereinafter "the applicant") is the owner of the property located at 2565 North Shore Drive within the City of Orono (hereinafter "the City") and legally described as follows: "Attachment A", Hennepin County, NfN (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, after due published and mailed notice in accordance with Minnesota Statues and the City of Orono Zoning and Planning Codes, the Orono Planning Commission held a public hearing on November 16, 1998, at w’hich times all persons desiring to be heard concerning this application were given the opportunity to speak thereon; and WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City for variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.56, Subdivision 16 (C) (6) to permit a roof line alteration to allow a hipped style roof to be changed to a gabled roof w'ithin the average lakeshore setback; and Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 and Section 10.56, Subdivision 16 (L) (1) to permit 2,439 sq. ft. (20.21%) hardcover in the 0-75' lakeshore setback where 2,775 sq. ft. (22.99%) exists and none is allowed. Minnesota: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #2437. 2. Tlie properly is located in the LR-IA Zoning District, where 2 acres or 87.120 sq. ft. is the minimum lot area. The property consists of 1.47 acres or 64,250 sq. ft. Page 1 of 5 5. 6. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variances would not adversely affect traffic conditions, hght, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicant; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicant and the effect of the proposed variances on the health, safety and welfare of the community. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.56, Subdivision 16 (C) (6) to permit a roof line alteration to allow a hipped style roof to be changed to a gabled roof within the average lakeshore setback; and Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 and Section 10.56, Subdivision 16 (L) (1) to permit 2,439 sq. ft. (20.21%) hardcover in the 0-75' lakeshore setback where 2,775 sq. ft. (22.99%) exists and none is allowed. Approval was subject to the following conditions: 1.Authorities granted by this variance run with the property not with the applicant, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit within one year of the date of Council approval, or the variances will expire on that date (November 23, 1999). Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of the variances shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. Paee 3 of 5 3. The undersigned applicant has read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of himself, his heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the Chain of Title of the property. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held on the 23th day of November, 1998. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Property Owner (s) Gabriel Jabbour, Mayor STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 23th day of November, 1998 by Gabriel Jabbour and Linda S. Vee, Mayor and Cit; ’lerk ol me City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was e*x i Vi behalf of the City. Notary Public Page 4 of 5 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this day of , 199 _before me a Notary Public within and for said county, personally appeared________________________________________ known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this__day of_____ NOTARY PUBLIC , 199 _before me a Notary Public within and for said county, personally appeared __________________________________________ known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC Page 5 of 5 X-/ / 0/ Exhibit "A" • V •• 1 Tr The Northwesterly 50 feet, front and rear, of that part of ^ . 117 TsiRan^c 23, W6 st of theGovernment Lot 5, Section 9, Township Ui, No. .h R „ Fifth Principal Meridian, described as follows: Commencing at a P®'’'* in the center line of County Road No. 51, which point is 437. 4 foot West of a point in the East line of Government Lot 5, distant 1,260 feet South o East 1/4 corner of said Section; thence Northwesterly along the center line of said road a distance of 534. 6 feet to the true point of beginning of the property being described; thence.continuing Northwesterly along the centor- -■ line of said road to a point 265.25 feet Southeasterly measured along the „ ■ centerline'of said road from its intersection with the West line of Coverm.ent Lot 5; thence Southwesterly with an interior angle of 90- 41', a distance of 435. 7 feet, more or less, to a point in the West line of said Government Lot 5, said point being 507 feet South of the intersection of said West lire with the centerline of said County Road, said point also being on the shore of 'crystal Bay, Lake Minnetonka; thence Southeasterly along said shoreline to its intersection with a line drawn through the point of beginning and forming an interior angle of 84- 29' with the centerline of said road; thence Nor.h- / ■ 'easloVly.ixlong last described line a distance o£ 435 feet, more or less, to the true point of beginning. Tract II: That part of Government Lot 5, Section 9, Township 117, North Range 23, West of the Fifth Principal Meridian, described as follows: Beginning at a poini: in the centerline of County Road No. 51 running across - • said Government Lot 5, which point is 200 feet Southeasterly measured along the centerline of said road from its intersection with the West line cf said Government Lot 5, said point of beginning being the Northeasterly corner of that certain tract of land deeded..to Anna H. Schuler by Anna and Titus ...........Marcck by Deed in Book 551 of Deeds, page :*.48 of Hennepin County, Minn- • esota; thence Southeasterly along the centerline of said road, 65.25 feet; thence Southwesterly making an angle of 90® 41* to the right from said centerline, a distance of 435.7 feet, more or less, to a point in the West line of said Government Lot 5, said point being 507 feet South of the intersection of said West line with the centerline of said County Road and which point is I . . • • also the most Southerly corner of the above n»cntionea aeed to Anna H. Schuler by Anna and Titus Mareck; thence Northeasterly along the Easterly line of said Schuler tract, 440. 11 feet to the point of beginning. .T_r_a_c_t_n2£_ That part of Lots 4 and 5, Section 9, Township 117, North Range 23, West of the Fifth Principal Meridian, described as follows: Beginning at a point on the centerline of the main County Road; running Easterly and Westerly through said Lot 4, 300 feet Easterly from the pc'lnt / 7 where said centerline intersects the centerline of a side road runniitfe Southerly from said main road to the shore of Lake Minnetonka, said point of beginning being the Northeasterly corner of a tract of land convey 2d by Anna H. Schuler and husband to Hattie M. Bridgcman by Deed in Book 579 of Deeds, page 423; thence running Southwesterly along the Easterly line of % the tract of land so deeded which line is parallel to and 300 feet distant rrom the centerline of said road to low water mark or. tb.c shore of said lake; from thence Easterly along the line of low water mark about 300 feet to the North and South. Government line between the aforesaid Lots 4 and 5, and from thence about at right angles Northeasterly through said Lot 5, and along the . Easterly line of the tract of land conveyed by Anna and Titus Mareck to /\nna H. Schuler by deed in Book 551 of Deeds, page 348, to a point in the centerline of said main road, 300 feet Easterly of the point of beginning and from thence Westerly along said centerline to said point cf beginning, EXCEPT land described as follows: Commencing at a point on the shore of Lake Minnetonka, said point being 300 feet Westerly along said shore from Southwesterly corner t of Lot 5, Section 9, Township 117, Range 23, said point also being Southeast ­ erly corner of land now owned by Dr. W. A. Patten; thence Northeasterly •along lire of said Patten land, 370 feet, mor< or less, to center of Cou.»ty Road, said point being 100 feet, more or lesr, Northwesterly from inter.5 e>:tion of said centerline of said road, with line between Lots 4 and 5, said Section; thence Southeasterly along said centerline to intersection with center of ' private driveway extended and thence Southwesterly along said centerline of Xsaid driveway to shore o£ Lake Minnetonka; thenee Northwesterly along said shore to beginning • ••• • # 9 i I • • •* m J r TO: FROM: DATE: Chair Smith and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator Paul Weinberger, Assistant Zoning Administrator October 12,1998 SUBJECT: #2437 Jeff Martineau 2565 North Shore Drive Variances-Public Hearing Zoning District: LR-IA Lot Area:64,250 One Family Lakeshore Residential District (2 Acre) squrre feet (1.47 acre)______________________ Application: The applicant has proposed to construct a 3' by 13' addition to the residence located within the 0-75' lakeshore setback. A basement wall would be extended to allow the addition above the new foundation. The existing wall has been determined to be in poor condition. The property owner has stated that a portion of the lakeside deck would be removed to decrease hardcover. The house currently has a hipped roof line on the lake side. The applicant has proposed to change the roof line to a gabled style. The height of the new roof would not increase the height of the structure. The gabled roof line would be an extension of the existing gable. This application requires the following variance: 1. 2. Average Lakeshore Setback. The roof line within the average lakeshore setback would be raised to allow a gabled style rather than the existing hipped roof. Allowed Hardcover in the 0-75' lakeshore setback. The applicant has proposed to add a 3' by 13' addition to the existing residence for living space. However, a portion of the existing deck would be removed. Overall hardcover would be reduced from 2,775 s.f. (22.99%) to 2,439 s.f. (20.21%). i^2457 Jeff Martineau 2"}5 Sorth Shore Drive Variances u/ims Page I Pertinent Ordinances: Section 10.56, Subd. 16(C)(6): Average Lakeshore Setback Section 10.22, Subd. 2: Allowed Hardcover Section 10.56, Subd. 16(L)(1): Allowed Hardcover Jeff Sfartineau 2**J5 Sorth Shore Drive I ariances U/16/9S Page! ANALYSIS Lot Area and Yards LR-IA (2 acre) Lot Area Lot Width Lakeside Yard Side Yard Street Yard Required 87,120 s.f 200'75’30'50 ’ Proposed 64,250 s.f 157’45'68’NA The residential addition would be located 45 ’ from the lakeshore requiring a setback variance. A deck is located on the lakeside of the residence setback 15' from the lakeshore. 65 s.f. of deck will be removed as a result of the remodeling on the house. Hardcover Distance from Shoreline Total Area in Setback Existing Hardcover Allowed Hardcover Proposed Hardcover Variance Requested 0-75’12,070 s.f 2,775 s.f (22.99%) none (0%) 2,439 s.f (20.21%) yes 75-250 ’30,120 s.f 4,327 s.f (14.37%) 7,530 s.f (25%) 4,327 s.f (14.37%) none 250-500 ’22,060 s.f 550 s.f (2.49%) 6,618 s.f (30%) 550 s.f (2.49%) none 500-1000’ 1 0 0 0 (35%) 0 none The applicant is requesting a hardcover variance to permit the construction of a 3* by 13' addition to the residence. The hardcover would decrease in the 0-75' setback following removal of 65 s.f. from the deck and 310 s.f from a patio that would be completely removed. No alteration will occur beyond 75' from the lakeshore on the property. JeffSIartmeau 2"3S Sorih Shore Dnve Variances n/16 93 Page 3 1 Structural Coverage Total Lot Size Total Structural Coverage Percentage 64,250 s.f.Existing: 2,954 s.f. Proposed: 2,993 s.f. 4.6% 4.7% The lot does not exceed the allowed lot coverage of 15%. ANALYSIS Variance STATEMENT OF HARDSHIP The applicant's have included their statement of hardship in Exhibit B. The applicant should also be asked for their testimony regarding this issue. Issues 1.The residence was constructed prior to the adoption of the zoning ordinance. Mo.st of the structure is located within 75' of the lakeshore. 2.Removal of the concrete patio and a portion of the lakeside deck would decrease the overall hardcover in the 0-75' lakeshore setback by 336 s.f. 3.An extension of the gabled roof would increase the height of the residence towards the lake. Although, the hipped roof is directing water directly to the lake. The gabled roof would divert water to the sides of the residence. 4.The 39 s.f. addition to the residence would require moving the basement wall out 3'. The applicant has stated the replacement of the existing wall would be an improvement to the residence as the existing wall is in poor condition and of substandard construction. 5. 6. The proposal would not change any hardcover outside of the 0-75' lakeshore setback. The property contains a large wetland over most the north half of the lot. H245" JtffMartineau 2 “35 \orth Shore Drive I ariances n/i6m Page^ i STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the variances to allow a 39 s.f. addition to the residence and alteration of the roof line. Upon approvals to remodel the residence the applicant will remove a 310 s.f. concrete patio and reducing the size of a lake side deck by 65 s.f Attachments A B C D E F G H I J K Application Description of Request (and photos) Site Plan Plat Map Location Map Survey Site Topography Wetland Map Hardcover Calculations Property Owaeis List Permit Record ^243 “^ Jeff Mariineau 2 "35 Sorth Shore Drive Variances n/l6.9S Page 5 A CITY OF OKONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee S250.00 (S50.00 per each additional variance) Application^ Date Received /c Amount Paid 3 2.s~o P F fts: t-. rj Renewal Variance Fee $150.00 (no change from original application) Variance for non-conforming structures .^250,00 After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) i / PROPERTY INFORMATION . Site Address ~2S6C ___________________ Property Identification Number (P.I.D.)______tX?-- 1 1'^— 2.^ ^ W/— OOO^ Attach legal description to a^lication if not included on required survey. Date Prnry^ Acquired I l^QCa______(month/year) I (do) (<fo no^also own the adjace'’^ p'"'cels of land Present use of property; Vx^esidential Zoning District: \ .4- other (specify) APPLICANT Phone (home) 2^7^ Name >_______ PfroneCwork) ^ZjF)\ Address: KJoxTl «//)Ai^City: LA>ku'L.-ff^ _____Zip: I OWNER (if different than applicant) Name Address:City;. Phone (home) Phone (work) Zip: DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST DwScribe request in detail:_ Estimated Construction Cost S )rn’tiikZ- OOP (attach additional sheets if necessary) VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area Lot Width ✓hardcover Lot Coverage -V /Isetback:Front Side Rear Average Lakeshore Other (specify) t RARDSHEP/DESCP^F HON OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue i.ardship or practical difficulty or unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code requirements: ___________ (attach additional sheets if necessary) B November 2. 1998 Jeff Martineau 2565 North Shore Drive Orono. MN 55391 SUMMARY OF VARIANCE APPLICATION DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST I request three (3) changes to the structure located at 2565 North Shore Drive. Orono: . This change to extend three (3) feet to the existing dining room wall and change the dining room to a third bedroom as shown on the attached drawing The exact size of this addition is 13 feet by 3 feet. A total hardcover addition of 39 sq.ft. The roof line would match good and eliminate one existing gable, gutter and downspout. #2. This change would be to eliminate the hip portion of the living room roof by extending the gable to the exterior wall. This change would also include relocating thr fireplace along the exterior wall in the living room that is adjacent the existing deck. The fireplace would be within the foundation. These changes would add no additional hardcover and would eliminate existing gutters and downspouts presently running to the lake. #3. This change would be to remove approximately 65 sq.ft, of deck located closest to the lake. This change would be made to compensate for the change described in changes number one and number two. I have researched and examined many different options with adding on to my heme outside the 0- 75' setback. I had blueprints developed and also a model of the possible changes by adding a new garage with rooms above it. At further view this would require raising the roof higher than the existing highest peak. These proposed changes solve additional existing hardships. Number one is the replacement of a wall in the basement in the area of the existing dining room that is in poor condition and substandard construction. The proposed changes will reduce a substantial amount of roof water run-off into the lake. All the proposed changes will in effect reduce the overall hardcover existing in the 0-75' setback. The overall hardcover for my property is under the 25% requiremer.i. CTy<Sflr|^ l^ippCC^ foc^ Sofi.r^J* fjjrrep PT/Jt-'p Ccc X^♦Ut F4?l/0?c^jf7r\ t/OlkJ* ... iiii •;•■:■ '■■"'■-••.?« l:f?7?7ra » ii #-v All I' . 1 ^ • . • ,wr ■• - - <•:•. . -tWMm r*^.r-- ^ i \ Vw r A VViK .• ^ 'tc:>.'i !2crr)DiZ Pj>j^oy /-r Dtct Z. {j>o rr£ j2<.I r> /L^l-^e j^lOac 3 Jk .A SWM V-: L ■ • .•5l i ¥ .•sr:iv=c:9 " t , J-JJl 1 fi lIsI---- J.‘igllK8i i'*it r .'i**- ' .* ^ • <!♦<■ t:.V ^ • \ ^ ' ' ' i" • ^ *• • • ^ . • .* *^ k ^ 1 * • o-.^' V-^. ' .'• ': . ’ ; <-. / .V.. --i. . rM DiI ■iJi-'-ne A’s. i>(S.C7/gi5-^ ^ CP^!.y^ O/^ D>«3c,^ M 'l: t y i V j • ; V. 0 /> r.' r /- VikvI.; sV <1 "V’I ’'i^» :•' M 1 ? : ■ * f V i,:'; k A .• . • •• % ^ V ' H 'V I. ' ' - I ^ C V J f' • *- »''**'• r t: 7s ' • • • • ^>- • •: • '^ '- .iV:. S°1 5/} ^ ■J 3'> ^oc4-L'^ n.K>^^TZ ^ 2cp *^ fs~I"" ' r-oo «a5.PCcif • •/ / • /f-5 N • ^fO^« P ;|iA< Sfone,pnVc I \ \ 2^^ //.•^ V/.V yv.^ //. ^ 7.tf P«tK- / CM<. Jfc»f> /ro/V^*r C I 8^ W0M . (r/a.c/t /yu - -\ , \ 51.T! \ ' 92^.^ ■ATS tOMfUn >: DE m TOX C9tt<\}IO| Line wxrTE \ 400 DEVtM LA coua LOiavicw cn ^, ....................................................................... ‘ ^ m ,/.?!V".‘......"’ *“«t <0 • ••b 0\ I* ( ? a • * ^ U “: Aansooa vat ORON »v>) F(A FAUCM LAXE French , - .. . - Lake mm .,5jt ;iOHMs •;-: i c- ‘j •- rt^ pRONQ vA 1600 CAURTlf R .\V«.r i J ^ ^ A'- -* ‘ r-1 •;: '>*.• •v - ’'//A^: ‘ \••-.If;/V-?'.:., V*;. ^7“ : *•. 111 .. 'r ■' ♦. .* MINNETONKA ... >• •^-* ,1 V •-• a t . F ^0^ C0^'» # T •// ^ // 2 IL h. i;!! i I.! j,.. 11 h i i - n I n fSi = i83JJi5S5-IrH33|||2ls5355 = :5|| s 5 5 : ^ : r 2 I - M «M • M ••0 — ft. *<* o 1 2 S 8 ✓ #'0 n n >! o • -^ » I •O ft V wr f ^ Kt I* V % ^ M'l 3 W \. ‘CD.n A r ?A -A ■%, \ X /? v>r // 4^- X r .=/' / \ X \ ffi! //I([/f- y 4 2* A\x \ \ V /> y 2 •T/ / • ^ » /> o A y.;x /iv/era^c, LaVjL^n Se^-Vio V V 4 -Jerr /^/(RTn~ieAi> HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET J / ^iO- SET3ACK ZONE! (CIRCLE ONE) C°~/5j) 75-250' 250-500' 500-1000' ... Existing Hardcover in Zone /o-Zf- 7 ^ • t ^ f • • a . ■ H ouse __• X .1739 S.F. • LENGTH • X . WIDTH 4a afose^ 8 J ■x t3 ^ootn«*-' - .r7 0/y-» -i'S 4f.sc,r _____________ S.F. - ^.^<T WAiv.5 1 7C?X .\,Z 8 204 • • • S.F. ■ CoHC Patio •• X .310 ail ^ T“o £f (fwc Walk X .1 S.F. B.Garage . _X _S.F,• c.D riveway X _S.F. X _ • • S.F. D..Sidewalk 'X _8 S.F. X _8 S.F. ..... X 8 • S.F. • E.^atio / D eck X _» . • • S.F. F.Landscape - X • .. .• S.F. areas underlain BY ,_ X • 8 S.F. PLASTIC SHEETING _ X _ • • • S.F. ^TfP^5,2. b,0 _ X 4-, 7 5.2 . 24 32 S.F. <^Td?C»P G. Other - X S.F. w 1 Total H ardcover in Zone Z775 S.F \i,o7ot t.T. rn IX.070Total Property Area in Zone /2^ Oyo X 100 -2 77.5' 4 B 2d?. 2/ • t > ' ./ Jpff /V1/4Rr/,ve/u/ HArWCOVER CALCULATWII WORKSjji acin^i.iwunti oMii) 0-75'(^7!3-259l Cxi ST INC IlAnocovER in Zone A. ■ House . X V>r/- '' 250-500' 500-1000'%V''^''--. length ( Z(S) 3 •X WIDTH iff ' c c yv?4U^ 37 X /.z = 44 0 • r t • • c tr • X • • X s Q c B. • Garage 19. S X 18.2 355 ”c. p C.Driveway • X = • 880-* *c p • V^/tAMUC X = ZI70 • • c p D. • S idewalk •X c c X • ^ p E.X _ S.F. ^ p ^ATIO/Deck X F,Landscape . X ^ pAREAS UNDERLAIN BY • ,. X s ^ pPLASTIC SHEETING X • s • 0 • r • • S.F. , S • F # S.F. X • G. Other X • Total Hardcover • IN Zone "^^27 • S.F. / Total Property Area in Zone isjLifi_s.F. ri ^3Z7 ^rT\Jo.izo X100 14.37 ■% ,7 ,4. yr» // «.‘ * ...1 4^1■-• *w •’ })/ JeffHARDCOVER CALCULATIOH WORKSHEET i SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75' 75-250' (250-500 I 3 500-1000' • Existing Hardcover in Zone • *T|- i. !.l ;| ■ ' ' 2 A. House length f ’ w: t: i; i *. jR.* i-i: '4. : • I ^ ■a ■' 1 ' J •7!r f * ’ r ■ 1. •;* ! B.. Garage 1'. If •c. Driveway _ HO •• f 11 D. Sidewalk -i- • I * •• • • n • 4 T • E. Patio/ Deck . i -!MI* 1 F.Landscape areas underlain BY PLASTIC sheeting * ? J, G. Jv .V Other WIDTH X X X \ X X X X X — 4 H!• 4 Total Hardcover in Zone Total Property Area in Zone 5 t* ^0C/u\>Cf' ■ . / / £.n <0. f t . t</U' 3^0 S.F. 5*-/J-- 9<p AJa rwy.o Cfr S.F./4 O^off^ S.F. S.F. S.F. S.P-. • • S.F. \ S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. . S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. 2-^ Q S.F. B 2 2. X 100 = - % 'rV -J •. -i#. • • \ • • • •» .V.;--' ,• ' V ^ •. 'T/""'’ •• -■■• • • C' i • —ff!I)7 4 PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEMPROPERTY OWNERS LIST 38 09 117 23 41 0003 2S4S NORTH SHORE DR CAROL G CALLAHAN CAROL G CALLAHAN BOX 72 CRYSTAL BAY MN S5323 CONDMN 8 38 09 117 23 41 0004 2S6S NORTH SHORE DR JEFFREY L MARTINEAU JEFFREY L MARTINEAU 2565 NORTH SHORE DR WAYZATA MN 55391 CONDMN I 38 09 117 23 41 0009 38 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED CHARLES & BIRGITi’A SCHOEN CHARLES & BIRGITTA SCHOEN 2430 NORTH SHORE DR WAYZATA MN 55391 CONDMN 8 38 09 117 23 42 0003 2625 NORTH SHORE DR iXNGBLA E WOODHOUSE ANGELA E WOODHOUSE 2625 NORTH rHORE DR WAYZATA MN 55391 CONDMN 8 PROP ADDR OWNER Name TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR 437 I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS kEPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPERARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION, TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF DATE im Mu) !a4 ‘6 3 ^ c- IM ’ S' /A ':£2K -'i/73 1(1^^ /A^iJL PERMIT RECORD I I-z ■_ s >1 ILA-I- fi ‘Z- /</ ,v^/ y/ - . c/1»j'K V- ZI -.p ' O 3 7- 4 f.r 7-j, K Permit No. JltJ________ Date Type of Permit ___________________3(4tf al2i4 ___ 0'^~Tt !oo^1 ____ /<r-Slfo<w^/S/9C S'^ 5-cf ^S'^uJe/’ Hooka ^ /„C?0 ■.->/// UJjlSJ) IAJ: \tT7 '/ ; A'l . -a. ,/c UcA n -AV-<~<y( I Date of Application: 10/28/98 Date Complete: 10/28/98 60 day limit: 12/28/98 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION COUNCIL MESTiNO NOV 2 3 1998 CITYC^CR0^;O DATE: November 18, 1998 ITEM NO.: A/ Department Approval: Name Liz Van Zomcren Title City Planner Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: #2438 Michael Sletten 4680 Bayside Road Class I Subdivision-Lot Line Rearrangement Zoning District: RR-IA One Family Rural Residential District (5 acres) Lot Area:6.51 acres to be divided Application: The applicant is proposing to divide his 6.51 acre parcel into two parcels to allow a .25 acre comer of the existing parcel to be sold to his neighbor (B. Peter Achey) to provide a suitable septic site for the adjacent 1 acre lot. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: To unanimously (7-0) to approve the lot line rearrangement. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: To approve application #2438 to allow the applicant to divide parcel B from the existing parcel to be sold and attached to the property at 4720 Bayside Road to provide a suitable septic site, subject to an executed drainage and utility easements for 10' along both sides of the new lot lines and the applicant to provide a consent form from his mortgage company to attach to the resolution. Attachments A RESOLUTION APPROVING A SUBDIVISION OF A LOT LINE REARRANGEMENT OF A PROPERTY LOCATED AT 4680 BAYSIDE ROAD FILE NO. 2438 WHEREAS, the City of Orono is a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Orono (hereinafter "City Council") has adopted subdivision regulations for the orderly, economic and safe development of land within the City; and WHEREAS, the City Council has coasidered the application for a subdivision of a lot line rearrangement by Michael D. Sletten and Mary Kay Sletten aka Mary Kay Snetsinger (hereinafter "the subdividers") of properties legally described on the survey attached to this resolution as Parcels A and B (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the subdividers have completed all requirements of the City for a Class I subdivision of properties to separate Parcel B from Parcel A to allow Parcel A to be legally combined with the adjacent property at 4720 Bayside Road. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Orono hereby approves the Class I subdivision and combination of the above referenced properties by the subdivider as shown on the Certificate of Survey by Charles F. Anderson, a licensed surveyor of Lot Surveyors Co., Inc., dated October 28, 1998, and attached to this resolution, subject to the following conditions: 1.Upon approval of this division by the City Council, B. Peter Achey, owner of 4720 Bayside Road, shall apply to the City for the legal combination of Parcel B to 4720 Bayside Road (38-31-118-23-33-0006) as described in the above referenced sur\'ey. 2.The aforesaid division as shown on the attached Certificate of Survey shall be filed by the City of Orono with either the Hennepin County Recorder ’s Office or Registrar of Titles Office on or before May 23, 1998 together with a certified original copy of this resolution. Page 1 of 2 3. 4. 5. Drainage and utility easements to be granted along 10’ of both sides of the new lot lines. Title opinion addressed to City. All owners, mortgage holders or others with property interest indicated therein shall sign the plat and all other documents affected by such interest. The approval granted by this resolution shall expire if the division has not been filed by the date specified above. In that event, it will be necessary to file a new application with the City of Orono for subdivision review. Adopted by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota this 23rd day of November, 1998. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Gabriel Jabbour, Mayor STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 23rd day of November, 1998 by Gabriel Jabbour and Linda S. Vee, Mayor and City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public Page 2 of 2 DRAINAGE AND UTILITIES EASEMENT THIS INDENTURE, made this day of , 19__, by and between Michael D. Sletten and Mary K. Sletten aka Mary K. Snetsinger hereinafter referred to as "Grantor(s)", and the City of Orono, a municipal corporation, its employees, interests and assigns, hereinafter referred to as "Grantee”. WITNESS, THAT Grantor(s), in consideration of the sum of One Dollar ($1.00) and other good and valuable consideration given by Grantee, the receipt ol which is acknowledged by Grantor(s), do(es) hereby grant, bargain, sell and convey to Grantee, its successors and assigns, a perpetual easement for drainage and utility purposes, including the right to construct and maintain the same, together with the right of the public for access over, above, under and across the land located in the State of Minnesota, County of Hennepin, legally described as follows: See attached Exhibit A which is made part of this document. In addition to any other remedy the Grantee may have, the covenants and restrictions contained herein may be enforced by injunction. Grantor(s) covenant that they are in fee title to the above property, have a lawful right and authority to convey and grant this easement, and that the land is free from all encumbrances except: Grantor(s) have executed this document the day and year set forth above. GRANTOR(S) STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) This instrument was acknowledged before me this day of ..by NOTARY PUBLIC This instrument was drafted by: City of Orono P.O. Box 66 Cr>stal Bay, MN 55323 TO:Chair Smith and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM: DATE: Liz Van Zomeren, City Planner/Zoning Administrator November 13, 1998 SUBJECT: #2438 Michael Sletten 4680 Bayside Road Lot Line Rearrangement—Public Hearing Zoning District: Lot Area: RR-IA One Family Rural Residential District (5 acres) Existing Proposed 4680 Bayside Road (applicant) 6.51 acres 6.26 acres 4720 Bayside Road 180' X 242' (approximately 1 acre) 1.25 acres Application:The applicant is the property owner of the 6.51 acre parcel located at 4680 Bayside Road. He is requesting approval to sell a comer of his property that measures .25 acres to his adjacent neighbor at 4720 Bayside Road for a septic area. The septic system inventor)' for both parcels is provided in Exhibits F and G. The proposal will reduce the size of the existing 6.5 1 acre by a quarter acre and increase the size of the adjacent lot. The adjacent lot is non-conforming as to the 5 acre minimum lot size requirement. The proposed lot line rearrangement will not interfere with the location of the primary or alternate site for the applicant's property. Pertinent Ordinances: • Section 10.27, Subd. 5, (B) RR-1A Zoning Standards H243S Michael Sletten 4680 Bayside Road 11/16 98 page-1 i ANALYSIS Lot Area and Yards RR-IA District Standards Lot Area Lot Width Street Yard Side Yard Rear Yard 5 acres 300'100'50’100' The applicant's parcel will continue to meet lot area and setback requirements. The lot currently does not meet lot width requirements. The proposed lot line rearrangement will not further diminish the lot width at the required front yard setback. The proposed lot line rearrangement will increase the adjacent property's total lot area from 1 to 1.25 acres. The lot line rearrangement will not improve the lot width for the adjacent property, as the addition is to the rear. Issues 1.Tlie lot line rearrangement will provide a suitable septic site to an existing 1 acre parcel that has a non*compliant system. 2.The existing 6.5 acre parcel will not be diminished in acreage so as to become non- conforming as to lot size. 3.The 6.5 acre paicel is oddly configured. The proposal is to remove a comer and attach it to the rear of t.ie adjacent property and would be connected by 20' of common boundary. 4.Existing drainage and utility easements exist along the external lot lines. The easements should be revised to take 10' drainage and utility easements along the new exterior lot lines of the parcel. 5.The applicant will need to obtain a consent form from his morgtage company to sell a portion of the property to the adjacent property owner. f*243S Michael Sletten 4680 Bay-side Road II/I6/9S page-2 1 STAFF RECOMMENDATION To discuss the configuration of the lot line rearrangement and the need for easements along the perimeter of the parcels. Attachments A B C D E F G Application Plat map Property Owner's list Proposed lot line rearrangement Proposed easements-drawn by staff Septic diagram for 6.5 acre parcel Septic Inventory 3 '1 4 i ^2438 Michael Sletten 4680 Bayside Road I I/I 6/98 page~3 £ Application » g<4 3? Date Received Amount Paid ^3^ * A CITY OF ORONO - SUBDIVISION APPLICATION PROPERTY LOCATIONl/Kl I JLCM^AllUi> ^ Siie address tP/y Propert>' Identiflcati^Numb^r (PIP) ^ ^ 3 - 3 ? f Please check one - Property abstract or torrens? Attach legal description to application. APPLICANT Name ^ ^ /7 Address r-^- City i<> /O ^ xV __________Phone (home) ___Zip.^>*sr v Phone (work) OWNER (if different than applicant) Name Address City ___;Zip Phone (home) _ Phone (work) (attach list if more than one) EXISTING I.AND USE Number of Tax Parcels Development Size Present use (check) /■■T/ Present Zoning District Acres Dry Land Acres Wet Land Acres Total, all parcels Residential; no. of units___^ Other (specify)__________ R^-IA :z PROPOSAL Division for Tax Purposes Lot Line Rearrangement Only (no new buildling sites) " Subdivision for New Building Sites Number of Building Sites ^ Existing Units O New Units 5 Total Units Proposed Gross Density Minimum Lot Size Proposed Use (check) Units per ___Acres Sq. Ft. Dry Buildable Land Residential Other (specify)_________ 1#.v;;• ^J *v. •» V ./ i / IIIMMUM MATERIAL REQUIRED FOR COMPLETE PRELIMINARY APPLICATION 1. Pa>-tnent of fees (refer to "application fees" listed below. 2. Completed application form. 3. Preliminary plat information on Certificate of Survey Mnciirfslaw^ of “y “'>>« P«<="= ''«!■ "o.ifi«d ofihU applicalion. ^ *---------------------------------------------------------- Date___________________ >n.MMUM MATERIAL REQUMD FOR COMPLETE FINAL APPLICATION 1. Pa>rnem of fces (refer to Preliminary Subdivision Approval resolution and park fees if appicable) Signed Certificate of Survey or mylar copies of formal plat. 3. Title opinion. 4. Easements, covenants, etc. ‘ 3. Developers Agreement and Letter of Credit. Zoning Official’s Signature_____________________________________ I. APPLICATION FEES (Zoning Administrator to check [X] those which apply) A. Application Base Fees: _____ Sketch Plan Review (Class I, II & III) $250.00 — Subdivision of a Lot Line Rearrangement $350.00 " _____ Subdivision Application (Class I & II) $350.00 -------- Preliminary Subdivision Application $375.00 + $25.00/lot (Class III & all non-residential) _____ Final Plat Application (Class III) $200.00 _____ Legal Review and Filing: _____Subdivision only $75.00 Subdivision w.'easements and covenants min. $200.00 Totals - ■ ...................w * wiiaiiu Park Fees (to be determined per Section 11.62) Legal and Engineering Review Fees (as incurred) Renewal of Class I an d II Subdivision Application $200.00 (No change fi-om original application) Renewa of Class III, Preliminary Subdivision Application $200.00 (No change from original application) Renewal of Final Class III Subdivision Application $150.00 (No change from original application) lal Imorovement ' lin. ft. X .50 “ $ lin. ft. x.50 = $ B. Special Improvement Fees: _____ Proposed Private Roads $600.00 + S.50/lineaI ft.; _____ Proposed Public Roads S900.00 + S.50/lineal ft.; -------- RequestforCity to Accept Existing Private Road $900.00 --------- -------- Proposed Sanitary Sewer Main Extension $250.00 + $25/stub --------- _____ Proposed Watermain Extension $250.02 + $25/stub ---------- -------- Proposed Storm Sewer System (excluding culverts) $200.00 ---------- —■" On-Site System, Site Evaluation Review (applicable to rural subdivision applications) S50.00/per lot x_____new lots C. Flexible Application Fees/Misc. Fees .. . ---------- _____ Variance $220.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) _____ Easement Vacation Associated with Subdivision $100.00 ---------- _____ PRO Application with Subdivision $30.00/Dwelling Unit ---------- ^e appiicMt hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, City Engineer, City Attorney, ordL'ance^°"^"^'^**°" Council necessary to process this application and further agrees to pay all additional fees established by Applicant’s Signature_______________________________________ Date Owner's Signature Date AppIivMt must have all submittals mto the City Office 25 days before the Planning Commission meeting. Planning Commission meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. I f an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. RUN DATE 10/21/9a BATCH 506 PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR 38 06-117-23 21 0005 04565 BAYSIDE RD P t S RENNEBOHM PETER > SHARON RENNEBOHH 4565 BAYSIDE ROAD HAPLE PLAIN HN 55354 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNERS LIST 38 06-117-23 22 0004 04645 BAYSIDE RD KATHI J CHAPPELL KATHI J CHAPPELL 4645 BAYSIDE RD MAPLE PLAIN MN 55354 REPORT NO. PI435401 PAGE is 38 06-117-23 22 0011 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED I T t M L GEFFRE IRVIN T S MARJORIE L GEFFRE 4665 BAYSIDE RD MAPLE PLAIN MN 55359 PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR 38 06-117-23 22 0012 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNEO ERVIN A WACHMAN JR CITY OF ORONO PO BOX 66 CRYSTAL BAY MN 55323 f 38 31-118-23 33 0006 I 04720 BAYSIDE RD I B PETER ACHEY ETAL I B PETER ACHEY \ 4720 BAYSIDE RD VsMAPLE PLAIN MN 55354 38 31-118-23 33 0004 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNEO PAINTERS CREEK HOMEOWNERS PAINTERS CREEK HOMEOWNERS C/0 CRAIG PASSOW 100 LUCE LINE RIDGE MAPLE PLAIN MN 55354 38 31-118-23 33 0013 04680 BAYSIDE RD M D SLETTEN t M K SNETSINGER M D SLETTEN > M K SNETSINGER 4680 BAYSIDE RD MAPLE PLAIN MN 55354 38 31-118-23 34 0005 00085 LUCE LINE RIDGE M C JOHNSON 8 D J JOHNSON MERVIN C JOHNSON 85 LUCE LINE RIDGE MAPLE PLAIN MN 55354 38 06-117-23 22 0014 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED ERVIN A WACHMAN JR CITY OF ORONO PO BOX 66 CRYSTAL BAY MN 55323 38 31-118-23 33 0007 04740 BAYSIDE RD L YOGERST I D DUNN D DUNN t L YOGERST 4740 BAYSIDE RD MAPLE PLAIN MN 55359 38 31-118-23 33 0011 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED B R LANGE t J B BURRELL BRUCE R LANGE SUITE 615 53 W JACKSON BLVD CHICAGO IL 60604 38 31-118-23 34 0003 00025 LUCE LINE RIDGE C H HATTSTROM * V A HATTSTROM CURTIS H HATTSTROM 25 LUCE LINE RIDGE MAPLE PLAIN MN 55354 38 31-118-23 34 0013 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED PAINTERS CREEK HOMEOWNERS PAINTERS CREEK HOMEOWNERS C/O CRAIG PASSOW 100 LUCE LINE RIDGE MAPLE PLAIN MN 5535«» 38 31-118-23 33 0005 04660 BAYSIDE RD B i N CUFF BOBBIE I NEVA CUFF 4660 BAYSIDE RD MAPLE PLAIN MN 55354 38 31-118-23 33 0008 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED PAINTERS CREEK HOMEOWNERS PAINTERS CREEK HOMEOWNERS C/O CRAIG PASSOW 100 LUCE LINE RIDGE MAPLE PLAIN MN 55359 38 31-118-23 33 0012 00150 MCCULLEY RD MARCIA A BARNUM MARCIA A BARNUM 10564 PARKER DR EDEN PRAIRIE MN 55347 38 31-118-23 34 0004 00045 LUCE LINE RIDGE J R HOLM t J K HOLM JANES R a JAYNE K HOLM 45 LUCE LINE RIDGE MAPLE PLAIN MN 55359 c ‘.-7 • I -.1 I • • s. •• V.* V£Vir TOTAL BATCH 506 00017 P HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNERS LIST PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AODR 38 06 117 23 22 0017 4665 BAYSIDE RD I T fi. M L GEFFRE IRVIN & MARJORIE GEFFRE 4665 BAYSIDE RO MAPLE PLAIN MN 55359 CONDMN 8 30 06 117 23 22 0019 4775 BAYSIDE RD EVAN R MELINE EVAN R MELINE 16901 GRAYS BAY BLVD WAYZATA MN 55391 CONDMN 8 117 23 22 0021 475‘ BAYSIDE RD HILI^AV CORP BT AL HILl.OWAY CORP & GP NFIELD CORP 1551 HUNTER DR WAYZATA MN 55391 CONDMN 8 PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR 38 06 117 23 22 0022 4725 BAYSIDE RD J W MORGAN JR & D G PULFORD J W MORGAN JR 6 D G PULFORD 815 PINEVIEW LA N PLYMOUTH MN 55441 CONDMN 8 30 06 117 23 22 0025 38 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED HILLOWAY CORP ET AL HILLOWAY CORP & GREENFIELD CORP 1551 HUNTER DR WAYZATA MN 55391 CONDMN 8 PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPERARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION, TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF 7 \L> n f DATE Permit #’s: 1551 Dates: 7/17/67 (This is (✓f an existing system t SYSTEM COMPLIANCE fl-3): 3 Contractors: Wldmer Bros. ) new construction). 0 rod^ Syst:emi Meets or exceeds current City standards in all respects relating to design, construction, and location. Appears to be operating properly. Compliant System: Does not meet all current City standards for new construction, but in mcst respects appears to be designed, located, and constructed in accordance with previous codes and is functioning properly. Non-Compliant System: System may or may not meet current City standards for design, construction, or location, but is failing to properly treat and dispose of the current input; and any system with less than three feet of vertical separation between the bottom of the drainfield and the saturated soil level. (The saturated soil level has or [ ] has not been identified at this time. Xf saturated soil level has not been identified, this classification is subject to revision.) the TANK CQNDTTT^M (5-9)! 9 5 Pumpout not needed at this time. 6 Solids accumulation in tanks indicates they should be pumped out this year. 7 System is discharging to the surface. Tanks must be pumped out within 48 hours. 8 Inspection risers missing-tanks could not be inspected. If tanks have not been pumped out within three years, they should be pumped out and risers installed now. Inspection pipe is located over tank baffle-can not measure solids accumulation. If tanks have not been pumped out within three years, they should be pumped out now. (During the last septic tank Maintenance Pumpout the tanks [ 1 were or \ l/^ were not confirmed to be watertight by the licensed pumping contractor. If the ta^s were not confirmed to be watertight, this classification is subject to revision.) nPATNFTELD CONDITION (11-14^; 13 11 Drainfield is dry, no surfacing evident. 12 Some evidence of surfacing, not critical yet. Repair is not required at this time. Drainfield is saturated and visibly discharging untreated effluent to the surface. Contact the City Inspector imjnediately. Repair must be completed within 90 days. 14 Drainfield extent and condition unknown. POTENTIAL FOR SYSTEM FAILURE: (system aoe and condition, soils, etc.); failing COMMENTS: In order to confirm that your septic system meets Minnesota standards, soil borings were performed to verify a 3 foot separation between the drainfield and the seasonal water table. The separation is 0 feet and the system is non-compliant. Repair or replacement of the septic system is required by 11/14/97. n / J —^ ^ / j Date of Inspection S^ric System Inspector Note: In the event that this inspection report is used to satisfy the requirements for a transfer of property, this report does not guarantee that an existing system will continue to function properly, but indicates the operation of the system under current conditions. Telephone (612) 473-7357 • FAX 473-0510 -L CITYof ORONO Municipal Oflices Street Address: 2750 Kelley Pariiway Orono. MN 55356 Mailing Address: P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323-0066 ArTey Address: 4720 Bayside Rd. Permit #*s: 1551 Dates: llVU^l (This is (^] an existing system ( SiSTE:-! C0MPLIAMCE_(l-ll: 3 1 Contractors: Widiner Bros. ) new construction). & Code System: Meets or exceeds current City standards in all respects relating to design, construction, and location. Appears to be operating properly. Compliant System: Does not meet all current City standards for new construction, but in most respects appears to be designed, located, and constructed in accordance with previoui codes and is functioning properly. Mon-Compliant System: System may or may not meet current City standards for design, construction, or location, but is failing to properly treat and dispose of the current input; and any system with less than three feet of vertical separation between the bottom of the drainfield and the saturated soil level. (The saturated soil level [n/ ] has or [ ] has not been Identified at this time. Z£ the saturated soil level has not been identified, this classification is subject to revision.) T.2iNK COMDITION (5-9) : 6 8 Pumpout not needed at this time. Solids accumulation in tanks indicates they should be pumped out this year. System is discharging to the surface. Tanks must be pumped out within 48 hours. Inspection risers missing-tanks could not be inspected. It tanks have not been pumped out within three years, they should be pumped out and risers installed now. 9 Inspection pipe is located over tank baffle-can not measure solids accumulation. If tanks have not been pumped out within three years, they should be pumped out now. (During the last septic tank Maintenance Pumpout the tanks [ ] were or were not confirmed to be watertight by the licensed pumping contractor. If the tanks were not confirmed to be watertight, this classification is subject to revision.) D^INFIELD CONDITION (11-14) : 11f 14 Drainfield is dry, no surfacing evident. Some evidence of surfacing, not critical yet. Repair is not required at this time. Drainfield is saturated and visibly discharging untreated effluent to the surface. Contact the City Inspector immediately. Repair must be completed within 90 days. Drainfield extent and condition unknown. rOTEMTIAL FOR SYSTEM FAILURE: (system age and condition, soils, etc.): high C0^D•I£^:7S :_ _ _ _ _ In order to confirm that your septic system meets Minnesota standards, soil borings v.-ere performed to verify a 3 foot separation between the drainfield and the seasonal water table. The separation is 0 feet and the system is non-compliant. Repair or replacement of the septic system is required by 12/31/2007. P-/-77Lte of InspeInspection Note: In the event that this inspection report is used to satisfy the requirements for a transfer of property, this report does not guarantee that an existing system will continue to function properly, but indicates the operation of the system under current conditions. Telephone (612) 475-7357 • FAX 473^10 SEPTIC SYSTEM INVENTORY Address: 4680BaysideRd. Building Type: residence Permit #: 7009 Date of Permit: System Type: mound PID: 31-118-23 33 0013 #BRs/GPD 4 Systems/unit 1/1 6/2/95 Installer: Patnode Bros. Appliances: Indry.dshw SYSTEM CONDITION Conformity: 1 Tank Condition: 5 DF condition: 11 Failure Pot: low SEPTIC TANKS Material: precast concrete Setback to Bldg: Capacity: 1000, 1000,1000 DRAINFIELD Length of Lines 150 # Lines: 3 Trench Width: 10 Treatment Area: 80*45 Type of Filter: rock,clean sand Tile Size: 1.5 Under Tile 9 PercRate: 44 Setback DF-Bldg: DF Ht above Wt: 3 Soil Type: loam, clay loam Limitations: water table WELL DATA Setbacks - Well-Tanks: Pump Type: Well-DF; Report in File: Depth: Diameter: Method: INSPECTION RECORD DATE DESCRIPTION 6/30/95 installauon 7/29/97 no surfacing PUMPOUT RECORD COMPUANCE DATE GALLONS 1 1 ^(a'Sb B<s.y e. R-J ■ SEPTIC SYSTEM INVENTORY Address: 4720 Bayside Rd. Building Type: residence Permit #: 1551 Date of Permit: System Type: standard trench PID: 31-118-23 33 0006 #BRs/GPD 4 Systems/unit 1/1 7/17/67 Installer: WidmerBros. Appliances: Indry.dshw.dspl SYSTEM CONDITION Conformity: 3 Tank Condition: 6 DF condition: 11 Failure Pot: high SEPTIC TANKS Material: concrete block Setback to Bldg: 20 DRAINFIELD Length of Lines 300 # Lines: Treatment Area: 600 TUeSize: Under Tile Setback DF-Bldg: 30 Soil Type: loam, clay loam Capacity: 600,600 3 Trench Width: 2 Type of Filter: rock Perc Rate: DF Ht above Wt: 0 Limitations: water table YVELL DATA Setbacks - Well-Tanks: 50 Pump Type: subm. INSPECTION RECORD Well-DF: Depth: 155 50 Report in File: Diameter: 4 Method: drilled DATE 10/29/79 5/23/80 8/4/86 6/28/91 8/13/93 12/16/94 7/30/97 12/1/97 DESCRIPTION no surfacing no surfacing, tanks will be pumped and ris 2 no surfacing 2 no surfacing 2 DF saturated 2 complaint-laundry waste w/sump discharg 2 non-compliant-rcpair by 11/14/97 3 non-compliant-tanks overfull.repair by 20 3 COMPUANCE PUMPOUT RECORD DATE GALLONS 12005/23/80 5/1/90 3/1/91 10/1/91 12/2/94 8/5/97 1500 2000 2000 2000 2,000 A HlZO & / y V /1 1 ^ # 3 J y )_ 3cyS)’^e Rd T t>I ‘L'^ "Crh 'S302 DBl A B ^2'6 57'& 2^0 SSD 1r^ LOT LINE REARANGEMET SLETTEN kWI «WrtWIBW9 W’yviWr'MMYy liiWa LAND SURVETOBS BEf^fCTMEn UNDER LAWS OP STATE OP MINNB80TA 7601 • 73rd Avenue North MinneapoUa, MinnetoU 65428 660>3093 FOR:(KerttOtatr MICK A .•y. '9o I Tafce 10' ‘05s€jv\eiAV 7ih f I r f« LtK / I • L- -11fQf new jl£| I id' €as£m0rvk \100.00 —2( Q 160.157 B7 N8y32'43"iW----- OUCtUJT D UTILITY a drainage EASEMEf Lr.*X&A h!-iSuEneM MW. 'go MICK SLETTEM W M 9 • I I Established in 1962 LOT SURVEYS COMPANY, INC. LAND SURVLYORS RliGlS TKRED UNDER 11 IE LAWS OF S l Al’E OF MINNESOTA 7601 73rd Ave. No. Minneapolis, Minnesota 55428 Ceititicate INVOICE NO..J22SL. P n Mn 281-77 SCALE I” « ^00-t 560-3093 H II ^ EAOeHe-V^T II o Denolft Iron Monumint . a Denotet Wood Hub Sot For Excavation Only kOOO.O Donoti* Exitfing Elevation Denotes Proposed Elevatio Denotes Surface Drainage I -^9.7 Proposed Top of Blocli ______ Proposed Goroge Floor Proposed Lovtest Floor Type of Building - Full 6a&^/ngoi' H/gItCoo' 4 GE EASEMEt / II I I I I 0 _____j____ iitjo'f' UX-TAIL I Wed -iobt Ound ATTK^To AoJACetJT PJZ.OPflW'^ s< 0-..L. ■ w -h* -V ' I • \r«*-* _J ''-t- eAY6’lPE (uMHiY pow - ■'ic-3.o\- - ♦ — WOAP m er^V) P6TA\L ^ , 66ALe i r»80' (J o3o.8 150 *zov 'ivcr 'r\ t» t'* '2.'cr"‘ p\2oPo9LCPpe^ioeuoe. 9 - ----------o\^.a' 55?.^S- fW»PECTOR uate ------ NU r Al' ,n.crmM.o... AH worH sh.,H ir, tHh "‘“’Jl- not M)oci»»c*Hv no!«‘l •" »’*“ n.M«.n«n:5 -K.uHnK JTV.rp ALL ^WlrKKEEP THIS Pl>N SET 01'i SITb Ai alu coufs'ciL r,'_ NOV 2 3 1998 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION CiTYo;* onc'.J Date: November 20,1998 Item No.: ^li Department Approval: Name: Michael P. GalTron 1/ Title: Senior Planning Coordinator Achninistrator Approval:Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: #2439 Service 800, Inc., 2190 W. Wayzata Boulevard - Request for Commercial Site Plan Approval - Variances/CUP Zoning District: B-1, Retail Sales Business District Application: Request for approval of variances and commercial site plan approval for the construction of a 10,880 s.f. office building on Lot 1, Block 1, Sugar Woods 2nd Addition (final plat pending). Request for a conditional use permit for office use in B-1 District. List of Exhibits A - Resolution B - Updated plans C - Memo and Exhibits of 11-12-98 Summary of Issues for Discussion Please review the memo and exhibits of November 12. Some updated plans have been submitted (most were presented at the November 16 Planning Commission meeting). A number of issues were discussed at that meeting and are detailed in the November 12 memo, outlined as follows: 1. Variances Required 1. Lot coverage: 2. 3. 4. 15% allowed, 26.1% proposed Number of parking stalls: 45 required, 36 proposed ("proof of parking" acceptance requested) Parking lot setbacks: a) Front yard: 20* required, 10'-45’proposed b) Rear yard (if this reviewed as a through lot): 20' required, 3'-16 ’ proposed Lack of loading berth. #2439 - Service 800 Inc. November 20,1998 Page 2 IT. Engineering Issues 1. Submittal of Highway 12 access driveway plans to MnDOT. 2. Parking lot grade reduction. 3. Retaining wall/grading along east boundary. 4. Site drainage and storm sewer design 5. Plans and specs for sewer/water connections. 6. Expanded utility easement over existing City water line. 7. Financial guarantee for specific site improvements. III. Other Site Plan Tonics 1. No Access Connection to Orono Shopping Center. 2. Setback impacts of and design for future rear access drivew ay. 3. Future screening along rear lot line. 4. Landscaping plan (see revised plans. Exhibit A) 5. Parking lot setbacks, front and rear yards. 6. Loading berth requirement vs actual need. 7. Lighting. 8. Signage. IV. Building Design & Construction 1. Facade materials were identified and samples presented 2. Height is well within 30' limit. 3. Trash and recycle facilities within the building. V. Utilities 1. 2. 3. 4. Sewer Availability Charge (SAC) and sewer/water units. Sewer and water availability. Recommend bur> ing existing power lines Maintaining access to utility facilities. VI. CUP for Office Use 1. No code standards attached to "office" CUP 2. Impacts of this use in B-1 District. 3. Conformity with the Council's "Concept Plan for Development Along Highway 12". 4. Quality of building construction. 5. Future conversion to retail impossible due to parking and design of building. 6. Difficulties for redesigning as a 2-stor>' building. #2439 - Service 800 Inc. November 20, 1998 Page 3 November 16 Public Hearing Planning Commission held a public hearing for this application on November 16. Bill Wear commented his concerns were 1) proper storm drainage to avoid impacts to his site, and 2) confirmation that the proposed building does not encroach the open space easement he obtained from Rebers. There were no other public comments. Planning Commmission Discussion and Recommendation Planning Commission discussed the topics noted in the outline above, giving considerable discussion to the issues of building size and lot coverage, and parking setbacks if the rear service road is ever built. Planning Commission concluded that the office use is a good fit in this B-1 retail zone, given tile relatively small size of the site and opportunities for larger retail uses bothe to the east and w'est. The proposed building materials were presented and Planning Commission found them to be acceptable. The applicant presented an updated version of the building plans and elevations (see r .hibit A), which included a revised partitioning of space within the structure. The submitted lighting and signage were discussed and found to be generally acceptable, with some added lighting plan detail suggested. In regards to the requested variances. Planning Commission concluded: The lot coverage at 26.1 % is acceptable given that this is a commercial site. - The provision of 36 parking stalls now, with the remaining 9 stalls staying as green space until they are needed at some future date, is appropriate. - The parking lot setback encroachment in the front is mi.nor, and the green space tliat will be maintained between the parking lot and Highway 12 is so substantial that the encroachment is not a problem. The future parking lot setback issue that will occur if the rear frontage road is ever constructed, can be mitigated at that time by provision of vegetative screening, and the fact that the City will have a 60' corridor likely will allow for a substantial shoulder that will help in buffering the parking if need be. - The office use of the proposed building suggests no need for a loading berth. The applicant notes that alt anticipated loading needs would be adequately handled via the 3 proposed access doorways. Since the parking would not support a conversion to a retail use that might need a dock, no dock shou’d be required. In regards to the CUP for office use. Planning Commission noted that this is a good, relatively low traffic use for this small site and that it is a fairly unobtrusive use given the proximity of the residential neighborhood directly behind it. In that respect, the CUP for office use should contain a requirement for future screening along the rear service road if it is ever built. #2439 - Service 800 Inc. November 20,1998 Page 4 With respect to engineering issues, it was noted that these all appear to be resolvable at the staff level. Planning Commission voted 6-1 in favor of a recommmendation to approve the commercial site plan with variances as presented, to approve the CUP for office use, to accept the 'proof of parking concept' the retention of the last 9 stalls as green space until they are needed, subject to a future screening requirement along the rear loit line if the service road is ever built, and subject to resolving any remaining engineering issues or other matters. The minority vote was Commissioner Stoddard, who indicated he supports the use for this site but was concerned about the intensity of use of the site. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval per the Planning Commission recommendation and per the cfmdings and conditions of the attached resolution. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Adopt the attached resolution for approval of the commercial site plan, variances, and CUP for office use for Ser\'ice 800, Inc. at 2190 Wayzata Boulevard. Note: Councifs December 14 agenda is expected to include final plat approval for the replatting of this site to buildable lot status. The applicant has requested to break ground prior to that date if possible, which may be a topic of discussion at the November 23 meeting. i A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCES AND APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR AN OFFICE USE IN THE B-1 ZONING DISTRICTAND APPROVING THE ISSUANCE OF A BUILDING PERMIT TO SERVICE 800, INC. FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2190 WAYZATA BOULEVARD PER MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.40, SUBDIVISIONS 2 AND 4H FILE NO. 2439 WHEREAS, Jean Mork Bredeson representing Service 800, Inc. (hereinafter the "applicant") is owner of the property located at 2190 Wayzata Boulevard located within the City of Orono (hereinafter the "City") and legally described as follows: Lot 1, Block 1, Sugar Woods 2nd Addition, Hennepin County, Minnesota (subject to final plat approval and filing)(hereinafter the "property"); and WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City for building permit approval per Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.40, Subd. 2 to permit the commercial development of the property includ ig approval of the following variances: 1. 2. Section 10.^3, Subd. 14(C) - Lot coverage by structures (lots of 0-1.99 acres in area subject to 15% limit on lot coverage by structures) Lot Area = 41,634 s.f. Lot coverage allowance = 15% = 6,245 s.f. Lot coverage proposed = 26.1% = 10,880 s.f. Variance = 4,635 s.f. or 11.1% Section 10.61, Subd. 5(B) - Setback variance for parking (not allowed within required front yard, nor within rear street yard of a through lot): Required front yard = 20' (10.40 Subd. 6C) Proposed front setback to parking = 10' Proposed encroachment by parking = 10' Variance = 10' or 50% Page 1 of 11 Required rear street yard = 20’ (10.40 Subd. 6C, 10.02 Subd. 42) Proposed rear setback to parking = 3' Proposed encroachment by parking = 17' Variance = 17' or 85% 3.Section 10.61 Subd. 10(K) - Parking stall variance (One parking stall required for each 200 s.f. of net usable floor area) Net usable floor area = 8,900 s.f Number of stalls required = 45 Number of stall proposed = 36 (9 additional stalls possible within rear yard via variance) Variance = 9 stalls or 20% 4.Section 10.61, Subd. 17(B) - Loading berth variance (One loading berth is required for an office building of 6,000 s.f or more) Number of loading berths required = 1 Number of loading berths proposed = 0 WHEREAS, the applicant has additionally applied for a conditional use permit for an "office" use on the subject property per the B-1 Retail Sales Business District requirements of Zoning Code Section 10.40, Subd. 4H; and WHEREAS, the property is near the R-IA Single Family Residential Zoning District to the north of the site, and all property owners within 350' of the property boundaries were legally notified of the public hearing for this project; and WHEREAS, the Orono Planning Commission reviewed this comprehensive application at a public hearing held on November 16, 1998, at which time all members of the public wishing to comment on the project were given the opportunity to speak thereon; and WHEREAS, on November 16, 1998 the Orono Planning Commission recommended approval of the development plans per the commercial site plan, building elevations, and landscape plan prepared by Charles J. Radloff dated 10-18-98 revised 11-11-98 for Service 800, Inc., subject to submittal of an acceptable grading, drainage and stormwater plan, and subject to a requirement for future screening of the rear parking area if the rear Page 2 of 11 1 service road is ever built; and recommended approval of a conditional use permit for the proposed office use in the B-1 zone; and WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed the recommendations of the staff, Planning Commission, City Engineer, and consultants as well as the comments by the applicant, applicant's representatives, and the public, and hereby makes the following findings in regard to this application; FINDINGS 1. 3. 4. 5. 6. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #2439. The property is located in the B-1 Retail Sales Business District requiring 20,000 s.f. in area. The property consists of 41,634 s.f. or 0.96 acres. The development plans include a 10,880 s.f. one-story commercial office building. The proposed office use is a conforming use allowed in the B-1 Retail Sales Business District subject to a conditional use permit. Applicant has concurrently requested a conditional use permit for the office use. Structural coverage on the site is proposed at 26.1%, exceeding the 15% limitation on lot coverage by structures and requiring a variance. This variance is justified on the basis that this is a small commercial site abutting Highway 12 where development under the 15% limitation would result in underutilization of the site; that the amount of land zoned for commercial uses in Orono is extremely limited, and the available commercial land should be developed at a level that will maximize its potential while still conforming with the goals and policies of the Orono Comprehensive Plan; and that the proposed shape, size and location of the building will not result in a compromise of the City’s goal of maintaining a low visual density. A variance is required for the number of parking stalls to be initially constructed to serve the building. This variance is justified by the fact that the required Page 3 of 11 7. 8. number of parking stalls is feasible on the property via variance, but the expected initial occupancy of the site will not require the full complement of stalls, and the City is best served be leaving 9 of the required 45 stalls as green space to the rear of the building until such time that the 9 stalls are needed. The variance to allow a parking setback of 10' along a portion of the front lot line where a 20 ’ setback is normally required, is justified by the angular shape of the site. The average front yard depth for the site will be approximately 25', ranging from 10' to 45' where a 20' yard is required. The location of the access road required to enter from the west side of the property in order to be across from Brimhall Avenue, and the location of the existing City fire hydrant just north of the proposed acces driveway, are factors which result in the proposed driveway and parking lot location. The property is technically a 'through' lot, abutting Wayzata Boulevard (Highway 12) to the front and an unnamed undeveloped service road to the rear. As a result, for zoning purposes the frontage along the future serv ice road requires the establishment of a 20' rear street yard. The proposed rear street yard ranges from 3’ to 16' in depth with all 45 parking stalls developed, but ranging to as much as 50'-60' until those stalls are constructed at some future date. The variance for the proposed parking encroachment into the rear street yard is supported by the fact that neither the service road nor the 9 future stalls are being developed at this time but may be developed at some future date; and further supported by the fact that the available right-of-way for said service road is 60' in width which will allow for a standard road width plus excess boulevard for the future development of a trail and buffering. The residential property to the north may have some views of the rear street yard at the time the service road is constructed, and it is reasonable to expect that a vegetative buffer be established at that the rear street lot line at the time such service road is constructed. 9.The variance to the requirement for a loading berth is supported by the intended office use of the building, with no anticipated needs for materials storage nor merchandise deliveries. All anticipated loading needs are expected to be handled via the 3 proposed access doorways. Since conversion of the site to a retail use Page 4 of 11 11. is unlikely due to the lack of supportive parking, no retail loading needs are anticipated. 10. The stormwater retention pond located within Outlot F, Sugar Woods, was originally designed and constructed to accommodate surface runoff from this site, and has since been modified by MnDOT. All surface runoff is intended to be directed via underground storm sewers to this stormwater retention area before disch..rging to downstream surface waters. This project is subject to review and approval by the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District prior to issuance of a building permit, and is subject to confirmation that the pond in Outlot F is suitable to serve this site. The property is proposed to access to U.S. Highway 12 and is subject to access permits which must be obtained from MnDOT. 12. Tom Kellogg of Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik and Associates, Inc. in his letter of November 9, 1998 made a number of comments and recommendations regarding traffic, grading, drainage, utilities, and easements. A majority of these issues can and w'ill be addressed in the construction plan review process prior to issuance of a building permit. 13. John Scalzo, Senior Designer with DSU, Inc., the City's consulting planner, in his letter of October 28, 1998 made a number of comments regarding the lot coverage and parking variances and the proposed landscaping plan, which comments were taken into account in the City's review of this application. 14. Applicants' development of the proposed site plan is dependent upon completion of the platting of Sugar Woods 2nd Addition which was granted preliminary approval by the City Council via Resolution No. 4182 on October 26, 1998. 15. The proposed site plan, landscape plan and building design incorporate features and elements which make this development appropriate for this B-1 District, especially in relation to its proximity to an existing residential neighborhood, as well as in its potential for future orientation toward the northerly ser\ ice road. Such features and elements include orientation of the parking facilities primarily Page 5 of 11 toward Highway 12, but with an easily accomplished connection to the future service road, and proposed facade materials and design of an appropriate high quality office character with design elements and styling carried around all sid'*'^ of the building. 16. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicant and the effect of the proposed variances on the health, safety and welfare of the community. 17. The Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the requested variances would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring properties, would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicant; and would be in keeping with the ' '* and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Orono hereby approves the commercial site plan, building elevations and landscape plan referenced above and approves the variances as requested based on the unique findings and hardships noted above; approves the City's issuing a building permit for the proposed office building to Service 800, Inc.; and approves a conditional use permit for "office use", subject to the following conditions: 1.Upon application for a building permit, applicant shall provide the following information for review and approval by the City Engineer prior to issuance of the building permit: A. Plans and specifications for sewer and water seiv'ice line connections and utility access facilities within proposed paved areas. Applicant shall be Page 6 of 11 B. responsible for making adjustments of City sewer and water lines, manholes, etc. in a permanent manner acceptable to the Public Works Department. As-built plans shall be provided to the City upon completion. Final grading, drainage and erosion control plan showing e,\isting and proposed contours, contours within 100' of the site, building locations, elevations, storm sewer facilities and erosion control measures to be used during construction. A drainage area map and storm sewer calculations must be provided. Revisions to the plans must be completed per the City Engineer's November 9 comments. All drainage from the site shall be directed to the storm sewer system and may not be directed to adjacent properties. Documentation must be submitted to confirm that the stormwater pond in Outlot F, Sugar Woods, is in fact the receiving facility for stormwater from the site and has been designed and constructed to handle the flows from this site. C. D. E. F. Written confirmation of Minnehalia Creek Watershed District stormwater plan approval and copy of any permits issued. Engineering details and design must be provided for any proposed retaining walls. Written confirmation of MnDOT Highway 12 acce^ Man approval and and copy of any permits issued. An cxpant toii of the utility easement along the west property boundar>’ to a total width of 14' shall be required to accommodate the existing City water line. G.Written confirmation/documentation that the appropriate number of sewer and water units has been procured from the owner of Outlot F, Sugar Woods. At such time that the service road along the rear of the property is constructed in the future, whether or not the property makes use of that road, suitable Page 7 of 11 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. screening per the standards of the zoning code shall be established along the rear lot line by the property owner . The parking lot shall be paved and shall include concrete curb and gutter; driving lanes within parking lot shall have a 7-ton pavement section. Applicants' architect shall submit final building plans to Metropolitan Council Environmental Services to confirm the number of SAC units to be charged at the time of the issuance of a building permit. No Sewer and Water Unit Adjustment Charges or system upgrade connection charges are required for the this development. Appropriate traffic and parking signage shall be installed subject to the Orono staff and City Engineer’s review. Fire lanes if required shall be designated during the building plan review process and identified appropriately. The landscape areas as shown on the above referenced site plan shall consist of grass wherever feasible and shall adhere to the Landscape Plan dated 11/11/98 in regards to planting species, sizes and locations. Landscaping plan shall include placement of a minimum 6" depth of topsoil over all areas to be vegetated. Applicant shall permanently maintain all landscape areas as originally approved. Site frontage for commercial signage calculation will be limited to the frontage along Wayzata Boulevard, being 146’ feet in length. Signage for this site shall be regulated by the provisions of Zoning Code Section 10.61, Subd. 1, Subd. 3(A) and Subd. 3(D). 8. 9. 10. Final lighting plan shall be subject to City staff approval and shall locate lighting so as to direct lights aw'ay from the nearby residential neighborhood. No formal approval for reciprocal parking agreements between this property and adjacent commercial properties has been requested or approved for this site. Erosion control shall adhere to "Best Management Practices for Protecting Water Quality in Urban Areas". All erosion controls as required by the City shall be in place prior to commencing excavation on the site. 11. A Developer's Agreement shall be executed by the applicant to assure that all Page 8 of 11 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. required site improvements as shown on approved site plan will be completed to the City’s satisfaction. The City Engineer has provided a preliminary estimate of the cost of site improvements at $______. This amount does not include the cost of landscaping and plantings, which shall be in addition to the preliminary estimated amount. Applicant shall provide an estimate of the cost of landscaping and plantings, which amount shall be added to the site improvement estimate. A Letter of Credit in an amount 150% of the final combined estimate shall accompany the Developers Agreement. Prior to issuance of a building permit, applicant shall provide suitable evidence of property ownership. The building shall not be converted to a retail sales use unless approved by the City Council. In addition to the conditions of this resolution, the property is regulated by any conditions established in the preliminary and final plat approval resolutions for the plat of Sugar Woods 2nd Addition. Authorities granted by this resolution run with the property not with the owners, but are permissive only and must be exercised by obtaining a building permit within one year of the date of Council's approval, or the special conditions of this resolution will expire on that date (November 23, 1999). Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this resolution shall constitute a violation of the Zoning Code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. The undersigned applicants have read, understood and hereby agree to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of themselves, their heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agree to the recording of this resolution in the Chain of Title of the property. Page 9 of 11 1 Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 23rd day of November, 1998. ATTEST; Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Gabriel Jabbour, Mayor Property Ovvner(s) STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 23rd day of November, 1998 by Gabriel Jabbour and Linda S. Vee, Mayor and City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation, and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public Page 10 of 11 1 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this day of , 1 998 before me a Notary Public \\ithin and for said county, personally appeared known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he(they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this day of , 1 998 before me a Notary Public within and for said county, personally appeared known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he(they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC Page 11 of 11 ESOTA ) ) ss. NNEPIN ) day of , 1998 before me a Notary Public county, personally appeared -- - - - - - - - - --- -;-;- - -—--- e the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and he(they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC MESOTA ) ) ss. iNNEPIN ) day of , 1998 before me a Notary Public d county, personally appeared-------------------------------;----^---------------- t>e the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and at he(they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC Page 11 of 11 \j) i *. •V.-- s"’'T' '•VV. ' • WrM Mil" ■. ■-is) ’ ;l|| ii if §m ., ;lf •v .’.W i?Av • .!•';biSI' Jv ^ •' a; ['cV/ci'.'- < .*• ixm's;ps4&i . * ■•A ’ • vt » ' tgm ;fei .♦'-r'-A : V s A-I •^v r ' '■ .*'ir ^vLil^ iiWi V •■N'i;’ *^«:l ■#ip. -fs^spir z mi&m . j'.fc 1.1 A: ‘.»i/'!/««S5?£i r.Vv^ •;^ss§i5)s«‘'S* 'V'V . iVlT • j •-; w < .|C m ’^i>a •«^»r iffci •'.-. 'S-C 4^- ff.k •I 1.5, r.; ' -)# '.V.-o: mu.-fAfr.-p ill 'tffei'**I rV 4 . ^ V I uu Sf >vl v.iiik'fL’lffeMt UM ‘ '^' ■■ ‘ •* oMl: . "UU/Uir-rv’ P'-m-i- ■■: tvV\VNV\>*> ►NXVV' ^ VVNVNXV WVW' €ilii <||i;#;i<. I ' ■'fe <•(«%** '^<i■ 4f'i?vt)MHi ■,^t 1#? mA' m f^-’- :m A' k ( *./. S't %T0m k*. S5I Ar, '■* O Q> xzo CC! O QC CO lO ID Z 2 — $ 03 ;—cn > •s.. -^IS'5 - CD 0) Cl 03^.t± CD x: 03 =3 -O OoCOLU o CC o oLLJCOcjO oz Q 00 LUg U_ U_o MfO 2I*«6 96-U*U S>%a: : O) 0) C O^.t:; 0) I05 zj-q:>^coiu O CCooUJ^aC/) <mC V1U6INWI ^ tM0 p*i 0) tan •«< M-M1 «>MT* (Mtl** •■ • M *« •• M u ^VSWTf.5tr«t uwaw ••••»• >RIMBfaAIII 16CSS NW yiVZAtM 002 3iS IS 3)*yi 3 /0> S31VIOOSSV A3nVAN33H9 \r .jO-.I = .1 31VDS li I I. S I I I I ). I 10 « I/•9l l»a(<lt) lUlUA inWS NW ONOUO 0AT8 ViVZAYM M 0612 IJINMO •0U| *008 30IAU3S iOiroiMV NVHd 3dV0SaN\nN\nd axis »t«a NHifi •miviM Him OH M 11 A A I 11 V A WAA RUINHVI1I • RlDlilMDHV jjoipcy f soiJcq3 ite -J.V ikr" ;*fe I 1 Pli OH I §■ J_ lL .-V.- < ■i-i. ■*r- iiO*iO0 mmmm h iui1 REMARKS4 i i 5 1 «<n m §|a a SIZEii ~ ^'«» < c4 0 h to L upm wro 80Q 21 -M 96*U*ii *?!• VlUOINNin ifi 6M06IA3U mi iiiS '■'ilM iir.'’ ii'’i Sill ■ I i i rr'*iTv *vm fS':;:ClT^«vF5Hv| hv^; rIII«II p a f I'- J-'i' pri:4j;^i !!% >; iiitei SS f Jj /'ilT:'*’ r.n-T^ I ,m iwi VvI li «f ■ if ii i i m i* r|: ’ll a I f i|l''« Sra I'w “M r,'mH-tt b]m 'St- ®(T| ® 19 1: ' i:‘\: mm ;■M a m ® ii vW€ HP I >f ! l;1 ir I:i! si ®3, »I P'' MIPvK I',iai iiniffi' PIil ■'^ I'iliiillr. \ymrn m !S5: ^ ifrr*TKr;| :>;, '.a • '> t->' :■> ' IA ‘ r 'i4Un;: I V.,S'.I ;■: • 5V'’fa • •.' .* ■f I 'S4'.|;MsiV i;5iii >‘v-'''5'.’!■, •' ; ;! al'l' I >' u . • & I'.':’ 1' Hi*, ij %i ■’ :liar,r;U3 i!S if I is }ln-,P UB f. >- fWil' I HS hrrt* v».aiiH III :■ ill IJ: 'i! jlsS: It*i i‘i'rI f-if f :’PHI f{'i- .- -i if/! ufiij*!. V-ii, n'pf mm PIm 16CS9 NW VIVZAVM 002 319 19 3)0n 3 lOf S31V130SSV A3nVAN33dD U3NMO i6C9Q N)/^*ONOyO QAT0 VIVZAVM M 0012 3U| *008 33IAU38 ______________loiroMJ \ 31V0S Ult) 30IOA Nvid doond >8 SN0I1VA313 fftn uNin *3uivu^ N3aa tn# QM M3IAA311VA SiM • M9NNV1<I « •iOaXIHOUV jjoipcy T S3IJCID ill~B J nor Ulfc . X t ARC5|lg§SS§bi bs U oSu oS s §S85 ”«S ;■ s 8 s I I O ^ ISs II^ a. < z uj Q. (0 CO U. OL G. »- OH □ □ a a □r □a a jouv b r»* ii rnf~ir—ir~in mr i JJI iii •■B • 1-6 1 i.. I s* roioabi 9M8VB1 §ll 1^0 VI UfO 809 m mm^ 21*00 96‘II*U ••• in fi 9I \o ei'M 96*11*11 mm ^ JmS fiffSSffr:sLr:i sa’TM ^SmT. S31VI30SSV A311VAN33U0 1 / Z TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: J \ ‘ Chair Smith and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator Michael P. Gaffron, Senior Planning Coordinator i' j November 12,1998 % #2439 Service 800, Inc., 2190 W. Wayzata Boulevard - Request for Commercial Site Plan Approval - Variances/CUP - Public Hearing Zoning District: B-1, Retail Sales Business District Application: Rev'uest for approval of variances and commercial site plan approval for the construction of a 10’880 s.f office building on Lot 1, Block 1, Sugar Woods 2nd Addition (final plat pending). Request for a conditional use permit for office use in B-1 District. List of Exhibits A - Application & Letter of Request B - Plat Map C - Property Owners List D - Plan Submittal: 1. Site Plan 2. Floor Plan, Elevation Views 3. Landscape plan 4. Proof of Parking 5. Site Survey, Preliminary Grading & Utility Plan 6. Site plan sketch by staff identifying easements, setbacks, -itc. E - City Engineer Comments 11-9-98 F - Consulting Planner Comments 10-28-98 G - Zoning Code Section 10.40: B-1 District Standards H - Preliminary Plat Approval Resol. #4182 & Peliminary Plat Drawing 1 - Council Resolution #4041 and Staff Memo re: Highway 12 Development Concept Plan #2439 Service 800, Inc. November 12,1998 Page 2 Site Characteristics, Conformity (Note: Needed variances are shown in bold t> pe) Required/Allowed Existing/Proposed Site area:20,000 s.f.41,634 s.f. Defined lot width:100'146'± Required front yard:20'10'-45' Avg. 25' Required rear yard:30'*See Parking Discussion Required rear yard (if "through" lot):20'If »• »» Required side yard:(None)15'(W); 3'(E) Building setbacks: Front lot line:35'68' Rear lot line:35'54' Side lot line (West):15'15' Side lot line (East):15'50' Building Height:30'15' max. Lot coverage by structures:15% (6,245 s.O 26.1% (10,880 s.O Hardcover (Not in Shoreland):NA NA Parking Setbacks; Not allowed within in required 20' front yard (Variance) Allowed to within 3’ of rear yard if this is noi treated as a through lot... Not allowed within 20' of rear lot line if this is treated as a through lot (Var?) Number of Parking Stalls: Required = 1 per 200 s.f. of "net usable floor area" (Net = 8,900+ / 200 = 45 stalls required) 45 stalls defined (36 proposed initially) Signage Allowance: Grading Witliin 5' of Lot Lines: 145 s.f.50 s.f. (No CUP required since grading is not within 5' of residential lot lines) Loading Berth:1 required per section 10.61 Subd. 17 None proposed ^2439 Serv ice 800, Inc. November 12,1998 Page 3 Summary of Issues for Discussion T. Vanances Required 1. Lot coverage;15% allowed, 26.1 % proposed 2.Number of parking stalls; 45 required, 36 proposed ("proof of parking" acceptance requested) 3.Parking lot setbacks; a) Front yard; 20'required, 10'-45'proposed b) Rear yard (if this reviewed as a through lot); 20' required, 3'-16' proposed 4. Lack of loading berth. II. Engineering Issues (Also see Exhibit E) 1.Applicant must submit plans for access to Highway 12 to MnDOT for review and approval. A'cess is proposed to be through the triangular portion of MnDOT right-of-way just west 01 the property and directly across from Brimhall Avenue. Parking lot grades should be reduced to 4% from 5%+ proposed. Additional topography outside the site is needed to confirm that the grading plan will flmction in relation to adjacent properties. 3.Retaining wall may be needed along east lot boundary, as well as a construction easement since the storm sewer and parking lot are so close to the side lot line. A detailed plan/cross section for how' this boundary will be accomodated would be helpful. 4.The City Engineer has a number of specific questions and design comments regarding sil£ drainage uid storm sewer design (See Exhibit E, item 3). Storm sewer calculations, and a drainage ttrea map are needed. Stormwater plan needs to be submitted to MCWD for review and approval. Confirmation that the NTJRP pond on Outlot F, Sugar Woods, has the capacity to serv'e this site and received MCWD approval, has yet to be submitted. 5. Plans and specs for proposed building sewer/water connections are required. 6. An expanded utility easement w'ill be needed over the existing City water line along the west ^2439 Service 800, Inc. November 12,1998 Page 4 property boundary, which appears to be offset 3-4' eastward from the lot line. It is expected that this easement will be granted as part of the pending final plat approval for Sugar Woods 2nd Addition. Existing utility and drainage easements granted with the original plat of Sugar Woods are not clearly identified on the utility plan submitted, but appear to adequately cover the existing sanitar>’ sewer and water facilities at the southwest comer of the site. 7. Financial guarantee required for specific site improvements. 111. Other Site Plan Issues Noted bv DSU and Staff (Also see Exhibit F) 1. 3. 4. Access to Highway 12 : Driveways and curb cuts for business uses are regulated by Section 6.05 of the municipal code. The proposed access plan appears to meet the standards of that section, and with the general intent of the approval of Sugar Woods 2nd Addition (see Exhibit H). The applicant should be required to obtain fomial MnDOTapproval of the access plan prior to issuance of building permits. Access Connection to Orono Shopping Center Site: Neither the City nor applicant have any intent at this time to create access between this site and the adjacent Orono Shopping Center site. The preliminary plat approval resolution allows the City to control access to that adjacent property. A future rear access driveway which would connect to the rear service road (if it is ever constmeted) apfH " to be possible with this site plan. The code would normally allow a 3 ’ parking setback from the rear lot line in the rear yard, assuming this is not considered as a 'through' lot. However, if this is treated as a 'through lot' at this time for review purposes, there should bt a 20' setback from the north lot line to the parking lot. A setback ranging from 3' to 16' is shown, with the greater setback showing future parking. If the serv'ice road is ever constructed, 3 parking spaces at the northeast comer of the site will be lost, leaving a potential total of only 42 spaces where 45 are required. There does not appear to be adequate space to pick up 3 stalls in the front yard if the Highway 12 access is closed. In effect, the site plan is not entirely designed to deal with a future conversion to rear service road access only. The rear line of the property does not technically abut the R-1A Residential District due to the platting of Outlot A, Sugar Woods 2nd Addition (the triangular road sliver abutting the ft..urc service road, Outlot D, which is zoned R-1 A). The significance is that a fence or hedge would be required along this lot line if the property did abut R-1 A. Given the nature and location of the site and the design and orientation of the building, it does not appear necessary to require screening along the rear lot line. #2439 Service 800, Inc. November 12,1998 Page 5 5. 6. The landscaping clan includes 5 trees across the Highway 12 frontage, 1 tree at the right rear comer, and a row of shmbbery along the east side of the building. Applicants plans should more clearly specify which spaces along the building perimeter will be green spaces, and the types of ground cover specified (grass vs. landscape rock, etc.). The B-1 District standards do not set specific green space requirements. Green space constitutes approximately 25% or 34% of the site dependint* on the parking scheme, as follows: Full Parking Development f451 25% green space 26% building footprint 49% parking and sidewalks Initial Proposed Parking 34% green space 26% building footprint 40% parking and sidewalks With the apparent proposed grade change between this site and the Wear shopping center next door, coupled with the parking being as near as 3' to the lot line, there is little opportunity for any significant landscaping between the two sites. The issue of parking lot setbacks is of some concern. Note that the existing sidewalk is completely within the right-of-way of Highway 12 (constmeted at the shoulder) and leaves 15'-30' of green r.o.w. be^veen the front lot line and the sidew alk, enhancing the appearance of open space. This results in a visual green space between Highway 12 and the proposed parking lot of from 20' to 70' in depth. It is unknown to staff w hether future upgrades of Highway 12 will make use of this space. The 20' front yard requirement is met on average, although portions of the parking lot encroach into that 20'. This is due to the shape of the lot, and may constitute an adequate hardship for the variance. There is no side yard requirement for B-1, hence parking is allowed to within 3' of the side lot line under staffs interpretation of Sections 10.40 Subd. 6 and 10.61 Subd. 5B. It could be argued that the triangular MnDOT property at the southwest comer of the site is a side street, however, and it is possible that future access to the adjacent Otten site will be from this location. In this case, there should be a 10' setback from the west lot line to the first parking stall. This would also have an impact on building setback requirements; setback from a side street is required to be 35', and the building is only 15' from the lot line at this comer. However, it may be a stretch to say that this e;.panded MnDOT right-of-way is a street for setback purposes, and staff does not view this as a variance situation. Parking at the rear of the property is conforming in location, being 3' + from the rear lot line and 10' + from the R-1A boundarj'. However, see the comments in item #1 above. Snow storage is likely to become an issue if the parking lot is fully used for parking. There is little area on the site that could be used for snow storage. #2439 Service 800, Inc. November 12,1998 Page 6 7. 8. 9. Loading berths: Section 10.61, Subd. 17 requires that one loading berth be provided for any office building in e.xcess of6,000 s.f. area. No loading berth is proposed. Applicant should be asked to specify reasons why no loading berth is needed, and if those reasons are sufficient, then a variance may be appropriate. If not, then one should be provided. Lighting: Code Section 10.60 Subd. 8 requires that lighting be diffused or directed away from "R" Districts and public streets. No lighting plan has been prov ided. Signage appears to be in conformance with the limitation of i45 s.f total and 50 s.f. per individual sign. The single linear building wall sign proposed is approximately 50 s.f in area. IV. Building Design & Construction 1.Facade materials are not designated and would have to meet the standards of Section 10.40 Subd. 6G(1) to meet code requirements, i.e. a) face brick or b) natural stone, or c) decorative/textured precast concrete, or d) factor)' fabricated metal frame panels. (See comments below regarding the "office use CUP") 2. 3. Height is well within 30 ’ limit. Trash and recycle facilities are pn J within the building near the east entrance. V. Utilities 1.Sewer Availability Charge (SAC): The 10,880 s.f building would appear to net to approximately 9,000 s.f for SAC and sewer/water unit determinations. At the Met Council Environmental Services (MCES) rate of 1 SAC unit per 2,400 net s.f for office, this building would be charged 4 SAC units, and would have a need for 4 sewer and water units. It is expected that applicant will acquire those 4 sewer and water units from Mr. Rebers whose Outlot F, Sugar Woods was allocated 44 units as part of the original utility project serving this area. 2.Municipal sewer is available to the site. There is an existing stub located at the south end of the site. 3. Municipal water is available to the site, with access feasible along the west lot line. ^7439 Sen'ice 800, Inc. November 12,1998 Page 7 4. 5. 6. Other utilities apparently are available to the site. While the new serv'ice connections are required to be below ground, the existing power lines are overhead in this area. The developer should be encouraged to ha\ e e.xisting overhead wires buried as part of this project, although the City code does not make this a requirement (Section 12.40). Since a number of utility access facilities will be in the proposed driveway, applicant shall be responsible for bringing those facilities to grade and finishing them in a manner acceptable to the Public Works Department. Although not a code requirement, there is benefit in keeping the perimeter utility and drainage easements in green space rather than under parking lots. This will allow future use by utility companies with the least site disruption. VI. CUP for Office Use An "office" use in the B-1 Retail Sales Business District requires a conditional use permit. The B-1 code establishes no specific standards for this use. The CUP process allows the City to place specific conditions on conditional uses in order to ensure their compatibility within the zoning district. As an office building of a general nature, the proposed use has minimal impacts within the B-1 district, and does not appear to staff to be in conflict with the Council's "Concept Plan for Development Along Highway 12" adopted by resolution last February. The City is looking for high quality development along Highway 12, and one condition of approval could be to specify facade materials that would add to the quality of the building, i.e. require face brick rather than allow lesser materials. Perhaps a future critical issue related to the office use, is that this building will not have enough parking to satisfy a conversion to retail use, which requires 1 space per 150 net s.f. rather than the 1 per 200 net s.f. required for office use. This does in fact reduce the flexibility of this building for accommodating future uses. It should also be pointed out that constructing the 11,000 s.f. total area on two stories would halve the footprint area, could likely still meet the 30' height limitation, would allow most of the variances to go away, and might even provide enough space for added parking to allow future conversion to partial retail use of the building. However, the single story building as proposed would not have enoi. 'h parking to ever accomodate a second story. ^2439 Sevice 800, Inc. November 12,1998 Pages Analysis The need for most of the required variances is a function of the size of the building in relation to the lot size. The current site plan yields little flexibility for accommodating future changes to access or for conversion to retail uses if that becomes appropriate or necessary. While a significant portion of the site remains in green space, the City code does limit this and any building site under 2 acres, to 15% coverage by structures. The lot coverage ordinance was adopted in 1989, in the conte.xt of regulating the proliferation and size of residential accessory buildings as well as to address the 'overbuilding' on small residential properties that is occurring as the lakeshore redevelops. A review of the files related to that ordinance suggests that the 15% limit was never intended to apply to commercial properties, and was never discussed in the commercial context, but as adopted in the ordinance, it does apply to commercial sites under 2 acres. The alternative to granting the requested variances is to recommend that the building be redesigned as a two-story office. This would solve a number of variance issues and would provide much greater flexibility for future uses of the building. Staff Recommendation 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Planning Commission should address the following topics in making a recommendation to the Council: Lot coveraee variance ®' W Parking stall variance (accept 'proof of parking'?) Parking encroachment into required front yard ^ Vi 0\c- lu f2cr-!_ Lack of loading berth ^(<L t Review in context of future rear access road: Rear parking setback encroachment Loss of 3 stalls, how/where to make up Applicant to address engineering issues Landscape plan - need to enhance? Need to more clearly specify materials, ground covers, etc.? Lighting plan needed Any signage issues? Building construction materials - specify? Any utility issues? MnDOT, MCWD approvals Future uses, flexibility, alternatives CUP conditions 6. 7 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. #2439 Service 800, Inc. November 12,1998 Page 9 60-Day Review Period For purposes of the 60-dav review period, this application was considered as complete on October 21,1998, the date on which it was submitted. The 60 day period will expire on December 21, 1998; if this item is tabled by the Planning Commission on November 16, it will not be reviewed again until the January meeting, hence an extension of the 60 day review period will be required. Options for Action 1. 2. 3. 4. Table for additional information or specific plan modifications. Recommend approval with conditions. Recommend denial, stating reasons. Other. Application #2*4 Date Received \ 0> >3. Amount Paid S CITY OF ORONO - GENERAL LAND USE APPLICATION PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address 9ion m VJayzata BlM Type of Application to be Filed Pr^p\^ Identification Number (P.I.D.) 34-118-23-21-0032 APPLICANT Kamp Service 800. Inc^ Address 407 E)ast Lake St«__Suite 2OQ. Phone (home)__6i2r425=2241 _______Phone fworkl f;i9-A7S-3747 City Hay^aha. MN_____—hf7391. Phone rhomel 612-475-3747 _ Phone (work)__6i2=J:15=3241 Addr^esdn? Rash Lak^ Sni hP 200 — Hay? a fa > MM---------Zip_^53ai OWNER (if different than applicant) Name r.reen VaUev Asscx:iates Date Property Acquired October 30, 1922—_—— I (rifi) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. (month/year) FEES - CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS - $ 75.00 For each variance request with CUP application SI75.00 Residential Accessory Use ^ $250.00 Institutional (church, school, etc.) $225.00 Guest House/Guest Apartments $200.00 Duplex Credit/Bldg A « M «-,nn OQ $300.00 Commercial/Industrial Use $250.00 Land Alteration « . . -------- Grading and filling - designated wetland or floodpioin Grading and filling - 501 cu. yd. or more Grading, seawall, retaining walls within 75' of lakeshore PRDA>ID - see Fee Schedule • n $150 00 Renewal Fee (no change from onginal application) After-the-Fact Fee - Double Current Application Fee other applications f r \ oe^O OQ $250.00 Commercial Site Plan Review (+ consultant fees) $300.00 Vacation $200.00 Easement Vacation _ ^ •$100.00 Easement Vacation With Subdivision $350.00 Rezoning (PUD - refer to fee schedule) $350.00 Comprehensive Plan Amendment 21 $100.00 Appeals . Other - set fee Schedule JaAs *0 ) ) V;3 REQUIRED SUBMITTALS 1. _x__ Completed Application Form. 2. y Describe request in detail. ................... 3. Y Certified Property Owners List of owners within 350’, labels and plat map (you must obtain this list, labels and map from Hennepin County Department of Finance, A-603, Government Center, 348-3271). 4 Y Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) - refer to handout for survey information. 5. X Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. 5 ^ Topographic survey (existing and proposed contours) if land alterations involve changes in elevation (grades). 7 List of the legal names (include marital status) of all persons with an interest in the property. This would include name(s) of applicant(s) if not current owner(s). 8 Construction plan, if applicable (see staff for requirements). 9’ As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. YOU ARE REQUIRED TO SUPPLY 30 COPIES OF LARGE DOCUMENTS OR COPY FOR REPRODUCTION (11" X 17" OR SMALLER) FOR ALL DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED. (Staff will require to scale drawings of all documents, plane, etc. to be submitted.) The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please lemember that your application is not complete if the above information has not been included. Certification by Clerical Department that Land Use Application is complete. Initials of Clerical Staff: _______________________Date-------------------------------------- APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE . . . .u 7 • The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zomng Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by onginal fee payment) and/or unusual expenses incuaed in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correc/toAe best of his/her knowledge. Applicant’s signature OWNER’S SIGI^TURE . ^ . u ' a The owner her^y acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authonze reasonable entry onto the oreperty by City staff, consultants, agents, commisrion members, and Council members for pupfes^ of investigation and verification of this lequest. DateOwner’s signat^e ADolicant must submttals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Comnussion Mccung. Plamiing Commission Meetings arc held on the third Monday of each month. Apphe^ts scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend m your place and advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting it \ * C' Ij / '■ 6 •• . •1% •• I ij /4*2. CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee $250.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $150.00 (no change from original application) Variance for non-conforming structures $250.00 After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) PROPERTY INFORMATION Site Addre«;s 2190 Vf. Wavzata Blvd Application Date Received Amount Paid Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) 34-118-2.3-21-QQ32—^—— Attach legal description to application if not included on required Date Property Arguired in/30/gB------------------------------ I ftto) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. survey. (month/year) Present use of property: Zoning District: B-L residential other (specify). APPLICANT Name service 800# Inc. Phone (home) fir?-47S-:^74l Phonefwork't 612-475-3747_ Address: an7 Rast i.ake st. .sintfi ?.n(L_ City: wayzata —tU-------Zip. OWNER (if different than applicant) Name Green Valley Agcinciates Address: an7 paci tj=iI<p ?nn DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Describe request in detail: Phone <home^ fii7-47S-374^------- ____ Phone (work^ 612-475-3747 _ City: Mayyai-a. MN______Zip:_ss391 ------- Estimated Constmction Cost $ b00.000_ (attach additional sheets if necessary) VARLANCES REQUIRED Lot Area ___Lot Width Setback:Front Side Hardcover Rear Lot Coverage Average Lakeshore X Other (specify) Percentage of hnildina nren na c i t-P HARnsmP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS hardship or practical difficulty or unusual property condtttons preventtr.g compUance with Zoning Code requirements: Seo Attached -----------------^------ — (attach additional sheets if necessary)* •* ^\ \! / m / 1. 2. 3. 4. ji REQUIRED SUBMITTALS All Af .h, fnllnu-in. infr>rmaliAn m..rt be submitted bv the HPplic»tion dtadlint jMt in order for ynnr application to be considered complete! Completed Application Form Certified Property Owners List of owners within 150 ’, labels and plat map (you must obtain this list, labels and map from Hennepin County Department of Finance, A-603, Govt Center, 348-3271). . . , , . . Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) and include hardcover calculations as required. In addition, provide one (1) copy ZVi" x 11 for Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing grade are proposed. In addiuon, provide one (1) copy B'// x 11" for reproduction. Sketches or plans of floor & elevation views (provide one (1) copy x II ). List of the legal names (include marital status) of all persons with an interest m the property. This would include name(s) of applicant(s) if not current owTier(s). As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. Additional items as may be requested by City staff. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that jamr v..ri»nr> annlicaiinn is not enmnlete if the ab ove infprmatipn has npt been inclua sa. APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE , , ^ ^ ■ The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zomng Admiihstrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by and/or consultant expenses incurred in review of this application and certifies that the information supplied is tme and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. Applicant's SignatiH'e 5. 6. 7. 8. Date m m!™r\ae^^o “dges and agrees to this appUcation and further authorises «ason»ble entry onto the property . y City staff, consultants, agents. Commission members, and Council members for purposes of jfivpsiigafion and verification of this request. Date)wner’s Signa)dre cTm‘""‘ Xir pLt^CoLiTL'Meeti^^^^^ must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commissi. i Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting p ease make arrangemenls to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. f i /fi cT^ 1 ift B B SERVICE 800, INC. Creatiff Resources to Monitor Customer Satisfaction Every Day October 20, 1998 TO: CITY OF ORONO Planning Conunission FROM: Jean Mork Bredeson, General Manager SERVICE 800, Inc. SUBJECT: Site Evaluation and Conditional Use Permit Thank you for reviewing our concepts and plans for a new building at 2190 West Wayzata Boulevard. Given the impending winter season, time is of the essence and we appreciate your prompt review. We also request to be included on the agenda of tlie November 23 Council meeting. The building will be owned by Green Valley Associates, a sister company of SERVICE 800. The occujOu of the building will be SERVICE 800, Inc., a small computer-related services company. Our business is most like a consulting company and our main activity is regular clerical/office activity. Other than regular office equipment and supplies, no warehousing is to be done at the buildiog. SERVICE 800 currently offices in Wav? and has 15 employees. The purpose of this project is to create an office situation for our growing company. Although we may elect to lease pan of the building, our primary intent is to have space into which we can easily expand if we need to. The minimum space required for our current and future needs is 10,000 square feet. Although the City of Orono prefers a floor/acreage ratio of 15%, the 25% required on our plan is die minimum usable building size. Please consider the hardship associated with tliis small lot size in a commercial area as you consider a variance of the preferred ratio. If you have any questions, please contact me at any time. Sio6erelv, Jeim Mork Bredeson incral Manager & Owner 407 East Lake, Suite 200 PO Box 900 Wayzata, MN 55391 in A/A’/)Aon<'6l2-A75-37A7 ro//-/-«'r 800-475-3747 612-475-3773 U .'A Cj ^ J / A "" C% ^ -^^3g.94 A-c#^3^.57 / ,4pr^= <5^ I •*&. C7 ^ P (13) - S' 209. 14 20'.51 46.23'- oe, 2# 05 :/ 1S4.14 isTu N89*36'07'E 19a iiilT: e i5L3fl 167.53 (20) , ■'''• S 103.06 ="3712 l05iC5 T «:s^«-?4. <7- IC1. 17 (29) '?V95 <v, / a. B P s / A Mx. / CZb^I / 4T7.4II i22^5 (15) n-w 7:;. . L.»5l6> i-05 :::W::x:-;:%:::: p 353.42 Sg7*4t*w il^.'\V/C0D >1^.93 5.22 23) ?2 _______LK t4 c .tlc: a ■IZ^o. TAYrA ?>} 6 T. >1 .,*.** — » 2CC § (2) (24) g IS5.:3 ooc w r" ?7349\7 200 337*4 1'E CUTLCT r (a) (58) 2C4. 44 (24) ?)4.4) WAYZ-A-' 378 I i03y ,©WSi®IAL? 3c>-----!|AfcO) (9) (10) ..TJi. (II) ■RTar i'9.5» lie 80.0' 2ii0: i SO S DANIELS P ».0l a 447. 1 -* 1267.5 -J01.C6 2'7. 16 355 t 137.64 t ) “^iiL : S6.9 146.9 n sa9*33' rj /cr RUM DATE 09/25/9#„eK»cPX»BATCH SOA PROr ADOR OWNER NAME taxpayer HAHE/AOOR UJLLIAM M wear t WIFE UILLXAH w wear 2UD WAYZATA BLVD R306 LOHC LAKE MN 5535A PROP AOOR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NANc/AOOR 3B 5<i-llB-23 21 OOM 02106 SUCARWOOO DR R M SCHOHHER A E H SCHOHHER R n SCHONHER # E M SCHOHMER 2106 SUCARWOOO OR LONG LAKE MN . 55356 PROP AOOR OWNER NAME taxpayer HAME/AOOR foOSr'^iSMEsfulIsSICNEO CITY OF ORONO CITY OF ORONO p 0 BOX 66 CRYSTAL DAY MN 55323 PROP AOOR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR CLIFPOM t LOUISE OTTEH p 0 BOX 269 long lake MN 55356 PROP AOOR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER HAME/ADDR 30 36-118*25 26 0001 02120 WAYZATA DLVD W WILLIAM WEAR ETAL WILLIAM W wear 3fc UACKBERRY HILL long lake MM 55356 PROP AOOR owner name taxpayer name/AOOR 72 36-118-23 23 0023 02225 WAYZATA BLVO W PERRY’S VENTURES INCJerry’s ventures inc 2205 w LONG LAKE MN 55356 30 36-118-23 21 0021 02102 SUCARWOOO OR REBERS CONSTRUCTION CO MBERS CONSTRUCTION CO 3525 WEBSTER AVE MPLS MM 55616 ;;o3r''ro;SEsru5|siGNjD^^ ISoAR WOODS HOMEOWNERS ASSOC SesSs COKSTSOCIIOU CO 3S25 WEBSTER AVE HPLS MN 55616 v. 3<i-110-23 21 0032 00038 ADDRESS VHASSICNEO SIDNEY B 8 BARBARA REBERS IiSSeY B I BARBARA REBERS 3525 WEBSTER AVE ST LOUIS PARK MM 55616 ;;o3r ‘“!o5Esru5!s’iGNED CITY OF ORONO CITY OF ORONO po DOX 66CRYSTAL BAY VM 55323 TR 36-118-23 26 0058 00038 ADDRESS VNASSICNEO SIDNEY D 8 BARBARA REBERS SiSmEY D 8 BARBARA REBERS 3525 WEBSTER AVE ST LOUIS PARK MM 55616 72 36-118-23 23 0053 02205 WAYZATA BLVO W PERRY’S VENTURES INC PERRY’S VENTURES INC J«5 WAYZATA BLVO W long LAKE MN 5j356 report ho. PI635601 PACE 1138 36-118-23 21 002202106 SUOARWOOD OR REBERS CONSTRUCTION CO REBERS CONSTRUCTION CO 3525 WEBSTER AVE HPLS MM 55616 roo3r‘“5iSsru55 ”icHED is; ;;;;; sisi «“i IS;e««s cousiiiuctioh CO 3525 WEBSTER AVE HPLS MN 55616 36-118-23 22 0015 00038 ADDRESS PENDING CLIFFORD 8 LOUISE OTTEN Sc^UKEMN 55356 ;;o3r'“!o5Ess"u5JsJicNco CLIFFORD 8 LOUISE OTTEN So^lIkE MM 55356 J t W PROPERTIES INC j t W PROPERTIES INC P 0 DOX 703 BRAINERD MN 5fc601 % :J J r •: V. * •/ : U / .* r,.|:s^ 4-1 01 72 36-118-23 26 0002 02073 WAYZATA BLVO W GREGORY M SHAUCHNESSY long lake ford tractor INC 2073 W WAYZATA BLVO p 0 BOX 697 long lake mm 55356 I- RUN DATE 09/25/98 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNERS LISTBATCH 509 PROP AODR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AODR 72 39-118-25 29 0098 02073 WAYZATA BLVD H GREGORY M SHAUGHNESSY LONG LAKE FORD TRACTOR INC 2073 W WAYZATA BLVD P 0 BOX 997 LONG LAKE MN 55359 TOTAL BATCH 599 00019 REPORT NO. Pr93S901 PACE 12 I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION# TO THE BEST OF NY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF .| DATE LlrcRTY lAXAIXUri# II# ■te' liiki fi n. ro *. ^1 li V •% •» m Bonestroo Rosene Anderlik & Associates Boneitroo Rosene. AnderUk ,ind AuccMfes. Inc n Affirnrititive Action Equ*9l Opportunity Employer Principals Otto G Poncsifoc. PE • Joseph C Anderlik. • Mar /»n L Sorv^M. PE • Richcifd £ Turner. PE • Gicrn R Cook. PE • Robert G Scriunicht. PE • Jerry A Bourdon. PE Robert W Rosene. PE and Susan M Eberlin. C PA . Senior Consultants AsiOCi,*ie Prtnciptifs HowfUd A Sanfgrd PE • Keith A Gordon. PE • Robert ? Pfefferle. PE • Richard W .-oster, PE • David O LosKota. PE • Robert C Pu5se*». Al A • Mark A Hanson, PE Michael T Rautmann. PE • Ted K Field. PE • Kenneth P Anderson. PE • Mark R Rolfs. PE • Sidney P WiHiamson. PE. L S • Robert F Kotsmitn • Agnes M Ring • Michael P Rau. PE • Allan Rick Schmidt. PE Engineers & Architects November 9, 1998 Offices '.t Paul RcChester Willmar and St Cloud. MN • Milwau'-ee. Wl \X^ebsite .V AW bonestroo com Mr. Michael P. Gaffron. Senior Planning Coordinator City of Orono Post Office Box 66 Crystal Bay, Minnesota 55323 Re; Sid Rebers, Outlot E File No. 139-2439 Dear Mike, We iiave reviewed the ‘••te plan for the proposed commercial development on Outlot E, Sugar Woods in the northwest quarter of Section 34. The site is located on the north side of Wayzata Boulevard (T.H. 12) just east of the Otten Brothers Nursery site. The site is proposed to be developed as a single story office building. There are several engineering issues that will need to be addressed as part of the plan review process. 1. Traffic; The access is proposed to be constructed west of Outlot E on MnDOT right-of-way. Plans should be submitted to MnDOT for their review and approval. 2.Grading: The grading plan should show all existing contours within 100 feet of the site. It appears that grading on the east side of the site along the existing parking lot may require a short retaining w all. A construction easement may also be necessary to construct the parking lot and storm sewer so close to the easterly lot line. Some grades on the parking lot scale to more than 5 percent. We would recommend that parking lot grades not exceed 4 percent. 3.Drainage: It is unclear how the proposed storm sewer at the access to the site is supposed to work. The catch basin is shown off the roadw ay in between a culvert and a concrete pipe. We would recommend that catch basins be located in the access roadway and tied into the proposed culvert. The culvert should then be connected to the existing 24 ” RCP. The proposed catch basin in the southeast comer of the parking lot has a proposed build of 2 feet. We recommend i minimum build of 2 Vi feet on any stonn sewer structure to allow adequate room for the pipe. We also recommend that the storm sewer downstream from the parking lot catch basin be tied into the existing downstream storm sewer rather than allowing the storm water to run overland. Stonn sewer design including pipe sizes and grades should be provided on the plan set. A drainage area map and storm sew er calculations should be provided for our review. Capacities and ultimate outlet locations should be provided for the existing 30” and 18” storm sewers. P'ans should be submitted to the .Minnehaha Creek Watershed District for their re\ iew. 4. Utilities: Plans and specifications should be prepared for the water and sanitary ser\ ice line connections, with as-built plans provided to the City upon completion. 5.Easements: Utility easements will need to be provided for the existing water main, sanitary sewer and any other existing utilities located on the property. Ba.sed on a recent site visit, it appears that the existing water main along the west edge of the property is located 3 to 4 feet east of the lot line. We recommend that a 10-foot utility easement be acquired along the west lot line. A triangular shaped utility ea.sement 2335 West Highway 36 ■ St. Paul, MN 55113 • 612-636-4600 • Fax: 612-636-1311 will be necessary in the southwest comer to allow access to the existing water main and sanitary sewer Drainage and utility easements should be provided 5 feet wide along the other perimeter lot lines and 10 feet wide along the T.H. 12 right-of-way. Drainage easements should be provided across any existing or proposed drainage ways. 6. Financial Guarantee: When the plans have been completed we will prepare an estimate of the total cost for the site improvements to determine the amount of the financial guarantee required. Please contact me at 604-4863 if you have any questions regarding this matter. Yours very truly. BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES. INC, Tom Kellogg cc: Greg Gappa, City of Orono DAHLGREN SlIARDEOW ANDUBAN INCORPORATED CONSULTING PLANNERS LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS 300 FIRST AVENUE NORTH SUITE 210 MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55401 612-339-3300 PHONE 612-337-5601 FAX F DATE:October 28, 1998 TO:Mike Gaffron Senior Planning Coordinator City of Orono FROM:Jon Scalzo Senior Designer RE:Service 800 Inc. Application #2439 As you requested, I have reviewed the site plan for the proposed office building located on Highway 12. 1 offer the following comments based on site planning and environmental perspectives. ISSUftS: 1. Variances The developer is requesting 2 variances to accommodate the development of the project. A. The developer is requesting a variance to increase the floor area ratio from the required 15% to 26%. By ordinance, this site, which is .96 acres would allow a 6.242 square foot building. The applicant is proposing a 10,880 square foot building which the applicant states Is their minimum space required for present and future needs. It is up to the developer to demonstratv that meeting the requirement represents an undue hardship and that there is no other reasonable recourse other than by variance and that they are requesting the minimum variance necessary. Although the applicant states this is the minimum space needed, this minimum represents an increase of over 174% of the square footage required as a maximum by ordinance. 11/02/9S 1U:0S ®U12 337 3G01 USl. INC.@002 • B The second variance request is for a reduction of parking spaces required from 54 spaces to 36 spaces with a proof of parking of 45 total spaces. The proposed building of 10,880 square feet with 36 parking spaces constitutes a square foot to parking space ratio of 3.3 spaces per 1,000 square feet of building. The City ordinance requires 5 spaces per 1,000 square feet of building. With the proof of parking of 9 additional spaces, the ratio becomes 4 spaces per 1,000 sq. ft. of building. As mentioned earlier, the applicant states that the building, a.s proposed, is the minimum space required for their needs. It is evident that this building, as proposed, even with parking far below required numbers is loo large for tliis site The developer needs to look at ways of reducing building area and increasing parking proportionately to meet the requirements of the ordinance. 2. Additional Issues A. The landscape plan referred to a shrub labeled as “DAF” whose botanical name is Daphne and Burkwood 1 . I he common name should be Carol Mackie Dapline, not Niobe Weeping Willow winch is a tree O:\JOB$U609 6\S1£RV8U0.MHM §10.40 (This is a cleaned up and partially updated version of 10.40; it is missing the added item "H** from Ord. ^161,2nd Series, which was mislabeled and which perhaps was intended to go into the Permitted or Accessory uses section of 10.40 - this needs to be resolved) SEC. 10.40. B-1 RETAIL SALES BUSINESS DISTRICT. Subd. 1. Puqjose. The "B-1 ” Retail Sales Business (District) is intended to provide a district for businesses that supply commodities or perform a service primarily for residents in the surrounding neighborhood. The district may adjoin residential districts or other business districts which are subject to more restrictive controls. The district shall have immediate access to adequate highways and public sanitary sewer. Subd. 2. Application. All applications for a building permit in any "B-1" Retail Sales Business District shall be reviewed by the Council and may be referred to the Planning Commission for review. Subd. 3. Permitted Uses. Within any "B-1" Retail Sales Business Distnet, no structure or land shall be Ui>ed except for one of the following uses or uses deemed similar by the Council: A. Retail and Service Businesses. The following neighborhood retail sales and service businesses supplying commodities or performing a service primarily for residents in the surrounding neighborhood: 1. Arts and school supplies store. 2. Banks and insurance companies. 3. Barber and beauty shops. 4. Bicycle sales and repair. 5. Books, magazines, record shop. 6. Drugs, candy, ice cream, soft drinks, cosmetics and other usual drug store merchandise. 7. Dry cleaning and laundry' pick-up stations including incidental pressing and repair. 8. Garden supplies, florist shop. 9. Gift or antique shops. 10. Hardware store, paint store. 11 . Hobby shops, camera and photographic supply stores. 12. Jewelry shops and repair. 13. Laundromats. 14. Locksmith. 15. Music, radio, T^^ appliance sales and repair stores. 16. Newsstands. 17. Office supply store, office machine store. 18. Pet shop. 19. Pipe and tobacco shops. 20. Plumbing, electrical, heating, housewares, furniture, carpet store. 21 . Postal substation. 22. Real estate sales. ORONO CC 332 (4-1-84) § 10.40 23. Retail food of all varieties and home supplies. 24. Sewing center and yardgoods. 25. Sporting goods store. 26. Tailor shops. 27. Temporary sales such as Christmas tree lots. 28. Travel bureau. 29. Variety store. 30. Wearing apparel store, shoe store. 31. Off-sale Liquor Store Source: Ordinance 29,2nd Series Adopted: 2-23-87 32. Home and garden equipment rental. Source: Ordinance 152,2nd Series Adopted: 10-28-96 B. Municipal Buildings. Municipal buildings where the use conducted is customarily considered to be an office use. Subd. 4. Conditional Uses. Within the "B-1" Retail Sales Business District no structure or land shall be used for one of the following uses except by conditional use permit: A. Garages. For the servicing and repair of automobiles provided repair functions are totally enclosed in a building. Subdivision 18. B. Motor Fuel Stations. Subject to the provisions set forth in Section 10.61, C. Restaurants (Class I). Food is serv'ed to customer while seated at counter or table. Cafeteria - Food is selected by a customer while going through a line and taken to a table for consumption. Neither live entertainment nor intoxicating liquor sales are permitted in Restaurants (Class I.) Source: Ordinance 67,2nd Series Adopted: 5-8-89 D. Restaurants (Class II). Fast Food, Convenience, Drive-in, ?'nd Liquor Store Restaurants. A restaurant where a majority of customers order and are served their food at a counter in packages prepared to leave the premises to be consumed; or a drive-in where most customers consume their food in an automobile regardless of how it is served, or restaurants which serve intoxicating liquor or have live entertainment. E. Off-Street Parking. Off-street Parking when the principal site of the off-street parking abuts on a lot which is (in) another "B" or "I" District and is in the same ownership as the land in the "B" or "I" District and subject to those conditions as set forth in Section 10.61, Subdivision 4 and such other conditions as found necessary by the Council. ORONO CC 333 (4-1-84) 1i j §10.40 F. Public Services. Public service structures, including, but not limited to, electric transmission lines and buildings such as telephone exchange stations, booster or pressure stations, elevated tanks, lift stations and electric power substations. Personal wireless service and commercial broadcasting antennas and towers shall not be considered public service structures. (Underlined language added per Ordinance No. 161,2nd Series, adopted 5-27-97). 1 i ORONO CC 333-1 (4-1-84) d §10.40 G. Nurseries. Day nurseries provided not less than 50 square feet of outside play area per pupil is available and fenced. H. Offices. Professional office and offices of a general nature. Source: Ordinance No. 172 Effective Date: 1-1-75 I. .^tcnna Stnictufc. One independent antenna structufe, with antenna or combination of antenna attached thereto,-aubordinotc to and servi cing the principal use-or structure on the same lot and customarily incidental thcrcto-that is not attached to anothcf-struc.utc provided the height of the antenna structufc does not c.\cccd 65 feet and the antenna structure is set-back from any lot line a diatanec-at least equal to the total heighhofthe antenna structure.- Source; Ordinance No. 177- Cffcetive Date: 6-5-75 (Subd. 41 deleted per Ordinance No. 161,2nd Series, adopted 5-27-97) Subd. 5. Accessory Uses. Within any "B-l" Retail Sales Business District, the following uses shall be permitted accessory uses: A. Garages, Etc. Private garages, off-street parking and loading spaces, as regulated in this Chapter. B. Signs. Signs, as regulated in this Chapter. C. Temporary Buildings. Buildings temporarily located for purposes of construction on the premises for a period not to exceed time necessary to complete said construction. D. Landscaping. Decorative landscape features. E. Fences. Fences, as regulated in this Chapter. F. Incidentals. Any incidental repair or processing necessary to conduct a permitted principal use, provided that the incidental use shall not exceed 30% of the floor space of the principal building. G. Public Telephone Booths. Source: Ordinance No. 172 Effective Date: 1-1-75 ORONO CC 334 (4-1-84) § 10.40 II. Antenna. Any antenna or combination of antenna-rtgtdly attached to the principal or accc93or^' structure provided that none of the foregoing exceeds the total-height allowed in Scctlen Source; Qrdinance-Nor-1-7?- EffcctiveE>ate; 6-S-75 (Subd. 5H deleted per Ordinance No. 161,2nd Series, adopted 5-27-97) Subd. 6. Area, Height, Lot Width, Setback Requirements and Design Requirements. A. Area. The minimum lot size shall be 20,000 square feet. B. Lot Width. The minimum lot width shall be 100 feet. C. Front Yards. The minimum front yard shall be 20 feet. D. Rear Yards. The minimum rear yard shall be 30 feet; side yard adjacent to "R" District shall be 15 feet; side yard adjacent to street shall be 10 feet. E. Setback Requirements. No building shall be nearer than 35 feet to any front lot line, 35 feet from any rear lot line, 15 feet from any side lot line, 35 feet to side lot line adjacent to street; except abutting or across the street from an "R" District, no building shall be less than 35 feet from such lot line. F. Fencing. Wherever a "B-1" Retail Sales Business District abuts an "R" District, along the side or rear lot line, a fence or compact evergreen hedge no less than 50% opaque nor less than six feet in height shall be erected along the abutting lines except within the required front yard. G. Building Design and Construction. In addition to other restrictions of this Chapter, the use, construction, alteration or enlargements to any building or structure within the district shall meet the following standards: 1. All exterior wall finishes on any building shall be: (a) Face brick, or, (b) Natural stone, or, (c) Specially designed precast concrete units if the surfaces have been integrally treated with an applied decorative material or texture, or, (d) Factory fabricated and finished metal framed panel construction. if the panel materials be of any of those noted in Items (a), (b) and (c) above. (e) Other materials as may be approved by the Council. Combinations of such materials shall be permitted. 2. All subsequent additions and outbuildings constructed after the erection of an original building or buildings shall be constructed of materials comparable to those used in the original construction and shall be designed in a manner conforming with the original architectural design and general appearance. ORONO CC 335 (4-1-84) § 10.40 3. No building or structure of a temporary character, trailer, basement, tent or shack shall be constructed, placed or maintained ipon the property except as accessory to and during the construction of permanent buildings. H. Drainage. No land shall be developed and no use shall be permitted that results in water runoff causing floods, erosion, or deposits on adjacent properties. Site and drainage plans shall be submitted by the applicant in such detail as required by the Council and those plans shall be reviewed by the City Engineer before submission to the Planning Commission and Council for approval. Such runoff may be required to be properly channeled into a natural water course, ponding area, storm drain or other public facilities. Any change in grade affecting water runoff whether onto adjacent property or otherwise must be in compliance with the Surface Water Management Plan and shall be consistent with other applicable regulations or City Code provisions and subject to the approval of other agencies having jurisdiction over the area affected by the drainage. I. Height. No structure or building shall exceed 2-1/2 stories or thirty feet in height except as provided in Section 10.75. SEC. 10.41. B-2 LAKESHORE BUSINESS DISTRICT (To Be Entered) ORONO CC 336 (4-1-84) CITYof ORONO .RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL 4 1 8NO. A RESOLUTION GRANTING PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF A CLASS II SUBDIVISION FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2190 WAYZATA BOULEVARD - FILE NO. 2425 WHEREAS, Sidney and Barbara Rebers (hereinafter the "Applicants") on February 19, 1997, filed a formal subdivision application with the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") for appro\ al of a replat of property legally described as: Outlet E, Sugar Woods, except that part shown as Parcel 342A on Minnesota Department of Transportation Right-ofiW'ay Plat No. 27-70, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "the Property"); and WHEREAS, this replat is proposed for the purpose of converting said Outlet E to buildable lot status in order that the Property may be developed, as .’•eouired by the City as a condition of the plat of Sugar Woods; and WHEREAS, after duly published and mailed notice in accordance with Miniiesota Statutes 462.358 et. seq. and the City of Orono Zoning and Subdivision Codes, the Orono Planning Commission held a public hearing on March 17, 1997, at which time all persons desiring to be heard concerning this application were given the opportunity to speak thereon; and WHEREAS, at its regular meeting held on April 14, 1997, the Orono City Council considered the subdivision application of the Applicant and made the following findings of fact: 1.The property is located within the B-1 Retail Sales Business Zoning District requiring a minimum lot area of 20,000 s.f and a minimum lot width of 100'. The property contains a total area of 41,612 s.f. and has a defined width of approximately 146’. The proposed plat consists of one commercial lot meeting the minimum lot standard requirements of the B-1 Zoning District. Page 1 of 10 CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 4 i S 2_____ D. 6. 7. 8. The property is served by municipal sewer and water. The property abuts U.S. Highway 12 as well as Outlot D, Sugar Woods, a segment of a proposed future frontage road corridor platted within Sugar Woods. In 1987 the City adopted Comprehensive Plan Amendment No. 2 which planned for the fuure development of a frontage road between Brown Road and Willow Drive, paralleling Highway 12. In 1987 it was anticipated that traffic on Highway 12 would continue to increase as a result of the upcoming completion of Interstate Highway 394. The purpose of this planned frontage road was to reduce and'or eliminate access directly to and from Highway 12, generally for safety and traffic flow reasons. Comprehensive Plan Amendment No. 2 specifically addressed road improvements needed prior to development of the commercial corridor as follows; 'Trior to the development of the commercial portion of this property, the existing intersection at Brown Road and Highway 12 shall be improved so that safely concerns associated with the current use and future increased use of this intersection are addressed. Configuration of the frontage road and North Brown Road would be determined at the time of development." Orono ’s 1994-95 reconstruction of Brown Road alleviated alignment concerns with the 12/BrowTi intersection, and Mn'DOT's 1995-96 safety improvements on Highway 12 similarly alleviated a number of safety concerns. The plat of Sugar Woods, completed in July 1989, included two commer-ially zoned parcels (Outlots E and F) abutting Highway 12. These two parcels were planed as outlots, rather than as buildable lots, because the Applicant at that time wished to delay decisions regarding future access to the commercial property until such time that it was developed. The Sugar Woods plat confomied to the comprehensive plan by creating Outlot D. a short segment of the proposed future east/wesi frontage road. Outlot D. however, only provides a corridor from the west boundary ot Sugar Woods to Page 2 of 10 o; o CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 4 ^ ^ - 9. 10. 11. the nonhwest corner of Outlot F. The City's intent in approving the plat of Sugar Woods was that at some future time when Outlot F is developed, the remaining frontage road segment eastward to Brown Road would be defined "md platted. On December 12, 1988, the Orono City Council adopted Resolution No. 2554 granting preliminary plat approval, conditional use permit and variances for the plat of SUGAR WOODS. Page 8, paragraph 4.E stated that the subdivider's agreement should; "Clarify that Outlot D (portion of future east/west road) is to be fully developed at the time of future development of the commercial corridor. The access road will be fully installed at the time of either the applicant's development of the commercial corridor or as a result of any other condition that may require the installation of the road prior to applicant's development of the commercial corridor." The foregoing language was not put in the subdivider's agreement, but it was put in the resolution granting final plat approval. On July 10, 1989, the City Council adopted Resolution No.2653 approving the final plat of SUGAR WOODS. Page 4, paragraph 4 stated; "4. Outlot D, a portion of future east/west road located within the commercial zoned portion of the property, shall be installed at the time of the development of Outlets E or F or the development of the Wear property (unless the City has obtained an alternate legal access tlirough Outlot E to the Wear property all subject to the approval of the City)." Pursuant to the terms of the preliminar>' plat resolution and final plat resolution, on September 8, 1989, Rebers Construction Co, and Sidney and Barbara Rebers granted public roadway easements over Outlot D to the City of Orono. Said easements were filed with the Hennepin County registrar of Titles as Document Nos. 2038791 and 2038792. Page 3 of 10 CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 4 j o o 12. 13. Thereafter, the Orono Building & Zoning Administrator and City Attorney objected to certain terms of said easements; said easements were renegotiated between the City and the Applicants; and a replacement public road easement over Outlot D was granted to and accepted by the City subject to the following: ”1. No road shall be installed by Grantee until a building permit has been issued for construction of a commercial building on Outlot E, SUG.AR WOODS (in wltich case the road may extend no further etist than the Northerly extension of the East boundary of Outlot E) or on Outlot F, SUGAR WOODS (in which case the road may extend the full length of Outlot D). "2. The south edge of any road built by grantee shall be no further North than the South boundary of Outlot D, SUGAR WOODS. It If and when a frontage road or service road is built connecting Outlets E and F, SUGAR WOODS, across land South of Outlot D, SUGAR WOODS, or an easement for such a road is dedicated, granted or condemned, this easement shall automatically expire." (Quit Claim Deed dated May 30, 1990, recorded June 25, 1990 as Registrar of Titles Document No. 2105974.) It appears that Interstate Highway 394 will not be extended along the current corridor of U.S. Highway 12; it appears that a bypass route will be e.xtended from the current freeway terminus near the easterly boundar>* of Orono to the intersection of Highway 12 and County Road 6. When this bypass is operational, traffic on Highway 12 adjacent to the Property will decline. However, the resultant traffic volumes on Highway 12 adjacent to the property at that time are anticipated by the City to be at a level that would generally indicate the need for a limited access highway. Page 4 of 10 o CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 41 8 2 ___ 14. The Council finds that although the ultimate access for the Property should be via a frontage road, the form of flmjre development of the adjoining and nearby properties should be taken into account at the time the frontage road is developed. Such future development has not been determined, but it will influence if. how, where and when the frontage road is constructed. Therefore, the Council chooses not to install the Highway 12 frontage road through Outlot D, SUGAR WOODS, at this time, whether or not Outlot E is developed with a commercial building, without waiving its right to require or order such installation in the future. 15. The Council finds that suitable interim access to Outlot E from Highway 12 may be possible using the Mn/DOT right-of way directly west of Outlot E. which would allow an access to be constructed opposite Brimhall Avenue. Such an access location afford'"- in opportunity for shared access to ser\'e the adjacent property in the plat of East Willow Woods. 16. Outlot D, Sugar Woods, is intended to serve as a trail corridor as well as a frontage road corridor, and therefore requires a continuous width of 60 ’ in order to accommodate both uses. Outlot D currently is 60 ’ in width at the west end but tapers to a width of 40' at its east end. Additional right-of-way is needed by the City via creation of an additional Outlot and granting of drainage, utility, road and trail easements in order that the 60 ’ corridor be provided. 17. The City Engineer has additionally recommended that a 5 ’ drainage and utility easement be granted along the south side of the added right-of-way outlot, within proposed Lot 1. 18. The easement granting the City rights to develop a frontage road in Outlot D does not grant an easement for drainage or utilities purposes, which is necessar>" in order for the City to use it for the intended purpose. 19. Proposed Lot 1 is subject to tire Park Dedication requirements of Municipal Code Section 11.62. Page 5 of 10 CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. J. \ P' 2 20. Any development proposed within proposed Lot I w 11 be subject to a commercial site plan review process before the Planning Commission and City Council; and WHEREAS, on October 13, 1997 the Orono City Council adopted Resolution No. 3972 granting preliminar>- plat approval for the proposed conversion of the Property into Lot 1, Block 1, SUG.AR WOODS 2ND ADDITION, subject to a number of conditions; and WHEREAS, the approval granted in Resolution No. 3972 expired on October 13, 1998 prior to the applicant completing the requirements for final plat approval; and WHERE.AS, the applicant applied for renewal of the Preliminary Plat Approval on September 22, 1998, and a public hearing was subsequently held by the Planning Commission on October 19, 1998 at which time all persons desiring to be heard concerning this application were given the opportunity to speak thereon; whereupon the Planning Commission recommended that the preliminar>' plat approval be renewed per the conditions of Resolution No. 3972; and WHEREAS, the applicant’s surs'eyor has submitted a revised Preliminar>' Plat drawinc which depicts the proposed Outlot A in addition to the proposed l.ot 1, Block 1, SUGAR WOODS 2ND ADDITION as required in the conditions of Resolution No. 3972. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that based upon one or more of the findings noted above, the City Council of the City of Orono hereby approves the request for renewal of the preliminary' plat application of Sidney and Barbara Rebers per plat drawings by Way ne D. Cordes, a licensed sur\eyor employed by BRW, Inc. dated October 19. 1998, for the conversion of the Property into Lot 1, Block 1, and Outlot A, SUG.AR WOODS 2ND .ADDITION, said survey attached to this Resolution as Exhibit A, subject to the following conditions; 1.Lot 1 shall be allowed direct access to U.S. Highway 12 only if the applicants are successful in relocating their existing access to Highway 12. by obtaining an access permit from the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) Pace 6 of 10 CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO.4 1 J. 4. permitting access over the triangular parcel of land owned by MnDOT across from the intersection of Brimhall Avenue and Highway 12. Any direct access to Highway 12 which is not directly opposite Brimhall Avenue will not be allowed. The right-in/right-out access of Lot 1 to Highway 12 at Brimhall Avenue is approved on a permanent basis. The left-in/left-out access of Lot 1 to Highway 12 at Brimhall Avenue is approved on an interim basis. At such time as a frontage road is installed to provide alternative access to Lot 1, the City shall have the right to terminate the right-in/right-out access at Brimhall Avenue upon payment of just compensation and the right to terminate the left-irL'lefi-out access at Brimhall Avenue without payment of any compensation; provided that Lot I’s access to Highway 12 will not be terminated unless the Highway 12 accesses of the other parcels served by the frontage road arc similarly temiinated. The City reserves the right to control access to Lot 1 from the W'ear property directly east of Lot 1 in the commercial site plan review process. Applicant shall, if found necessaiy by the City, place barriers to prohibit access from the Wear property. Lot 1 shall bear the total reasonable costs of constructing the portion of the frontage road directly adjacent to Lot 1. If the frontage road is built, the owner of Lot 1 reserves the right to contest the necessity and feasibility of the frontage road improvement. The Council will require at the time of final platting security in the form of a cash escrow, letter of credit or other form of security acceptable to the City. Applicant shall grant the City a drainage, utility and trail easement over Outlot D. A triangular segment of right-of-way shall be platted as Outlot A. SLG.-\R WOODS 2ND ADDITION, per E.xhibit A attached, and applicant shall grant to the City road, tr' 1. drainage and utilities easements over said Outlot A. Paae 7 of 10 ill V/ CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 4 1 9 9. 7. Applicants shall provide confirmation that the existing stormwater pond is viable to serve Lot 1, or shall provide a new comprehensive stormwater plan tor Lot 1 and Outlot F, SUGAR WOODS, subject to approval of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District and the City Engineer. 8. Applicants shall in conjunction with City staff determine the exact location of the existing water main along the west boundary of the site and applicants shall grant to the City an easement for utility purposes within the property extending 10' from the centerline of the existing pipe. 9. Applicants are hereby advised that preliminary subdivision approval will expire within one year of the date of Council approval, on October 26, 1999. Should Applicants fail to complete the filing of the final plat application within the one year deadline, it shall be necessary for applicant to file a new preliminari- subdivision application with the City. The following list of final submittals must be submitted to the Zoning Administrator two weeks prior to the regularly scheduled Council meeting on the second and fourth Mondays of the month. These submittals are as follows: 1.Record plat drawings in the form of two (2) mylar copies (one copy for the City's records and one for filing with Hennepin County) and one (1) copy reduced to 1" = 200*. Drawing to include: A. Lot lines platted per preliminary plat survey by Wayne D. Cordes dated October 19, 1998. B Dedication of drainage and utility easements 10’ wide along the exterior boundaries of the Property with additional water main easement as noted in Condition No. 8 above. Designation of Outlot .A per Exhibit A attached, to sei^ e as an expansion of the frontase road corridor. Page 8 of 10 CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL no._4 1J?2 ■■ Legal documents required: A. Title opinion addressed to the City. B. All owners, mortgage holders or otheis witn property interest indicated therein shall sign the plat and all otiier documents affected by such interest. J. 4. C. The applicant must provide certified copies of all recorded easements currently affecting the Property. Signed and executed road, trail, utility and drainage easement over Outlot A, SUGAR WOODS 2ND ADDITION. Signed and executed trail, drainage and utility easement over Outlot D, SUGAR WOODS. 5. Fees to be paid: Total due: S 200.00* A. B. Legal review and filing fees for subdivision and associated documents = S200.00 *Park dedication fee, fee shall be based on 8% of the fair market value of land within Lot 1. per the provisions of City of Orono Ordinance No. 173, Second Series adopted April 13, 1998 and Resolution No, 4064 adopted April 13, 1998. The applicant shall be advised as soon as the amount of the park dedication fee has been determined. Paee 9 of 10 CITYof ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at its regular meeting held this 26th day of October, 1998. ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this^^^^day of , 1992_, by Gabriel Jabbour & Linda S. Vee, Mayor & City Clerk of the Cit>- of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. ^ xCiib. CAmEA.HASF.VAM •' NOTARY FLELIC-M!M":0TA h ' HENNEPIN CCiitlTY V Notary Public Page 10 of 10 I CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL' NO. A n "I RESOLUTION ADOPTING A GENERAL CONCEPT PLAN FOR DEVELOPMENT ALONG ffiGHWAY 12 - • \MIEREAS, the update of the City ’s Land Use Plan is an important element of the Comprehensive Plan update process; and WHEREAS, the construction of new Highway 12 will have a significant impact on land use along both new and old Highway 12; and WHEREAS, developers are currently pursuing sites for retail development throughout the Highway 12 area; and WHEREAS, it is important that the Council has a clear vision for land use along Highway 12 to guide its review of proposals for development along Highway 12; and WHEREAS, the Highway 12 area has, in recent years, been the subject of extensive study by the City; and WHEREAS, at its February 12 work session, the Council reviewed several pneral concept plans for development along Highway 12 as a way to clarify its vision for how the Highway 12 area should develop; and WHEREAS, the consensus of the Council at the work session was that community scale retail development focused in a more compact area in or near downtown Long Lake (closer to Brown Road than to Willow Drive, at least in the short-term) most closely reflects the Counci s vision for the Highway 12 area; and WHEREAS, this concept plan has the following benefits: 1. Focuses on downtown Long Lake remaining a strong retail area. Page I of3 CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. n A V 2. Focuses on maintaining a vital downtown and "sense of place" for both Long Lake and Orono. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. A compact retail area encourages pedestrian activity. It is easier to plan, coordinate and control the development of a more compact retail area than an e.xtended retail strip. Focusing development toward Brown Road could strengthen the ability to obtain desirable development on the north side of Highway 12 east of Otten Brothers Nursery. Enables better control over the amount of retail development that occurs in this area. Provides the opportunity to generate stable jobs in office, high tech, medical, etc. A more compact community scale retail area matches the design of new Highway 12 with no interchanges through Long Lake. Liniits the number of north/south roadways that would be affected by retail development (increase traffic and activity levels). 10. Maintains a lower activity level in the area west of Willow Drive. 11. Would create less pressure for providing an access from new Highway 12 to die retail area. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Orono City Council, that a general concept plan for land use along Highway 12, calling for community scale retail development focused in a compact area in and near downtown Long Lake (closer to Brown Road than to Willow Drive, at least in the short-term) most closely reflects the Council's vision for development alono Highway 12. a9 Page 2 of 3 of%CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 'A C\ _ Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held this 23rd day of February, 1998. REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: February 19,1998 ITEM NO: Department Approval: Name RonMoorse Title City Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: City Administrator’s Report Item Description: Highway 12 Land Use Concept Plan - Resolution At its February 12 work session, the City Council reviewed three general concept plans for land use along Highway 12 as a way to clarify the Council's vision for how the Highway 12 area should develop. The three concept plans were as follows: 1. Community scale retail development alo.ng the majority of Highway 12. 2. Community scale retail development focused in a compact area in and near downtown Long Lake (closer to Brown Road than to Willow Drive, at least in the short-term) with office, office/service, and high tech industrial development west of Willow Drive. 3. Provide for regional or "big box" retail development in selected locations along current Highway 12. The Council selected concept plan #2 as the plan most closely reflecting the Council's vision for the Highway 12 area, and directed staff to draft a resolution reflecting the Council consensus for adoption at the February 23 Council meeting. General Elements of Concept Plan The general elements of this concept plan are as follows; 1. Restrict strip retail development along Highway 12, particularly west of Willow Drive. 2. 3. Prohibit all regional "big box" retail development. The sub-area on the north side of Highway 12 west of Willow Drive would be planned for medium density residential development on the north side of an extended Kelley Parkway to take advantage of the wetlands as an amenity. The area south of Kelley Parkway along Highway 12 would be planned for office development with minor "neighborhood" retail to serve the office development, the medium density residential development and the Orono schools. Request for Council Action continued Page 2 February 19,1998 Highw'ay 12 Land Use Concept Plan 4.The sub-area in the southwest quadrant of Old Ciystal Bay Road and Highway 12 would be planned for office/high tech/medical or similar development. A portion of this sub-area may also be considered for medium density residential development. 5, Orono's current industrial area on the south side of Highway 12 east of Old Crystal Bay Road would be maintained or redeveloped as office, high tech, medical, etc. Benefits of Concept Plan The key benefits of concentrating retail development in a more compact area are as follows: 1. Focuses on downtown Long Lake remaining a strong retail area. 2. Focuses on maintaining a vital downtown and "sense of place" for both Long Lake and Orono. 3. A compact retail area encourages pedestrian activity. 4. It is easier to plan, coordinate and control the development of a more compact retail area than an extended retail strip. 5. Focusing development toward Brown Road could strengthen the ability to obtain desirable development on the north side of Highway 12 east of Otten Brothers Nursery. 6. Enables better control over the amount of retail development that occurs in this area. 7. 8. Provides the opportunity to generate stable jobs in office, high tech, medical, etc, A more compact community scale retail area matches the design of new Highway 12 with no interchanges through Long Lake. 9.Limits the number of north/south roadways that would be affected by retail development (increase traffic and activity levels). 10. Maintains a lower activity level in the area west of Willow Drive. 11. Would create less pressure for providing an access from new Highway 12 to the retail area. .1 j Request for Council Action continued Page 3 February 19,1998 Highway 12 Land Use Concept Plan A resolution reflecting the Council consensus regarding concept plan #2 is attached for Council consideration. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to approve the adoption of a resolution to reflect the Council consensus regarding the Council's vision for development along Highway 12. HWYI2USE ! «ro soe ir*z8 CM ««<0I KOOl ■ WrM IK9 fWiflSi Al 98-81-01 96-91-Ot^ ftl ViOS3NNn C> l«fl« •41 ID two »<l •< 1 r«i »*• t |»»«t »« ■•11 M« •••*<>« M<«*<« * ••Ml ••ion »•*»•• M3IA3U A1I3 bOi 03069 M*tl-0l 8NO(8IA3b ICC99 m VIVZAVM 002 3JLS iSaMVl 3l0f S31VIOOSSV A3mVAN33yO 83NMO iew<5 NW 0N0«0 OA10 ViVZAVM M 0812 •0U| ‘OO0 3OIAd3S xosroBd JL •ou| ‘008 30IAd3S '^X99l l»« U19I aOlOA J02 = .l 31VDS N\nd 3ilS NNtn ‘3UIVUa N303 9SZ# Ob M3IA A311VA 6X68 nb3NNV1d • 8i03ilH3bV • irr-oll'k JJOIPB^ T SOl-IBMP a3Ay3S3d SiHOlu nv eeei. H3aw3id3S si03iiH0dv • ddonavd r s3idVH0 @ *.• f'hr I va ■ d 'r. !• iiO’iG CO CM • f (1 1 • 1 .-^ob'e «0-i02 .0-.22 ^cviH (D^^Oi —zjy = 0 c93 '^±za> -V V p07s •i0-i6 OH ' .•> ■ •■' ' -•• .v* .• V-- ; ’ • I.0-.S .. '''• • /■■ •. '* ' .'m /' ■■"■■■' •• : *• r . • \ ‘; : ' • \ - ,. ,hO-,9^ I j.• V: - ■ * ■ • ■ • .■ -• *"• hi- ' h'/,- •-■ ■■•■ •' -■• ■■ -•• ■'. ■• •• .:-,yv •. • * •' • ^ . r <■ ■> .1 :: t • > . • . . -V T •, -■ :k ■ •' „ - *• • •• - • - ' . ■ ...... ^ • . • ■ . - 1* I I i Q> 6Tco!h: ^ = lO CO “C Q) 0) c (0 ^ .t:! <D OSCOLU uiS 0> tr 002: h“ 0)5 ^ Oc^ = ^2 0) Q-P-’5 0 CO H— i5 ^ 0) “7 CD o C! "Vsae xr-z6 ee-tv-oi ______yv \QVGid3S 31UVH0 ® • iO OS > ^ E• .ts CD > 3*0 D CO 111 ^9901 ViOS3H»«W ^ *i*r< M3IA3U Alio M03 03nSSI «fl 91 01 8NOI8tA3U 16C9S m ViVZAVMIS 3>nn 3 zo»S31VI00SSV A3mVAN33bO 16CS9 NW ONOUO OATS ViVZAVAA AA061Z ■0U\ ‘008 30IAU3S ONI ‘008 gOIABBSjO-.l = Ml :31V08 N\nd UOOld V SN011VA31E IJlOA U3NMO Hcn mnw *iMiVH«i H101 9U» on M JIA A1 11VA «/M ByjNNvid • tioiiiMayv ^ Jjoipca r saiJBMoMife* Q OH I NVA OH 1 1 -1 -n tz t t LU CO CO CC C\i ------------------r—^rTRASH & ^RFCYCLEoa T-r4 i 3 ^ ^CO cc U) s. i tt SB ooo bTO Isose» mr>iif-IS ■ ■ 96^l<0i L ___/ r—----------VlOS3NN«^ K901 €> V*** «> tMVl ►! 1 ilt»< ^ ••• •*) 96-91-01 |}«MQ •« l«9»n d«M>4aM •• c.mo«9»«>m mu 002 3iS IS 3XV1 3 lOf MiatASU Alio \tOd 030881 90-81*01 8W0191A3W saivioossv AanvANaauo U3NMO 16CSQ Nl^ ONOUO OAHQViVZAVM M0612 •OUj -008 dOIA«3S rrr"tro SOS 1¥-16 m *•»>> 96-fli-Ol 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i1 1 • 1 1 1 • i 1 ± • 31d3S VHO ® 3 $ 800 ^901 cst se-fii-oi V10S3NNWV •' «4tii »« <t> !•«*« »<l OMO M* •MW' iC' 4Mi«*M •«• UC'«M *o MfV* ta^t ir»i •l»M«t> i =v^ M3(A3U Ki\0 HOd 03069 96 91^1 SNOt6VV3M _ 16C99 VIVZAVM 002 3iS JLS 3X\n 3 ZOyS31VIOOSSV AanVAN33dO U3HMO 16C9Q ONOUO OA10 VIVZAVM M0612 0U| *008 30IAd3S 103r06d ou\ *008 30IAU3S JX^A 31VOS ONi>fldVd30dooyd Ui%»tC«C NNIfl '3mVV«l N9Q3 9Vi on M3IA A311VA 0^«9 8d3NNVld • 8i03ilH0HV jjoipny r soiJTjqo rr- Q3AU3S3d SiHOId 11V 866 1 d30W3id3S Si03JLIH0dV • ddonavd r S33dVH0 ® V M iiO'iC ■\- ii0 “i6 -\ «0-i02 f ,0-.2^ H © OH -\- ..0-.9 •/ «0-,Sk I >/• :>• •■ V. - ■ -• A. ;->v ■ ' - ■: ^. t ‘ ‘*y. ^ * ■ •. ■ - i •f\ y-’T .s' .* ’ .1 .n-.OQ o^ 6r<D!£ ^ = in (0 sSSI£ ^ 0> (D C (0 ±f <D £0>Oo>COUJ 00 CO O} 1 CO .ujS 1o ozw . — <0oc c)^5 oof Hr o) £5.12O c ^ is 5 Q. 2;CC o cosa-s 3Qmid3S }3iy VHO o l«2 uiS = c o5 (D Q. 5 Q CO c o c erCViC raven raio 0 raa CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY &c PRELIMINARY GRADING 6c UTILITY PLAN FOR SERVICE 'sbo. INC. & KM BUILDING CO. INC. IN OUTLOT E. SUGAR WOODS ORONO. MINNESOTA U-' '1 ........ / /OUTLOT ! D ,'\A/nnnc:,' S erje-OO* 1M.4J ,'l I I I K I 1.1 ' flrruRE ' ' r I I < I PARKING tp'O OUTLOT proposed BUILDING f i^,€. ■m PAf <WC blacktop rVO •* SUBiM UA»\U 800 OATI VACVC f/sii2 EXISTWG \ Jiff A «. fAO^0tf* C,ff. AfA*»e^j3! /av » ~ \ I,/I BUILDING CAT04 •ASM - - -1016- - IMd (ioie.0) EXSTWC CONTOUR PROPOSED CONTOUR ; EXBTWC SPOT EUEV. ; PROPOSED SPOT ELEV. JtUuM __A ia __SJK a —b Ia I__OmmU ia JL XtSTtNI jlLOING * «ro 1 soe w' ir 26 m »*«>r«90k g- I t *• h »> «»•' ••• •***' , . |4M .« 1 »!•>»• fci • ►»< «».••*-• #«•••• •*•^1 M3tAau Auo bOd oanssi«ti-oi ^96*61-01 , ... A . P^*l V P^W’ M W® ■ •itcr«M.»««A^ SNOtSiASU J SUiVIOOGbVA3nVAN33dO Minmo QA'ieViVZAVM M0612’OU| ‘OOP 33IAU3S103r0H4 = 3TV0S r-aHHV.d.,i03i.H0«yNVnd 31IS j ijoipcy r S0IJCH3 Q3Ay3S3d SiHOlU TVi 0661 a38IM3id3S Si03ilH0dV • ddOiaVB r S31BVH0 @ . r»; \x4 •A • ^ ^"9 I ''Vjj * h O'iC 0*103 (7 ii2 V.3rvf -\ —I 2 i0*i32 *^CMl— 0{qCO 2zUJ o;§3 m:7 Tf^O) -V OH ..0-.S ■^. * V' <s• o ^tzCC "g®2 Co ^ °^X. .®^ -3 S^CD.fc < “ = in CO 1 gg^a <5. l\ N'T ’ro ^ CO o>• CO 1o 0^10 V .v: x>Z oo^ h" cnf? w ^ 2 ® s.OC ■= Q ® I— 5'^ ®^OQo c 055! .S ’ # f-*'- — t y Date of Application: 10/26/98 Date Complete: 10/26/98 60 day limit: 12/26/98 COUNCIL M££ri;>:G NOV 2 3 1998 CITY Or GRCNO REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: November 18, 1998 ITEM NO.; /(f Department Approval: Administrator Reviewed: Name Liz Van Zomeren Title City Planner Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description:^2442 Tony Eiden Company 345 Leaf Street Variance Renewal Zoning District:LR-IA One Family Lakeshore Residential District (2 acres) Lot Area:77,039 sq. ft. (1.77 acres) Application: The applicant received a lot area variance in July of 1997 to remove the existing residence to construct a new residence. The previous variance expired. The applicant is requesting to renew the variance for lot area. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: To unanimously (7-0) approve the renewal of the ? i»rer. '•■ariance. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: To approve application ffl442 for the Tony Eiden Co. for renewal of a lot area variance to allow new residential construction on the existing 1.77 acre lot where 2 acres is required. Attachments TO: FROM: DATE: Chair Smith and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator Liz Van Zomeren, City Planner/Zoning Administrator November 9, 1998 SUBJECT: #2442 Tony Eiden 345 Leaf Street Variance Renewal-Public Hearing Zoning District: Lot Area: LR-IA One Family Lakeshore Residential District (2 acres) 77,039 sq. ft. (1.77 acres) Application:The applicant is requesting a renewal for a lot area variance for the property- located at 345 Leaf Street. The previous resolution was adopted July 1997 and e.xpired on July 28, 1998. Pertinent Ordinances: Section 10.23, LR-1 A, One Family Lakeshore Residential District Section 10.03, Subd. 6, Lot of Record, A. 3. ANALYSIS Lot Area and Yards LR-IA District Standards Lot Area Lot Width Street Yard Side Yard Rear Yard 2 acres 200 feet 50 feet 30 feet 50 feet Tony Eiden 345 Leaf Street Variance Renewal 11/1 6/98 Subject Property Lot Area and Yards Lot Area Lot Width 77,039 sq. ft.204 ft. The zoning lot does not meet the minimum 2 acre requirement. The existing structures are to be removed for new construction. A suitable building pad exists. No other variances are needed. Structural coverage and hardcover are not issues with this application. STATEMENT OF HARDSHIP This is an existing lot. The lot size is 77,039 sq. ft. or 1.77 acres which is 88.42% of the minimum lot size requirement. No other land is available to purchase to add to this lot to bring it into conformance. STAFF RECOMMENDATION To approve the renewal of the lot area variance, Attachments A B C D E F G H I Application Resolution #3937 Plat map Topo Map Lot area calculations Permit record Minutes from July 21, 1997 Minutes from July 28,1997 Property 0\Mier's list U2442 Tony Eiden 345 Leaf Street Variance Renewal PC-n/l6/9S A RESOLUTION GRANTING A VARIANCE TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.23, SUBDIVISION 6 FILE NO. 2442 WHEREAS, Tony Eiden Company (hereinafter "the applicant") the owTier of the property located at 345 Leaf Street within the City cf Orono (hereinafter "the City") and legally described as follows: the East 310 feet of Lot 12 and the East 310 feet of the North 124.7 feet of Lot 13, Auditor ’s Subdivision Number 203, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, after due published and mailed notice in accordance with Minnesota Statutes and the City of Orono Zoning and Planning Codes, the Orono Planning Commission held a public hearing on November 16, 1998, at which times all persons desiring to be heard concerning this application were given the opportunity to speak thereon; and WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City for a variance from Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.23, Subdivision 6 to allow renewal for a lot area variance for an existing lot of record 77,039 sq. ft. (1.77 acres) in area where 2 acres is required. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: 1. 2. 3. FINDINGS This application was reviewed as Zoning File #2442. The property is located in the LR-IA Single Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District where 2 acres or 87,120 is the minimum lot area. The property consists of 1.77 acres or 77,039 sq. ft. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on November 16, 1998 and recommended approval by a vote of 7 to 0. Page 1 of 4 4. The Planning Commission made the following findings of fact: A. The subject lot does meet the minimum lot area requirements. There is no vacant land adjacent to the lot that is available to increase the lot area. B.A suitable building pad exists to construct a new residence without requiring additional variances. C. No negative comments were received. 5. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district: that granting the variance would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicants, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is neccssar>' to preserve a substantial property right of the applicants: and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. 6. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicants and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a lot area variance to reduce the required lot size from 2 acres to 1.77 acres per Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.23, Subdivision 6 to renew a lot area variance. Approval was subject to the following conditions: 1. New construction to occur within the building pad. 2. Authorities granted by this variance run with the property not with the applicants, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit within one year of the date of Council approval, or this variance will expire on that date (November 23, 1999). Page 2 of 4 3.Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this variance shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 4.The undersigned applicant has read, understood and hereby agree to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of himself, his heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agree to the recording of this resolution in the Chain of Title of the property. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held on the 23th day of November, 1998. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Gabriel Jabbour, Mayor Property Owner (s) STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 23th day of November, 1998 by Gabriel Jabbour and Linda S. Vee, Mayor and City Clerk of the City of Orono. a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public Page 3 of ^ I STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this day of , 199 _before me a Notary Public within and for said county, personally appeared________________________________________ known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this__day of_____, 199 _before me a Notary Public within and for said county, personally appeared _________________________________________ known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC Page 4 of 4 #24 A Application#,2^^Z. Date Received IQ - iScr^ ^ Amount Paid / 'SO'"’_____ CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee $250.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $150.00 (no change from original application) Variance for non-conforming structures $250.00 After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) \ PROPERTY INFORMATION Site Address B*4S Property Identification Number fP.I.D.) 05 ll~1 23 0003 Attach legal description to application if not i^luded on required si^ey. Date Property Acquired______ ^ ^/ / / / - I (do) (do not) also own the adjacerip^arcels of land. Present use of property: )C residential ___other (specify) Zoning District: 1 K___________________________ (month/year) APPLICANT Name _3j eiDC^si Phone (home) Hi fo — 0^4 2: Phone (work) Oa*gl Address: HlCX^ feEJ2Jl5Hl2r^ City: PL^MOlATl-l______Zip: Phone (home ) Cc// A-Z-A /9OWNER (if different than aM.licant) Name (fonv Eidc.^^ Con-^Aany ________ Phone (woi^_ Address: /Ao/'u. City: /. J5-S-9-OZS-/ __Zip: DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Describe request in detail: ___ Estimated C^struction Cost $ (attach additional sheets if necessary) VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot AreaX Lot Width Setback;Front Side Hardcoyer Rear Lot Coverage Average Lakeshore Other (specify) HARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY' CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty or unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code requirements; IEXKS~|~/K)/^ l O~T ____^____________ (attach additional sheets if necessary) B CITYofORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 8 9 37 A RESOLUTION GRANTING A VARIANCE TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.23, SUBDIVISION 6 FILE NO. 2261 WHEREAS, Thomas Meyers is the owner of the property located at 345 Leaf Street and Tony Eiden and Diane Eiden (hereinafter "the applicants") have an interest in the property located at 345 Leaf Street within the City of Orono (hereinafter "the City") and legally described as follows; the East 310 feet of Lot 12 and the East 310.00 feet of the North 124.7 feet of Lot 13, Auditor's Subdivision Number 203, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicants have applied to the City for a variance from Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.23, Subdivision 6 to remove an existing residence and construct a new residence. A variance for lot area to reduce the required lot area from 2 acres to 1.77 acres is required. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: FINDINGS 1. 2. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #2261. The property is located in the LR-IA Single Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District where the minimum lot area requirement is two acres. 3.The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on July 21, 1997 and recommended unanimous approval of the proposed variance based upon the following unique findings and hardships: A. The zoning lot is 77,039 sq. ft. (1.77 acres) and does not meet the minimum lot area requirement of 2 acres. Fige 1 of 4 CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 5^ 9 7_____ B.The applicants have obtained the owner's consent to apply for a lot area variance. C. No other variances for .construction of a new residence are anticipated. 4. The City Council finds ihat the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variance would not adversely afiect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicants, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicants; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. 5. The City Council has considered this application including the fmdings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicants and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a lot area variance to reduce the required lot size from 2 acres to 1.77 acres per Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.23, Subdivision 6 to permit removal of an existing residence and construction of a new residence, subject to the following conditions: 1. 2. J. • • Future buildings are to be located within the setbacks as shown in Exhibit D. No future variances will be approved. Authorities granted by this variance run with the property not with the applicants, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit within one year of the date of Council approval, or this variance will expire on that date (July 28, 1998). Violation of or non-compliance with any or the terms and conditions of this variance shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be pumshable as a misdemeanor. Pace 2 of 4 CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 8937 4.The undersigned owner and applicants have read, understood and hereby agree to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of themselves, their heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agree to the recording of this resolution in the Chain of Title of the property. Adopted by the City Couiicil of the City of Orono, Minnesc'i at a regular meeting held on the 28th day of July, 1997. ATTEST: l/.JL T?0fbihy4^^HQUin, City Clerk y C y.'Hn-'yoO Thomas Meyers, Property O Tony Eiden, AppUa^t Gabriel Jabbour, May Diane Eiden, Applicant STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instn^ent acknowledged before : 1997 by Gabriel Jabbour and Borc^y M. Ilollki, Mayor and-^^ me on this 28th day of July, Clerk of the City c** Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was e.xecuted on behalf of the City. JAMIELGEMAR WIMVnaCtfNNESOU men COUNTY My CanWai E«b« Jr. 31. S Page 3 of 4 r*\ '='\ \ ’ I Ij ! 56) \ 2 (59) WSIP m^M mmmmmmimm\ ;:Xv:y.:;:v:::;:v:;:;:;:v::::X::5a^ '-X ;Xv:;-:<-:';‘sX':-;';;<->/:-:-:->/:-:->:x;;Xy;t^^ mmmrnmmmmm stt y. J . Vv 25 (8) 2)0 Jun 12.97 16:17 No.017 P.Ol JUN-12'97 THU 10:36 »•» • I ^ ^ —" ;4 41 i* Po»t*lt* Fax Note 7671 ox* To coyDop( PhOfW 9 Faxt . - V i|l! rrii V « e,f^ f.p'fe^TY ».i *|li t.:: ,»■•) .'t ■K /\peA Il» * ' *' tnI "-1P^Tjnr V y 4^ / ; 1 I'Jj;" 1 i \ (12) » i» ' * n* •• ■<«:i») n *_ » ‘-q »b •^l^S (10^! " tlR) *•* rr/T//7,r/^ » .t L. / / I • % s ■■* ^ ‘Sfa all*"- ‘ ■** likfSiOK \ ^*0001 ^ (Si ^*!Kr %t«J, v> ish f I I '1 ’ _.«:_1».— ■ n ■"> r r.-■'—^ rtf_______ H f^4vg —fartr — rh / GOVT lot 3 GOVT LOT 2 @ WE/OfiCEMBeR’ 3^/5' SfruOiJ- PERMIT RECORD Permit No.Date Type of Permit 113^.'Z// 7i<<>i io-V-7/ --------------r—— ^iLUauCJLj cLty^ 6l'10 -6 -7£kzCi/ ^di>^j-zr^-g-K <r>(cC^J/'S- ^4 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR JULY 21,1997 (#10-#2260 Benjamin Milbrath - Continued) Van Zomeren passed out photographs of the property. The application is a request for CUP and variance to replace a retaining wall, which has been removed, in the 0-75' setback with a keystone type wall. A variance is required to remove a walkway on the north side of the timbers. Grass will replace this area but the retaining wall will encroach into the side yard. Van Zomeren said staff recommends approval. The applicant said his goal is to have less hardcover. Milbrath said the plan would allow the drainage to flow into the front yard instead of the neighboring property and aids in presenting a natural setting. There were no public comments. Hawn noted that the property needs relief as soon as possible. She noted that much of gravel under the deck has swept into the neighboring property and would like to see the gravel removed from the property. Milbrath said the gravel would be left there for now and removed once the walls are in place. He will replace the gravel with wood chips under the deck. Milbrath said the neighbor is pleased with his plan and the improved drainage situation. Schroeder moved, Hawn seconded, to approve Application #2260. Vote: Ayes 6, Nays 0. Van Zomeren said the application will go before the Council at their July 28 meeting. Milbrath noted that he would not be in attendance. (#11) #2261 TONY EIDEN COMPANY 345 LEAF STREET VARIANCE PUBLIC HEARING 8:52-8:54 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. The Applicant was present. Van Zomeren said the application is for a lot area variance for a 1.77 acre property located in the 2 acre minimum IR-1A Zoning District. The applicant is in the process of purchasing the property owned by Tom Meyer. Van Zomeren said Staff is concerned with the lack of a proposed plan but the building pad as outlined should not create any problems. Van Zomeren said she would recommend screening from the Luce Line. ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR JULY 21,1997 (#11- #2261 Tony Eiden Company - Continued) Tony Eiden had no comments to add. There were no public comments. Hawn asked if the applicant was satisfied with the setback requirements. Eiden said he was and would be able to meet them. Smith moved, McMillan seconded, to approve Application #2261. Vote: Ayes 6, Nays 0. (Item #12 follows item #16) (#13) #2264 JANET C. KIERNAN 1491 SHORELINE DRIVE VARIANCES PUBLIC HEARING 8:54-9:20 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. The Applicant was present. Gaffron reported that an application had been previously reviewed and approved for reconstruction and additions to the residence in 1996. He reviewed that application and the new changes requested. The applicant had determined that it would be impossible to save the existing superstructure and is proposing a new residence. A one-stall addition to the garage would meet the setback. There would be an additional encroachment to the front setback and a new small encroachment to the side. The issue is with new construction being an opportunity where all the setbacks, especially the lakeshore setback, could be met. Lot area and width variances are also required. The one acre property, 187' in width, is located in the two acre zoning with a 200 width standard. Gaffron indicated that the property may be sewered in the future but continues at this time to require use of a septic system. Kieman noted the hardships on the propeitji' with the maple tree to the north side and the Indian mounds to the rear where a 50’ setback is required. Kieman said to renovate the property would require an additional two to three courses of b’oek to create more headroom and a better foundation. During public comments, John Ericson, 1620 Shadywood Road, clarified that the encroachment of the 75' setback would be allowed with a major remodeling but would be required to be met if MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON JULY 28,1997 (#8) #2258 GERALD E. WALSH, 180 BIG ISLAND - VARIANCE - RESOLUTION NO. 3935 Mrs. Walsh was present. Gaflron reported that the request is for the lot area variance similar to those granted to other Record Lots per the RS District ordinances which began in 1983. The property on Big Island was reviewed together, grouped by ownership, categorized by size, and granted a variance for building of Record Lots. The owners of lots that were allowed this variance were required to execute variance documents. This property was vacant at that time and has changed ownership several times. The documents were not signed for the subject property. The applicant would like to guarantee his right to build on the property and formally establish the automatic lot area variance. Gaffiron reviewed the .64 acre propert>-, which is 100’ wide x 283' deep, a size common to other lots in the area. Gaffron said the applicant would be required to obtain a survey of the property if he desires building permits. Gaffron said the property is located in the 5 acre zoning and would not be eligible for subdivision. Kelley moved, Goetten seconded, to approve Resolution No. 3935. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. (*#9) #2260 BENJAMIN MILBRATH, 3265 CARMAN ROAD - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - RESOLUTION NO. 3936 Goetten moved, Peterson seconded, to adopt Resolution No. 3936. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. (#10) #2261 TONY EIDEN COMPANT, 345 LEAF STREET - VARIANCE RESOLUTION NO. 3937 Diane Eiden was present. 1 NDNUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON JULY 28,1997 ( #10. - #2261 - Tony Eiden Company - Continued) Van Zomeren reviewed the plat for the property. She indicated that the applicant is the developer of the property currently under purchase agreement from Thomas Meyer. The 1.77 acre property is located in the LR-1A Zoning District, which requires 2 acres. Van Zomeren said she believes there is enough space on the property for a building pad that would meet all required setbacks. The Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval. Staff recommended approval or amendment of the resolution. Jabbour moved, Goetten seconded, to approve Resolution No. 3937. Peterson asked about the proposed structure and its relationship to the Luce Line and Staffs recommendation. Van Zomeren said she would preferred to have seen the building plan but the size of the lot is adequate. Jabbour amended his motion, Goetten seconded, to include no further variances will be allowed. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. (*#11) #2262 NED BUTTERFIELD, 3745 WATERTOWN ROAD - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - RESOLUTION NO. 3938 Goetten moved, Peterson seconded, to adopt Resolution No. 3938. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. (#12) #2265 ROBERT LUNT) FOR GRAYDON K. AND MICHELLE M. NEWMAN, 1655 BOHNS POINT ROAD - VARIANCES - RESOLUTION NO. 3939 Axchitect, Robert Lund, represented the applicants. Van Zomeren reported that the request is fo’ average lakeshore setback variance and hardcover variances in the 0-75' and 75-250', which would remain consistent with current percentages. The property' owners plan to remove an existing residence and construct a new residence. The property is on a pie-shaped lot which is the reason for 8 J RUN DATE 07/00/97BATCH 50<* PROP ADOR Oi«4£R NAME TAXPAYER NAlie/ADOR PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAliE/ADDR PROP ADDR aiNlR NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR •4 HEh^NEPirj COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNERS LIST 38 0^-117-23 23 0008 003^0 LEAF ST L M BEHRMAN I JANE E BEHRltAN LEIGH M & JArJE F. BEHRMAN 3<«0 LEAF ST LONG LAKE m .S5356 38 04-117-23 24 0005 00038 ADDRESS UMA:iSIC14ED STATE OF MINN STATE OF MINK (DNR) (LX:E LINE TRAIL) 38 05-117-23 14 U005 03280 BAYSIDE RD 0 J NYHAMMER A S G OLSEN DALE J A SUSAI4 0 NYH/ilMER 3280 BAYSIDE RD LOe4G LAKE MN 55356 38 05-117-23 14 0050 00038 ADDRESS UIU^SICNED STATE OF MINT4 STATE OF MINN (DNR) (LUCE LINE TRAIL) 38 04-117-23 23 0009 00360 LEAF ST H C FURCHNER JR ETAL HENRY FURCHNER 3t)0 LEAF Sr LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 05-117-23 14 0001 00285 LEAF ST L P A P A CRANE LESLIE P CRANE JR PATRICIA A CRANE 285 LEAF ST LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 05-117-23 14 0006 03240 BAYSIDE RD DAB BOYLAN DONALD K BOYLAN 3240 BAYSIDE RD LOi^ LAKE MN 55356 38 05-117-23 14 0059 00375 LEAF ST ELIZABETH P VOGT ELIZABETH P VOGT 375 LEAF ST LONG LAKE ff( 55356 REPORT NO. PI435401 PAGE 9 38 04-117-23 23 0024 05180 RIDGEWOOD CIR FRANK J A PATRICIA K ROUTSON FRANK ROUTSON 1620 JOHNSON DR STILLWATER MN 55082 38 05-117-23 14 0003 00345 LEAF ST THOMAS H MEYERS THOMAS MEYERS 345 LEAF ST LOf(G LAKE MN 55356 38 05-117-23 14 0007 03200 BAYSIDE RD RAT MIMKEMA ROBERT L A TERESA M MINKEMA 3200 BAYSIDE RD LONG LAKE MN 55356 TOTAL BATCH 514 00011 I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENr OF PROPERTY TAXATION, TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF. DATE yy97sY .. •n I . c J • ' -VUi?1; J COUNCIL f/.£.£TlNQ NOV 2 3 1998 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Date: Item No. CTTYCrORCNO November 20,1998n Department Approval: Name: Michael P. Gaffron Title: Senior Planning Coordinator Adminbtrator Approval:Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: #2341 - Dan Anderson - Lot 5, Little Orchard Approve Revised Easement Legal Description and Language List of Exhibits A - Surveyors drawing: 3 Alternates B - Sketch of "Line A" Alternate (As discussed on Nov. 9) C - Sketch of "Line B" Alternate (Developers preference) D - Sketch of "Line C" Alternate (Staff recommendation) E - Legal Descriptions by Surveyor F - Existing Easement Language G - Memo and Exhibits of 11-6-98 November 9 Council Action On November 9 Council reviewed the information provided by staff and the developer regarding the location of the existing easement boundary. Council voted 5-0 to allow the easement boundary to be modified subject to staff and developer reaching a suitable agreement on the location. Council generally accepted a boundary ("Line A" Alternate) with a curved line which is depicted in Exhibit B. Staff and applicant have concluded that there are two additional Alternates ("Line B" and "Line C") which address specific issues detailed below. Council also accepted the concept of an amendment to the easement language which would more clearly limit the extent of manicured lawns which might tend to develop in the easement area and which would result in loss of the natural character of the shoreline. "Line A" Alternate (As Presented to Council November 9) The easement boundary conceptually accepted by Council November 9: Preserves the trees. Has a curved line which, similar to the "Line B" Alternate, leaves a portion of the defined 30' bluff setback zone outside the easement, which is a problem from staffs perspective. Doesn't accomplish applicant's goal of protecting a portion of tlie non-bluff area uphill from the 75' setback line. i t #2341 - Little Orchard Easement Revision November 20,1998 Page 2 "Line B" Alternate (Developer Preference) The easement boundary in the "Line B" Alternate results in the following: The trees are preserved. - The boundary is identical to the other Alternates in the east half of the lot. In the west half of the lot, more non-bluff area landward of the 75' setback is protected from development (no trees exist here). “ However, a portion of the 30' bluff setback zone as defined by both staff and surveyor (hashed area on Exhibits B and C) is not within the easement boundary, hence there could be future confusion as to the acceptable location for structures here. "Line C” Alternate (Staff Recommendation) The easement boundary in the "Line C" Alternate results in the following: The trees are preserved. The boundary is a compromise between the staff and surveyor's determinations of the top of bluff, reflecting the surveyor's "30' top of bluff setback" at the west end, and staffs version at the east end of the site. Eliminates potential confusion over actual bluff setback at west end, since the boundary is at or uphill from the 30' bluff setback as defined by surv eyor and staff. Easement Language Staff and developer have agreed that a sub-section 10(1) should be added to the ease; .rent, affecting both the "preservation easement area" and the "protected area", as follows: "(I). With respect to those portions of the Land contained within Lot 5 only, no manicured lawn shall be allowed except within the northeasterly 10' of the 'Protected Area’". Summary All 3 proposed Alternatives protect the trees which City has intended to protect. The "Line C" / . < - ^ * coincides with the bluff setback line so that there will be no future confusion as to acceptat.. i» Jns. The "Line B" Alternate protects more of the non-bluff open slopes to the west side of the lot, but could lead to future confusion over where a house can be legr.'ly placed, because it doesn't encompass the entire bluff setback zone. #2341 - Little Orchard Easement Revision November 20,1998 Page 3 The "Line A" Alternate, which Council reviewed November 9, has a few problems which are better addressed by the "Line B" or "Line C" Alternates. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends the "Line C" Alternate (or a combination of "Line B" and "Line C" that also protects the non-bluff areas while still incorporating the entire bluff setback zone hashed area). Staff recommends acceptance of the amended easement language by adding sub-section 10(1) as noted above. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Motion to approve "Line C" Alternate or some other version, and to accept the amended easement language. , DESCRIPTION FOR: imjHUNT 62186-009 SCHOELL & MAOSON, INC. Engineers ♦ Surveyors ♦ Planners Soil Testing ♦ Environmental Services 10580 Wayzata Btvd. r.' nnetonka, MN 55305 612/5-1C-7601 Fax:612-546-9065 BLUFF IMPACT EASEMENT That part of Lot 5, Block 1, LITTLE ORCHARD, Hennepin County, Minnesota, according to the recorded plat thereof which lies southwesterly of the following described line: % Commencing at the corner of Lot 6 in said Block 1, which is also the southwest corner of the Northwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 9, Township 117 North, Range 23 West of the 5th Principal Meridian; thence on an assumed bearing of South, along an east line of said Lot 6, a distance of 100.00 feet; thence North 62 degrees 31 minutes 10 seconds West a distance of 235.54 feet, to the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence North 26 degrees 56 minutes 57 seconds West a distance of 66.09 feet; thence North 64 degrees 34 minutes 14 seconds West a distance of 19.16 feet; thence North 26 degrees 34 minutes 10 seconds West a distance of 27.16 feet; thence North 41 degrees 30 minutes 54 seconds West a distance of 79.38 feet; thence North 48 degrees 49 minutes 07 seconds West a distance of 24.30 feet; thence North 79 degrees 18 minutes 31 seconds West a distance of 20.86 feet; thence North 41 degrees 53 minutes 19 seconds West to the westerly line of said Lot 5 and said line there terminating. Date: November 19,1998 Theodore D. Kemna Land Surveyor MN Lie. No. 17006 DESCRIPTION FOR: KYLE HUNT 62186-009 SCHOELL & MADSON, INC. Engineers Surveyors Planners Soil Testing ■¥ Environmental Services 10530 Wayzata Blvd. Minnetonka, MN 55305 612/546-7601 Fax: 612-546-9065 BLUFF IMPACT EASEMF.NT That part of Lot 5, Block 1, LITTLE ORCHARD, Hennepin County, Minnesota, according to the recorded plat thereof which lies southwesterly of the following described line: Commencing at the corner of Lot 6 in said Block 1, which is also the southwest corner of the Northwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 9, Township 117 North, Range 23 West of the 6th Principal Meridian; thence on an assumed bearing of South, along an east line of said Lot 6, a distance of 100.00 feet; thence North 62 degrees 31 minutes 10 seconds West a distance of 235.54 feet, to the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence North 26 degrees 56 minutes 57 seconds West a distance of 66.09 feet; thence North 64 degrees 34 minutes 14 seconds West a distance of 19.16 feet; thence North 26 degrees 34 minutes 10 seconds West a distance of 27.16 feet; thence North 41 degrees 30 minutes 54 seconds West a distance of 79.38 feet; thence North 48 degrees 49 minutes 07 seconds West to the westerly line of said Lot 5 and said line there terminating. Date: November 19,1998 Theodore D. Kemna Land Surveyor MN Lie. No. 17006 Page 3 of 2 c DESCRIPTION FOR: KYLE HUNT 61286-009 SCHOELL & MADSON. INC. Engineers 4- Surveyors ^ Planners Soil Testing 4 Environmental Services 10580 Wayzata Dlvd. Minnetonka. MN 55305 612/546-7601 Fax: 612-546-9065 BLUFF IMPACT EASEMENT That part of Lot 5, Block 1, LITTLE ORCHARD, Hennepin County, Minnesota, according to the recorded plat thereof which lies southwesterly of the following described line: Commencing at the corner of Lot 6 in said Block 1, which is also the southwest corner of the Northwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 9, Township 117 North, Range 23 West of the 5th Principal Meridian; thence on an assumed bearing of South, along an east line of said Lot 6, a distance of 100.00 feet; thence North 62 degrees 31 minutes 10 seconds West a distance of 235.54 feet, to the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence North 26 degrees 56 minutes 57 seconds West a distance of 66.09 feet; thence North 64 degrees 34 minutes 14 seconds West a distance of 19.16 feet; thence North 26 degrees 34 minutes 10 seconds West a distance of 27.16 feet; thence North 41 degrees 30 minutes 54 seconds West a distance of 79.38 feet; thence North 17 degrees 47 minutes 43 seconds West a distance of 14.75 feet; thence North 41 degrees 14 minutes 35 seconds West a distance of 24.39 feet; thence South 55 degrees 27 minutes 49 seconds West a distance of 22.09 feet; thence North 41 degrees 53 minutes 19 seconds West to the westerly line of said Lot 5 and said line there terminating. Date: November 19, 1998 Theodore D. Kemna Land Surveyor MN Lie. No. 17006 u fc X any dwelling; (iii) the maximum dwelling height may not exceed thirty-six (36) feet as measured from grade on the ’back (street) side offfc dwelling; and (iv) no trees shall be planted or relocated without the prior written approval of t\e Architectural Review Committee, said approval to take into consideration the size, type and prSj^sed location of such trees and the preseiy^tion of reasonable lake views by Owners of other Lots >^^n the Property. Nothing contained herein shall be construeJ^limit the right of an pwner to remodel the interior of the Owner ’s dwelling. No permission or appl’^al shall be required from the Committee to restore or rebuild in accordance with originally approvet^plans amt^pecifications. Section 9 . Lot Maintenance. In order to pr^^e the uniform and high-standard appearance of the Property, each Owner undertakes respowiBility for. maintenance and repair of the exterior of his or her dwelling, exterior yard area and driveway on the\ot. Such responsibility for maintaining the Lot a . - improvements thereon shall inofude, but not be liirut^d to the following: the maintenance and repair of exterior surfaces of>lfbuildings on the Lot, inclv^ding but without limitation, the painting of the same as often as pe'cessary, the replacement of trim knd^caulking, the maintenance or repair of roofs; gutters, do>^»s(fouts and overhangs, the maintenance an'd Repair of exterior windows and doors, necessary p^ifSig, staining and repair of patio structures. In^ntaining e^erior yard areas and private ddv^ways an Owner shall be required to mow, trim, wateW otherwise care for grass, trees or qt^plants located on a Lot and shall be required to remove s^w from the private driveways, o»lSg areas and walkways to the dwelling. Maintenance, painting and constriction shall be in the*<^inal colors and materials, or according to approved color boards on file with the Association. Other colors and materials shall require approval by the Architectural Review rrimmittPftin ‘ » ■■■■ F Section 10 . Tree, Woodland and Vegetation Preservation Easement. Declarant, its heirs, successors and assigns, for and in consideration of the sum of One Dollar (SI.00) and other valuable consideration, does hereby covenant, grant, gift, quit claim and convey to the City of Orono, its successors and assigns, the right to restrict, and Declarant agrees to limit and preclude the use, improvement and development, under the conditions and covenants herein contained, on that part of the Property described as follows: The "Preservation Fasement Area” (see legal description on Exhibit B); and The "prnter.ted Area" (see legal description on Exhibit C); (the Protected Area includes all area not within the Preservation Easement Area but still within 75 feet of the shoreline (said line referred to as the “75 Foot Setback Line ’' and legally described on Exhibit D, or within the “Bluff Impact Zone ’’ which is also legally described on Exhibit D), said Preservation Easement Area and Protected Area is collectively referred to as the “Land ” and is to be subject to the conditions, covenants and restrictions hereinafter specified. Declarant hereby covenants and agrees as follows: PROHAK 948270.5 (A) No structures shall be constructed, erected, or placed upon, above, or beneath the Land except the following; (1) One lakeshore access stairway per Lot, such stairway b'ing no more than 4 feet in width, subject to City approval; (2) One dock structure extending from the shoreline; if such structure includes a canopy-covered slip, such canopy to be dark green or brown in color; (3) One lockbox limited to 20 square feet footprint area and 4 feet maximum height, hnished in natural earthtones; and (4) One mechanized lift device for transporting persons up and down the bluff. All such structures or devices shall be designed, located and finished to be consistent with the natural state of the Land and screened from view as viewed from the lake to the greatest extent possible. Where feasible, stairways and lifts may be designed to run diagonally across the slope in order to maximize natural vegetative screening and avoid vertical cuts in the shore landscape. (B) No trees, shrubs or other vegetation shall be destroyed, cut or removed from the ‘Preservation Easement Area’ except as authorized by wrinen consent of the City. Such consent may be granted under the following guidelines: (1) Removal of trees and understory shall not be allowed except to the mirumal extent necessary to accomplish one of the improvements allowed in Section 10(A) above. (2) Trimming of trees and understory shall be allowed, but shall be limited to merely the minimal extent necessary to gain a partially obstructed lake view, and such trimming shall not be so extensive as to jeopardize the vitality of the plant materials. (3) To pping of trees to gain an unobstructed view of the lake shall not be allowed. Natural vegetative groundcover shall be maintained to minimize erosion of the steep slopes within the 'Preservation Easement Area’. (C) Vegetation maintenance, trimming or removal within the ‘Protected Area’ shall be subject to the following: (1) No tree of diameter 6" or greater shall be removed except by specific approval of the City. (2) Trimming or topping of trees and trimming of understory shall be allowed without requiring approval of the City. PROHAK 948270.5 Natural vegetative groundcover shall be maintained to minimize erosion of the steep slopes within the ‘Protected Area ’. (D) There shall be no change of the topography of the Land without the written consent of the City. (E) There shall be no fences, play structures, decks, accessory buildings or other temporary or permanent structures placed on the Land. (F) Except for the improvements provided for in Section 10(A) above, no hardcover shall be allowed within 75 feet of the shoreline. (G) Except as herein provided, no use shall be made of the Land except uses, if any, which will not change or alter the natural condition of the Land, and no use which would tend to change natural visual characteristics shall be made of the Land. (H) City may enter upon the Land for the purposes of inspection and enforcement of the covenants contained herein and to cause to be removed from the Land without any liability any structures, uses, materials, substances, or unnatural matter inconsistent with the covenants contained herein and^he natural state of the Land. (l ; To de In addition to any other remedy the City may have, the covenants and restrictions contained herein may be enforced by injunction. Declarant does not intend that the public should have any interest in the above Land by virtue ^ of this Declaration or otherwise, except as hereinabove set fonh. All provisions hereof shall run with the Land for the benefit of the City, the Lots and Owners, and shall extend to and bind the heirs successors, representatives, grantees or assigns of the respective parties hj Section 11. Drainage Easeifflot. Declarant, in consider^lmn of the sum of One Dollar ($1.00) and other good and valuable co^ideration, the receun and sufficiency whereof is hereby acknowledged, does hereby grant, bargah^uitcladm and omvey unto the City, forever, the following perpetual drainage easement over and under^d aerostat part of the Property legally described in Exhibit E attached hereto (the “Drainage Eas^exjl^ea ”). Said easement includes the free righu^f the^Uy or its agents to enter upon, under and over said Drainage Easement Area, to rer.ove^es, brush, gs^s and dirt and other structures therefrom and to construct, maintain, repair, reconstruct and use draim^ways and other improvements related thereto, and to enter upon said ea^^ent for the purpose o^specting, repairing, removing and reconstructing such facilities. Tj^ City shall return the area it dh^bs to grade and seed the same and replace the surface soil with the original type material. PROHAK 948270.5 % ' ^ REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Date: November 6,1998 Item No.: j j Department Approval:V Administrator Approval:Agenda Section: Zoning Name: Michael P. Gaffron Title: Senior Planning Coordinator Item Description: #2341 - Dan Anderson - Lot 5, Little Orchard Request to Revise Easement Legal Description List of Exhibits A - Proposed House Location Sketch (As staked as of 11-6-98 9:00 am) ^ • B - Overlay onto Staff Easement Proposal of 10-23-98 C- " ” Surveyor............................... D - Technically Correct "Top of Bluff' and 30’ Setback Line E - Memo and Exhibits of October 23,1998 p-Plato /• 2>C> October 26 Council Action ________________ , , ' - O' O'* , .i V jfc A"' ON'- -J'- On October 26 Council reviewed the information provided by staff and the developer regarding the location of the existing easement boundary in relation to the defined 'top of bluff. Council tabled the request for two weeks in order that the developer could stake the site to depict the proposed house location in relation to the top of bluff, \\ith the intent that Council members visit the site prior to the next meeting. Where is the Top of Bluff? Exhibit D depicts the technically correct "top of bluff’ location in staffs opinion. The critical points were located based on the new topographic survey and slopes calculated by measuring between each contour line along the cross section. This exhibit also shows the technically correct location of the 30’ setback from "top of bluff’. Staff does not agree with the surveyor’s depictions of "top of bluff’ shown in Exhibits A and C and staked in the field today, because they do not reflect the slopes between individual contours and appear to have gaps in information at certain critical points. The difference between staffs "top of bluff’ and 30’ bluff setback depiction, and that of the applicant’s surveyor, is significant, ranging from as little as less than a foot to nearly 18 feet. Unfortunately, the greatest difference occurs where it has a severe impact on the proposed house location. #2341 - Little Orchard Easement November 6,1998 Page 2 Easement Location Relationship to Top of Bluff The intent of locating the easement line as originally accepted last summer was two-fold: 1 . It was located so as to be at least 30 ’ setback from top of bluff as roughly defined in the field and per the old topography. 2. It more or less followed the old field fenceline, beyond which trees exist which we intended (and still intend) to preserve. The new topographic information tells us that the newly defined top of bluff is more than 30' downhill from the existing easement line. We could, therefore, move the easement downhill if the tree preservation goal will still be met. In staffs opinion that goal will not be met by defining the easement boundary ’ at the 30' bluff setback line depicted by applicant's surveyor. This line would allow removal of or grading near 5 mature trees uphill from the old field road. Our goal will be marginally met by defining the easement boundary as the line labeled "Staffs Proposed Easement" on Exhibit C of the October 23 memo; however, this line still would allow removal of the two medium sized maples and allow grading near the 36" oak. Our tree preservation goal would be best met by establishing an easement boundary that encori?passes all existing trees we want to preserve, and that will allow no structures within 10 feet of those trees; i.e. establish the easement line at least 10' from those trees, as well as at least 30' uphill from the technically defined top of bluff. Easement Language 'fhe Tree, Woodland and Vegetation Preservation Easement as granted last summer has the following impacts on the 'Protected Area' in question: 1. 2 3. 4. 5. 6. Prohibits structures except for lake access stairway or lift. Prohibits removal of any tree over 6" diameter without City approval. Allows trimming or topping of trees without City approval. Requires vegetative ground cover to be maintained. Allows no topographic changes without City approval (since the code-defined 'bluff impact zone' is only 20 ’ uphill from the defined top of bluff, while the setback for structures is 30', staff concluded that grading w ould be allowed 10' lakeward of the easement line). Prohibits fences, play structures, decks, accessory buildings, etc. Applicant has no apparent intent to revise the easement language. #2341 - Little Orchard Easement Ncvember6, 1998 Pane 3 Easement Relocation vs. Variance At the October 26 meeting I indicated that a compromise was likely possible in regards to the easement location. Council has the ability to redefine the easement boundary wherever you see fit; however, you cannot arbitrarily establish the 'top of the bluff at a location other than the technically correct location arrived at based on the code definition. Therefore, placement of the house at a location less than 30' from the defined 'top of bluff would require a variance regardless of w here you choose to locate the easement boundary. If the final proposed house location requires a variance for setback from top of bluff. Council may wish to indicate to applicant whether a variance would be granted if a hardship is shown. As of my site inspection with Kyle Hunt at 9:00 a.m. on November 6 the house was staked as shown on Exhibit A. The technically correct 'top of bluff is not shown on Exhibit A nor was it staked in the field this morning. This proposed house location jeapordizes the 36" oak tree as well as the two maples(?) that are close together. This location also requires a variance to the bluff setback based on staffs top-of-bluff depiction. Mr. Hunt agreed that the house should shift to better protect the trees. He indicated he may be submitting a revised plan from that staked in the field. That plan has not been submitted as of this writing, but may arrive in time to include in this packet. Staff Recommendation The bluff setback issue is difficult to deal with, since a variance for new construction will require a Council conclusion that a hardship exists. Council should visit the site with Mr. Hunt to visualize the impacts the house location will have on existing trees, and to help you in determining whether a variance application might meet with success. Staff recommends that an easement be retained that will meet the City's tree preservation goals. It is not necessary that the easement boundary match the technically defined 30' top of bluff setback line, but it should not be downhill fi'om that line. It should be located at least 10' from any trees you w'ant protected. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Review the new information and provide staff with direction as to relocation of the easement boundary. 9 312± c;t,!!i°34’45”'N COMMUNICATIONS.MEDIA DIVISION M L=252.46 \ \i.y ._B/f’C extt.c^ &»se/neivj7" ttevnion> ^fptpp i: $II f V ^ % 8 s 1)N I f«e56J?l4VT70<O eA5en<e(vir (w° ciw/uoe P^fbsei^ Q 9in nj rM $ 3 exH.y> Twenty CbfrAK'.cr \X>ePicr7ot-^ ''TVe Of ^ /JJL. SMC«t’.»NC AS LCCATCO-*' ^(2€sifkvm)f<^ gte^lWaWT ^/uo P/2t>eoset^ REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Date: October 23, 1998 Item No.: Department Approval:Administrator Approval:Agenda Section: Zoning Name: Michael P. Gaffron Titic: Senior Planning Coordinator Item Description: #2341 - Dan Anderson - Lot 5, Little Orchard Request to Revise Easement Legal Description List of Exhibits A - Existing Easement Depiction B - Proposed Easement Depiction (Developer) C - Proposed Easement Depiction (Staff) Summary of Request V.—- / ^ j * /■•'•'T-.sJ r y In the covenants for the plat of Little Orchard, the City was granted a Tree, Woodland and Vegetation Preservation Easement within the 3 lakeshore lots (Lots 4,5, and 6). This easement included a "Preservation Easement Area" (on the steep wooded slopes along the shoreline) and a "Protected Area" (additional areas further from the shore but within the 75' setback or within the 'bluff impact line'). See Exhibit A. Staff w'orked with Mr. Anderson to establish reasonable boundaries for these two easement areas based on the topography maps, staff analysis of the bluff boundaries via cross sections, and based on the natural and manmade site features which provided logical 'edges', such as the old field road and fencelines. The resulting boundaries were staked in the field, surveyed, described by metes and bounds, and agreed to by staff and applicant based on Council's direction. A potential buyer for Lot 5 has pursued (with some vigor) the premise that the boundary of the "Protected Area" is ill-located, and should be moved nearer the lakeshore. The basis for the request is that new', more accurate topography (which has been field-verified with as many as 300 individual elevation shots, rather than merely created via photogrammetric methods) results in the 'top of bluff being located from 10’ to as much as 40' nearer the shore than depicted in the easement description. Staff Perspective WTien this topic was first raised by the potential buyers and their builder, Kyle Hunt, staff initially took the view that the casement is in place to everyone's satisfaction, so live with it. However, the builder insisted that the lot is not suitable for a walkout unless a home can take advantage of the natural slopes to the southwest comer, and that the 30 ’ bluff setback eliminates this potential. #2341 - Little Orchard Easement October 23, 1998 Page 2 The builder was told that the City is not likely to grant a bluff setback variance for a newly created vacant lot, and that staff does not at this point have the ability (nor any motivation) to revise the description of the easement. WTien faced with the spectre of'inaccurate topographic information', however, staff suggested that the builder may wish to have a new topographic survey created for site planning purposes to more accurately establish house placement. This was completed by a surveyor in August/September. The result was a renewed effort to convince staff that the 'top of bluff was incorrectly located. During the initial discussions it was clear there was some confusion on the part of the builder and surveyor about how our 'top of bluff ordinance definition is to be interpreted. This was mostly cleared up, and staff was presented on October 22 with cross sections of the slopes based on the new topography, depicting a proposed new easement line, and a request for Council review of the matter. Bluff Cross Section Analysis 2. 3. 4. The submitted cross-sections prove a number of points: 1. The slopes are complex in nature. At critical points the slopes are just over or just under the 18% threshold used for determining the 'top of bluff. The field methods originally used by staff and developer to help define the boundaries erred on the conservative side, and found that borderline slopes were steep enough to define the 'top of bluff in locations that gave a clear sense of boundary between 'steep' and 'not as steep'. The bluff impact line boundary (30' uphill from top of bluff) as it is documented in the easement, provided significant protection of not only the steeper slopes but the scattered mature trees between the field road and the fenceline. This forced any construction to be as much as 30 ’ back from the fenceline in some locations, i.e. out in the open field. As was always known, the westerly 1/4 of the lot has flatter slopes that do not meet the definition of bluff In that location the fenceline was originally chosen as the demarcation for defining the 'top of bluff, to continue the easement to the west lot line. This w'as done for the sake of convenience as well as to provide a relatively straight boundary. 5. I have reviewed ihe submitted cross-sections and disagree with 4 of the 7 points depicted by the surveyor as 'lop of bluff locations. An analysis of the slope 'contour by contour' yields slightly different results than the computer generated sections, i would agree, however, that the new analysis ________vmaM n *tnn nf KlnfP Unp rrmoina from S* to nearlv 45*with some corrections by staff does yield a 'lop of bluff setback line ranging from 5 ’ to nearly 45' nearer the lake than the current easement line. See E.xhibits B and C, ^^2341 - Little Orchard Easement October 23,1998 Page 3 Does Revised Description Meet City’s Protection Goals? The City's goals for protecting this unique wooded shoreline were/are to preserve the dense natural vegetation (trees, sluaibs, plants) along the steeply wooded shoreline, and to limit the impacts on vegetation in the 0-75' and bluff impact zones. In relating this to the actual site features, staff concluded it was appropriate to define the steep slopes lakeward of the field road as Preservation Area ('don't cut anything') and the area between the field road and the fenceline as Protected Area ('minor trimming OK, no tree removal without permission'). The original easement description agreed to by staff and developer, accomplishes these goals. The bluff impact line was not solely intended to establish the 30' building setback from the top of the bluff, but also to provide a buffer to ensure that the grading allowed by code within the first 10' downhill from the 30' setback, w'ould not result in tree damage. The easement proposed by the developer would result in the potential for 2 or 3 mature trees to be removed, with the potential for a few others to be encroached upon by the grading that is allowed in the first 10' downhill from the setback line. There is a jog in the developer's proposed easement line that is a result of the topographic anomally created by the field road and pumphouse. Note that in the central portion of the lot, the house could be located lakeward of the old fenceline. This is where there are potential tree impacts. In this location staff is proposing to divert from the technical 'top of bluff detrmination for Cross Section 'C and draw the line from 'D' to 'F'. The result is that a few more trees between the fenceline and the field road will be protected. Also, as a result the nearest the house could be to the shoreline is about 100' at any given location on the lot. Staff Recommendation The builder had indicated a proposed house location to staff, which may or may not be significantly benefitted by the revised easement location as proposed by staff. However, the recised description as proposed by staff in Exhibit C is more accurate thatn the current description while meeting the City's goals and intent. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Approve the revision of the easement description as proposed by staff. 9 t >■ L=252.A6 /eX^r/A/<5. €ASejU£A:T 5>€wc.‘r/oAJ /"'Soi- ^Ontl'NC AS lOCA^rO ON SCP’tv«9 3 »9»8 YRese<^VAT/o^J o r\j CM s \ ^ \ N POS€^ BM&^T tSielO . B /" 4 -'''i ........ SHO»a»N£ AS LOCATED •' ON S£3’tv?lt» y *998 Pl?fS6j?l^VT70A^ ^A5emerur C^>o c ^amc ^ 55o 9<n o 5 5 ^•■7/exH /0-;t -■:» 64S6*vie<or (2£0//X/Of» ^Xfirpp 5mO«CUNC as 1<?CATC0 •' f/2€5'^W0AJ eki^JPAei^T (^ ctlAAioe fieofevet^ / /!//’/ ' ''-I hiiIi f lyi ' / !■/I I: ■/''■ !mm4i / // / ;lli '; ■ t I 9 h ■' ' ~?i/ .F v; / ' '7 / 7' "■'/ / / / r*V/ ^^^5'c///v J ' / .W'/ / /?•' •'/;■!//// 7'07 V / / / ' z .<4': /k* ' • I • ' ‘ - uj* • O \ / ^ 2^ • "f 5' 7- /. 7\." .‘^.9 7 ,fc‘^ //. /., 7 •■^■4:1 y • ••< V; .1 VIt. j ------- ^ ' T; / * “aI *u. li »* T I / •' '7 I 1 / ;/;: J<Tk‘ . ••; »« •.' // . /• j/f 17 • i • /' ^ '-7 •/ / / /r ;■'ll '• • / c t ‘ * : U hi ' i ■ IifiI i / : 11 :' ‘ I "<■ p- '■/ Will: W ,// 'S^Si 'i 1% J !, ■ • \ / / /» / 1 i .7I A I// ‘■K -L ' :j . /1 iI i i i'! ‘ ■■ i I •• U. ’ * » / • l^i ' I • ' u/ If I ' / / / / ^// 7 7 ’ ' oi ytdl: tQ] y ; /r '/ / *f / C^j/ •’ • / ‘lA/! j I • y / /// /■; ; ^:j! // '•■ ■ / ■ ’ I' ' I i ’itTjtf /^. I / : . , • a/; / » . « / I "T1 A) ,/ I / *'•. " , / CV / // • 4j y /1 /• / 1 * \ ' •. *1/7 1 , US/.. .j. -k ^ i .. r Jk/ i/’' • • cj/ «i I Si ' > /‘s ■ ' / ;'./ I *r-"^- .1 ■ / ; ;i ■' .ii/..' ''■/ ; . z/r// /./ ii II '1 * • v •.. —~~ -L • • ■ / ■ I ■ 11 I I ■ \ . ■■ ■', ' O .? r'a,2i 1,';:"“! ;T'/^-cTrt*Si r I COUNCIL f/iiTi;v NOV 2 3 1998 C^TYC^CRC^:0 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Date: November 18,1998 Item No.: Department Approval:Administrator Approval:Agenda Section: Zoning Name: Michael P. GafTron Title: Senior Planning Coordinator Item Description: #2369 - Joe & Mary Fiedler, 365-373 Westlake Street - Resolution: Assessment Refund List of Exhibits A - Resolution November 9 Council Action On October 9 Council voted 3-2 to approve a refund to Mr. Fiedler of the $5,304.02 assessment balance paid off by him in June 1998 for the property at 373 Westlake Street. Council directed staff to draft a resolution documenting the unique aspects of this request in order to distinguish it from potential similar future requests. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Adopt or amend the attached resolution. A RESOLUTION APPROVING PARTIAL REFUND OF SEWER ASSESSMENT FOR 373 WESTLAKE STREET WHEREAS, the property at 373 Westlake Street which is legally described as Lot 17. Block 2, Hillside Park (PINS No. 05-117-23 23 0028) was assessed one sewer unit as part of the 1992 Stubbs Bay Sewer Project on the basis that the property contained an existing residence structure; and WHEREAS, the property owners paid the annual assessments in a timely manner for the six tax years 1993 tlirough 1998; and WHEREAS, the residence on the property was connected to the municipal sewer in 1993 and the sewer was in use during times that the residence was occupied thereafter; and WHEREAS, in June 1998 the property was purchased by the owners of the adjacent property, Joseph and Mary Fiedler, at which time the Fiedlers paid to the City the remaining sewer assessment balance of $5,304.02 which would have continued on the assessment rolls ^or tax years 1999 through 2007 had it not been paid off; and WHEREAS, on October 7, 1998 Joseph Fiedler formally requested that the City refund to him the amount of $5,304.02 based on his agreement to remove the plumbing from the principal residence structure on the property and to legally combine 373 Westlake Street with Fiedler’s homestead parcel at 365 Westlake Street (Lot 18, Block 2. Hillside Park, aka PINS No. 05- 117-23 23 0029) as documented in City of Orono Resolution No.____; and WHEREAS, Mr Fiedler has indicated an intent to eventually remove the principal residence structures on each of Lots 17 and 18 and construct a new' single family residence on the combined Lots, hence the sewer unit allocated and assessed to Lot 17 will no longer be needed; and WHEREAS, this refund request was reviewed by the City Council on November 9, 1998 and was approved by a vote of 3 in favor, 2 against, based on the following unique findings: 1 . The property was assigned a sewer unit as part of the 1 992 Stubbs Bay project because a single family residence existed on the property. However, the property is Pane I of 3 only 10,675 s.f. in area, extremely substandard as compared to the 87,170 s.f. minimum lot area requirement for the LR-IA zoning district in which the property is located, and the property would likely have been considered as unbuildable, and potentially would not have been assigned a sewer unit, had it been vacant at the time the project was assessed. 2. The combination of Lot 17 with Lot 18 will result in a lot that is still only 25% of the minimum required lot area standard for the LR-1A zoning district. 3. Construction of a new single family residence on Lot 17 would not be in keeping with the low density residential development goals and objectives of the Orono Comprehensive Plan, nor in keeping with the standards of the LR-1 A Zoning District. Further, construction of a new single family residence on Lot 17 would certainly require significant variances to lot area, lot width, side setbacks and possibly variances for hardcover and structural coverage. 4. It would be in keeping with the objectives of the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Code to reduce the potential for a new single family residence to be developed on Lot 17 by eliminating the sewer unit assigned to Lot 17. The sewer unit would be efTectively eliminated by refunding the amount of the remaining balance of unpaid assessments as of the date of the Fiedlers' purchase. 5. The Fiedlers paid the remaining balance of unpaid assessments as of June 1998 in order to facilitate a timely purchase of the property, but not with the intent to firmly establish the right to a sewer unit for Lot 17. The Fiedler’s have indicated that construction of a new residence on the combination of Lots 17 and 18 will make use of the sewer unit provided and assessed to Lot 18. The 1992 Stubbs Bay Sewer Project was assessed on a unit basis and the amount assessed to Lot 17 was equal to the amount assessed to Lot 18 and any other individual building site in the project sub-area at the time of assessment. 6. It is not the general policy of the City to refund paid or unpaid assessments when a principal structure is demolished or has plumbing removed. However, when unique circumstances arise in which the general interest of the public is best served by eliminating the possibility of future high-density development that would be in complete Page 2 of3 r conflict with the City's Comprehensive Plan, then such action is warranted as it is in this case. 7. There is no request for, and no basis for, refund of the annual sewer assessment payments made in a timely manner during the years prior to the Fiedlers' purchase of Lot 17. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of Orono Minnesota does hereby direct that the Finance Director refund to Mary and Joseph Fiedler the amount of $5,304.02 for assessment amounts paid in June 1998. FURTHER BE IT RESOLVED that upon payment of such refund, the City of Orono declares to be null and void any future rights which may have been previously established for buildability of Lot 17 as an individual site by reason of prior sewer assessment. Adopted by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota, this 23rd day of November, 1998 ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Gabriel Jabbour, Mayor Page 3 of 3 I REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION COUNCIL r/iLSTII'lC. NOV 2 3 1998 ClTYCi'CP.CAO Date: November 20, 1998 Item No.n Department Approval: Administrator Approval: Name: Michael P. Gaffron /|'|/^^^^ Title: Senior Planning Coordinator Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: Plat of Blue Hill - Request to Amend Conditions of Special Lot Combination Agreement List of Exhibits A - Andrew Goetten Letter November 17, 1998 (Revd 11/20) B - Andrew Goetten Letter March 18, 1998 C - Staff Response Letter April 8, 1998 D - Special Lot Combination Agreement E - Code Section 10.61, Subd. 5 A F - Plat Drawing G - Approved Co. Rd. 15 Construction Plan The property owner has requested that the City amend the Special Lot Combination Agreement to allow temporary or occasional parking on Outlot A of Blue Hill. The primary purpose of the Agreement was to document the relationship between Lot 1 and Outlot A, which were physically separated from each other by County Road 15 and therefore could not be legally combined for tax purposes. However, the County did, in fact, legally combine the two parcels into one tax parcel in April 1996, which effectively eliminates the primar>’ issue addressed by the agreement; i.e. that the two parcels must remain under one owner. Existing Agreement Conditions The agreement also contains some conditions for development of the property, including: Lot 1 is considered the primary parcel for principal uses of the property Outlot A is "accessory" to Lot 1 and can be used for a permitted accessory use if: 1 . Lots 1 and 2 and Outlot A are held in common, wiih just one single residence on the entire group of 3 parcels; or 2. Lot 1 and Outlot A are held separately from Lot 2 and a house exists on Lot 1 . Development of Outlot A is restricted to one seasonal dock per LMCD regulations, one lock box per City code, and a lakeshore stairway/boat lift/boat landing per City code. Outlot A shall not ser\e as an accessory parking area. Outlot A is created for the exclusive use of the owners of Lot 1. Blue Hill Special Lot Combination November 20, 1998 Page 2 Item 8 on page 3 notes that the "terms and conditions of this indenture may be modified, amended or extinguished...". The applicant is requesting a minor modification of the Agreement to allow for temporary vehicle parking on Outlot A. Why Limit Parking? Earlier this year I reviewed the staff memos and Council meeting minutes pertinent to the Agreement. I found no documented specific discussion to clarify the reasoning behind including the condition that 'Outlot A shall not serve as an accessory parking area’. Similar conditions have been established for similar special lot combinations in Orono, where a small lakeshore parcel is separated by a road from the residence parcel to which it is accessory. In one case on Bayside Road, where such a lakeshore parcel was visually very 'open' with perhaps only 20-30' of land between the road and the lakeshore, it was clearly intended and stated that no temporary or permanent vehicular parking would be allowed. Two obvious justifications for such a requirement were that a) parking within 75' of the lake would not be in keeping with the hardcover ordinances; and b) any vehicles parked on the parcel would be a visual detriment to views of the lake from the road. A third justification for such a condition is that property security cannot be as easily maintained by the resident when the residence is separated from the outlot by not only a roadway but by a significant distance. The first two justifications noted above may be less applicable in the case of Blue Hill Outlot A given that a significant portion of the Outlot is further than 75' from the lake, and given that a vehicle might potentially be screened from view of the general public by existing vegetation and topography. However, the third justification is very applicable given the distance between the residence parcel and the Outlot, and the nature of the busy roadway separating them. Zoning Code Parking Standards The zoning code provides some direction regarding standards for parking areas that may be pertinent to this discussion. Section 10.61 Subd. 5 A indicates that "vehicles normally owned or kept by the occupants on the premises must have a garage stall or open parking space on the same lot as the principal use served"; since Outlot A and Lot 1 have been legally combined into a single tax parcel, an argument can be made that parking on Outlot A would not be in conflict with this section. Subd. 5A also states that "open parking spaces on lots must have a location other than a required yard except that such parking may be located in a rear yard to within ten feet of an interior side lot line and to within ten feet of a rear lot line". Since a lakeshore lot has by definition a lakeshore yard and a rear yard, one can infer that open parking on a lakeshore lot would normally have to occur at least 10' back from the street lot line. Blue Hill Special Lot Combination November 20,1998 Page 3 The Agreement does not specifically address whether storage of boats and/or trailers is allowed, but I would consider a boat on a trailer or on blocks to be the equivalent of a vehicle for purposes of the Agreement, with the understanding that the "Exterior Storage" requirements of Section 10.60 Subd. 13 would apply, and would require housing or full screening of any boat stored on the site. Basis for Allowing Temporary' Parking Many other properties along County Road 15 have similar lake access situations. There are at least 28 individual properties between Blue Hih and the Areola Bridge which have a dock located across County Road 15 from the residence, as well as the Foxhill joint dock system. Similarly situated properties exist along North Shore Drive west of the marinas, and along the north side of Stubbs Bay. None of these properties have parking on the lake side of the road; but Blue Hill is the only one that has land area outside the 0-75' zone. Given the heavy traffic associated with County Road 15 at the Orono Orchard Road curve, it is desirable to minimize pedestrian traffic crossing County Road 15 at this point. Coupled with the 500' distance separating Lot 1 from the actual shoreline, it may be reasonable for the City to allow 'temporary' parking of a vehicle on Outlot A under certain circumstances; for instance, while the property owner is actively using or maintaining the parcel, i.e. out on the boat, mowing, using the dock, etc. subject to some easily complied with conditions; 1. 2. 3. 4. Establishment of a minimal parking area for no more than one or two vehicles, that meets the 75' lake/10' street/lO'side setback requirements, meets hardcover limitations, and is adequately screened from the roadway and the neighboring properties so as not to be obtrusive. Given the topography, some grading work might be required in order to establish a parking area that would meet required setbacks. This parking area would be accessed from the driveway apron entering onto Orono Lane as shown on the approved plans for County Road 15 (See Exhibit F). This is clearly a location we would not want to have a driveway for anything more than very occasional usage. Placement of a chain barrier across the parking area would be appropriate to deter unwanted visitors. Vehicle parking to be limited to short term, i.e. perhaps not more than 2 consecutive days/nights and definitely not for extended periods. The goal would be that this not be a location where boats or vehicles arc stored seasonally, due primarily to the security issues noted above. Blue Hill Special Lot Combination November 20, 1998 Page 4 Staff Recommendation Revise Item 4b of the Blue Hill Special Lot Combination Agreement to read as follows: "b. Parcel B may be used as an accessory parking area under the following conditions: 1) A parking area meetinj^ all required setbacks (75' from shoreline, 1 O' side lot line, 10' street lot line) and meeting hardcover limitations may be established within Parcel B. 2) Such parking area shall be adequately screened by natural vegetation or a fence so as to not be obtrusive to the neighboring properties. 3) Grading work to create such a parking area within Parcel B shall be subject to the appropriate land alteration permit. 4) A chain barrier shall be maintained across the entrance to the parking area. 5) Vehicle parking shall be limited to no more than 2 vehicles, and such parking shall be for periods of no more than 48 hours. Extended parking or seasonal boat storage within Parcel B shall not be allowed. Applicant's Letter of Request In the letter I received from Mr. Goetten today, he requests the ability to establish a parking area for as many as 6 vehicles at the site, to be used when the lakeshore is in use, agrees to no parking of trailers during the season, and notes some concerns regarding the screening and security chain requirements. He also expresses concern regarding trees in the right-of-way of Orono Lane which may have to beremoved in order to establish a suitable driveway entrance. Staff has not had an opportunity to review this on site. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Approve the amendment of the Blue Hill Special Lot Combination per the staff recommendation. Mr. Goetten is expected to be at the meeting to discuss his request. November 17, 1998 Mr. Michael P. Gaffron Senior Planning Coordinator City of Orono 2750 Kelly Parkway P.O. Box 66 Orono, Minnesota 55323 Re: Blue Hill-Special Lot Combination Agreement Dear Mike; As you know, we entered into a "Special Lot Com­ bination Agreement" with the City of Orono in March of 1993 as a part of the subdivision of our property at 1385 Fox Street. The Lot Combination Agreement related to the use of a lakeshore piece of ground, south of County Road 15, in conjunction with Lot 1, Block 1, Blue Hill Addition, the main lot, which lies north of County Road 15. Among other things the agreement provides that the lake piece "shall be considered accessory to" the main lot, and that the lake piece "shall not serve as an accessory parking area". You are correct that there was no documented specific discussion of this condition at the time of the sub-division, but I did not know then, and I do not know now the specific definition of accessory Parking or what it was meant to apply to in this instance. Accessory to the main piece or Accessory only to the lake piece? Whatever the intent or validity of the restriction at the time of the sub-division, we believe the substantial upgrading and widening of County Road 15 adjacent to this property makes the restriction un­ workable and unrealistic. As I wrote you on March 18, 1998 "In view of the (revised) adjoining road (Orono Lane) and thoroughfare (County Road 15) configurations, access to the outlot must now be mainly if not entirely by automobile." Foot access across County Road 15 from the main lot is now materially more hazardous. Further, with the widening and upgrading of County Road 15, we may not access the lake piece from its frontage on County Road 15, but rather from a roadway piece created by the extension of Orono Lane, already platted, but not fully opened at this point in time- This letter is to voice our concern that we have reasonable access to and use of the lake piece. It is over 35 foot wide, ori average about 290 foot deep (from the lakeshore to County Road 15), -1- contains about 10,400 square foot of ground or about .23 of an acre. This piece of ground can certainly accomodate automobile and related access and parking without being obtrusive in any way. No one's view of the lake would be violated by parking adjacent to County Road 15 and the Orono Lane Access point. This area is more the 250 foot from the lakeshore - obviously well beyond the significant 75 foot lake front set back area, Mike, we believe that automobile, boat and boat accessory (trailer) parking should be allowed when such parking is in conjunction with reasonable and ordinary private use of and access to the lake. In this regard specifically we are in agreement with several of your 11/19/98 staff recommendations; namely Nos. 1 and 3, page 4: 1.) 3.) A parking area meeting all required setbacks (75' from shoreline, 10' side lot line, 10' street lot line) and meeting hardcover limitations.... Grading work to create such a parking area within Parcel B shall be subject to appropriate land alteration permit. beyond the above we feel you are sort of doubling up on your basic land allowances and restrictions. Let us suggest something along the lines of the following in place of your other suggested recommendations: 5a.) Vehicle, boat and boat accessory (trailer) parking shall be allowed when such parking is directly incident to or associated with a specific private use or visit to the lakeshore, whether for boat, swimming, picnic or other similar lake use; and such parking may continue for the duration of the specific use. However for the purposes of this paragraph it is agreed that a boat or ice boat will be placed or sited for full seasonal use at the shoreline or attached to dock or lift or mooring at or near the shoreline. 5b.) It is further agreed that trailers accessory to boats placed or sited for full seasonal use at or near the shore­ line, may not be parked in seasonal storage within Parcel B. 5c.) It is further agreed within thisparagraph that the vehicle parking shall be limited to no more than 6 vehicles at any one time. We feel the above, in conjunction with the hardcover restrictions (which we understand to be 25% of the lot area beyond the 0-/5 foot lake set back area) will effectively limit and outline reasonable park­ ing for reasonable and ordinary private lake use. Proposals of screen­ ing, fencing and chaining the property seem questionable as to usefulness or attractiveness as we think of the mattei^ just now. The final matter of our concern relates to assuring a workable access to the lake piece from Orono Lane. As indicated above, our access -2- to the lake piece must come from Orono Lane and it must be sufficiently open to allow not only ready, but also speedy access from Orono Orchard Road as well as County Road 15 and Orono Lane. As of this date trees remain in the Orono Lane right-of-way which we believe may impede work­ able access to the lake piece. We request your attention to this matter as well as the parking matter. i -3- mm lawW rtratrAit / *.c t . > ^ili^m¥tT:It •i:ai r: fif:REfniIi»EIS ^nt] [%wm faMtfiTMlilTtKHIg WSRIfTilUW wiuiliw] ^■Ct FsrAOt] faHIKliT^.IIttlVIHfJ r«YtitWM rarai»5TiTtl WliT^ hmOlltlUTO [ilwEli&J FHiitllWUlJ ^TiTiK ^n«ilt] •ItWIMlU ^iit] pnielUtlll^ TLid •iium-AUj Andrew Goetten April 8,1998 Page 2 The zoning code provides some direction regarding standards for parking areas that may be pertinent to this discussion. Section 10,61 Subd. 5 A indicates that "vehicles normally owned or kept by the occupants on the premises must have a garage stall or open parking space on the same lot as the principal use served"; since Outlet A and Lot 1 have been legally combined into a single tax parcel, an argument could be made that parking on Outlet A would not be in conflict with this section. Subd. 5 A also states that "open parking spaces on lots must have a location other than a required yard except that such parking may be located in a rear yard to within ten feet of an interior side lot line and to within ten feet of a rear lot line". Since a lakeshore lot has by definition a lakeshore > ord and a rear yard, one can infer that open parking on a lakeshore lot would normally have to occur at least 10 ’ back from the street lot line. Notwithstanding the above discussion, because there is a lack of any specific direction to the contrary in either the record of your subdivision review or in the Zoning Code, it is my conclusion that the 'no parking' condition is intended to mean exactly what it states: "The Outlot shall not serve as an accessory parking area". Without qualification, this means no temporary or permanent parking of vehicles is allowed on the parcel. The Agreement does not specifically address whether storage of boats and/or trailers is allowed, but I would consider a boat on a trailer or on blocks to be the equivalent of a vehicle for purposes of the Agreement. It may be reasonable for the City to allow 'temporary' parking of a vehicle on Outlot A under certain circumstances; for instance, while the property owner is actively using or maintaining the parcel, i.e. out on the boat, mowing, using the dock, etc. If you wish to pursue a revision of the Agreement to allow this, I would recommend conditioning the revision on establishing a minimal parking area for no more than one or two vehicles, that meets the setback requirements, hardcover limitations, and is adequately screened from the roadway and the neighboring property so as not to be obtrusive. Given the topography, some grading work might be required in order to establish a parking area that would meet required setbacks, if parking were allowed. Placement of a chain barrier across the parking area would probably be appropriate to deter unwanted visitors. Please feel free to contact me at 473-7357 if you have questions or want to have the Council reconsider the provisions of the Agreement, Sincerely, Michael P. Gaffron Senior Planning Coordinator cc: Ron Moorse, City Administrator • . • SPECIAL LOT COMBINATION AGREEMENT This indenture is made and entered into this___day of , by and between Andrew J. Goettenand J. Diann Goetten, husband and wife, their heirs, successors and assigns (hereinafter coUectively referred to as "Grantor(s)") and the City of Orono, a municipal corporation under the laws of the State of Minnesota, its successors and assigns (hereinafter referred to as "Grantee"). WITNESSETH: ^VHEREAS, Granior(s) are the owner(s) of real property in the City of Orono, County of Hennepin, State of Miimesoia, legally described as follows (and hereinafter collectively referred to as the "properties"); Lot 1, Block 1, Blue Hill (hereinafter described as "Parcel A'); and Outlot A, Blue Hill (hereinafter described as "Parcel B"); and WHEREAS, Parcel A and Parcel B are physically separated from each other which prevents their being combined into one legally described lot or parcel, and/or fof or other reason the Hennepin County Assessor cannot combme Parcei A and Parcel B mto one parcel for tax purposes; and WHEREAS, notwithstanding the above it is the intent of Grantor(s) and Grantee that Parcel A and Parcel B are and shall henceforth be continued in common ownership by toe same person or persons, and further that Parcel A and Parcel B are intended to be used and/or developed in common by Grantor(s) as if they were in fact one parcei instead of two. NOW THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the sum of One Doliar ($1.00) and other vaiuable consideration, Granto.-(s) hereby covenant, grant, gift, quit claim “^ convey to Grantee the right to restrict, and Grantor(s) hereby agree to resmcl^ limited ownership, use, improvement and development of Parcel A and Parcel B accordmg to an toe conditions and covenants herein contained, as follows: 1 Grantor(s) and Grantee agree that Parcel A and Parcel B shaU hencefoi* hi common use and ownership even if recorded as separate lots or parcels, and that A Parcel B shall be considered a single parcel for purposes of meetmg any acreage requtrements of toe zoning district, and that Parcel A and Parcel B will not be used, conveyed, sol , or otherwise encumbered except together as if they were a single parce . • Page 1 of 4 2. Grantor(s) and Grantee agree that Parcel A shall be considered the primary parcel which may be used or developed for any principal use as may be permitted in the zoning district, subject to all performance standards and approvals required therefore. 3. Grantor(s) and Grantee agree that Parcel B shall be considered accessory to Parcel A, and that Parcel B may be used or developed for accessory uses as may be permitted in the zoning district and subject to all performance standards and approvals required therefore, and that such accessory uses shall be allowed only when one of the following conditions is present; Parcel A, Parcel B, and Lot 2, Block 1, Blue Hill are held in common ownership and a single principal residence exists on the commonly owned property; or a. b. Parcels A and B are no longer held in common with Lot 2, Block 1, Blue Hill and a principal residence strucmre has been established on Parcel A. 4. Grantor(s) agree to restrict and limit the use and/or improvement of Parcel B as follows: a.No structures may be constructed or located on Parcel B except the following: 1) One seasonal dock; location and number of slips allowed shall be per the regulations of the LMCD. 2) One lock box no greater than 20 square feet in area and no greater than 48 inches in height. 3) Lakeshore access siairway/boat lift/boat landing subject to requirements of Municipal Code Section 10.56 "Shoreland Management". b. Parcel B shall not serve as an accessory parking area. c.Parcel B is created for the exclusive use of the owners of Parcel A. 5. Grantee shall not issue any building permit, zoning variance or conditional use permit for any structure or use on the properties inconsistent with the covenants contained herein. 6. Grantor(s) hereby grant to Grantee the right to enter upon the above described properties for the purposes of inspection and enforcement of the covenants contained herein, and to cause to be lawfully removed from these properties without any liability any structures, uses, substances and natural or unnatural materials inconsistent with the covenants contamed herem. 7. In addition to any other remedy Grantee may have, the covenants and restrictions contained herein may be enforced by injunction. Grantor(s) who are in possession of mese properties shall pay to Grantee all costs and expenses including attorneys fees meurred by Grantee in enforcing the terms of this indenture. Page 2 of 4 8. The terms and conditions of this indenture may be modified, amended or extinguished and thereafter Parcel A and Parcel B may be subdivided, sold separately or reduced in part only upon application by Grantor(s) to Grantee for approval of a "Subdivision" in accordance with the platting code of the City in effect at the time of such application. 9. Grantor(s) do not intend that the public should have any interest in the above properties by virtue of this indenmre or otherwise, except as hereinabove set forth. All provisions hereof shall run with the land and shall extend to and bind the heirs, successors, representatives, grantees or assigns of the respective parties hereto. STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. (City Acknowledgment) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of ____.« 190.by -T. __________and /H; fhlliSL------• Mayor andCity Clerk, respectively, of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation, onbetiall of the municipal corporation. hennSin coun^NOTARY PUBUC Page 3 of 4 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) (Individual Acknowledgment) On this / 7^ day of 19^, before me, a Notary Public within and for said County, personally appeared dvxJ\iui G ~ba<Xtin ^ known to me to be the oerson(s) described in and'who executed the foregoing instrument, ^ndknown to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. JAMIE LB0S^^„ PU8U(>M>N^TA H0W£PIN COUNTY m OTARY PUBUCi^om This document is being recorded for the benefit of the City of Orono per Minnesota Statutes 386.77. State Deed Tax Due Hereon: Exempt This instiament was drafted by: City of Orono P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 473-7357 Page 4 of 4 £-I § 10.61 A. "R” Districts. Within all "R” Districts all vehicles normally owned or kept by the occupants on the premises must have a garage stall or open parking space on the same lot as the principal use served. Garage stalls accessory to residential structures may be located anywhere on the lot other than a required yard area except that such garages may be located to within ten feet of an interior side lot line and to within ten feet of a rear lot line subject to Section 10.03. Open parking spaces on lots must have a location other than a required yard except that such parking may be located in a rear yard to within ten feet of an interior side lot line and to within ten feet of a rear lot line. Source: Municipal Code - - Effective Date; 9-14-67 __ _ B. "B” Districts. Within the "B-2" District® parking may not be allowed in any required yard or landscaping area. Within the "B-1", ''B-3” and "B-4" Districts parking spaces ^ and/or garages shall be located in areas other than a required yard K except that parking may be located in a rear yard to within three feet of the rear or side lot line unless the rear or side lot line is in common with an "R" District; then the setback distance shall j|| be the same as required for the "R“ District. • Source; Ordinance No. 172 Effective Date: 1-1-75 I C. "I" Districts. Within "I” Districts, off-street parking spaces shall be not less than twenty feet from any street ^ right-of-way line nor less than five feet from any interior side lot line or rear lot line, except when a side or rear lot line is abutting an "R" District. Then, off-street parking shall be not B less than ten feet from said lot lines. * " Subd. 6. Joint Parking. Required parking facilities » serving two or more uses in the "B" or "I" Districts may be located || on the same lot provided that the total number of parking spaces so furnished shall be not less than the sum total of the separate requirements for each use and provided; B A. The proposed joint parking space is within thirty feet of the use it will serve. B. The applicant(s) shall show that there is no substantial conflict in the principal operating hours of the two or « more buildings or uses for which joint use of off-street parking f facilities is proposed; and, C. A properly drawn legal instrument approved by the City Attorney, executed by the parties concerned for joint use ■ of off-street parking facilities shall be filed with the City — Clerk. Said instrument may be a three or more party agreement including the City. j| I ORONO CC 384 (4-1-84)I to Ln/ yjjjmilllltrmq ^ / ^ ^ A ^ _//, / / /. 9 ^ / •/I ^ •'/ -a*/ 'f / / tO • ^ ^ '%'/'/i■^rf /t/'fv'./ / ' / / / / ✓/ / / / w COUNCIL M£=.TiM3 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION NOV 2 3 1998 CtTY or ORONO DATE; November 23, 1998 ITEM NO.; Department Approval; Name Gregory A. Gappa Title Director of Public Services Administrator Reviewed; 0 Agenda Section; Engineer's Report Item Description; Request for Final Payment, Old Crystal Bay Road/ TH 12 Traffic Signal We have reviewed the information submitted by the City ’s engineering fu;n and recommend approval of this Request for Final Payment. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to approve Request for Final Payment, to Electrical Installation & Maintenance, Maple Plain MN in the amount of $8,250. ^ I Bonestroo Rosene Anderlik & \\\\ Associates Engineers & Architects Novembers, 1998 Bonestroo. Rosene. Anderhk jrna Assocu^es Inc is an Affirmative Action. Equ<rl Opportunity Employer Principals C to G Bonciiroo. PE • Joseph C AnJcilik, PE • I Sorv.ila. PE • Richard E Turner. PE. • Glenn R Cook. PE • RoDcrt G Schumchi. PE • Jerry A Bourdon PE • Robert W Rosene. PE and Susan M Eberhn. C PA . Senior Consultants Associate Principals Howard A Sanford. PE • Keith A Gordon. PE Robert R Pfefferie PE • Richard W Foster PE • David O Loskota PE • Robert C PusseV A I A • Mark A Hanson. PE • Michael T. Rauimann. PE • Ted K.Field. PE • kenrcih P Anderson PE • Mark R Rolfs. PE • Sidney P Williamson. PE . L S • Robert F. Kotsmiih • Agnes M Ring • Michael P Rau. PE • Allan Rick Schmidt PE Offices St Paul. Rochester. W*limar and St CIcjd MN • Milwaukee. Wl WtPute WWW bonestroo com Mr, Greg Gappa City of Orono 750 Kelly Parkway Long Lake, MN 55356 V., •I I '•• • Re: Trunk Highway 12 and Old Crystal Bay Road Signal System Revision BRA File No. 139-GEN Dear Mr. Gappa: Transmitted herewith are four (4) copies of Request for Payment No. 1 and Final. The Minnesota Withholding Form IC-134, for the above-mentioned project, will be forwarded to you once it is received in our office. The work on this project has been satisfactorily completed and we recommend payment at this time. Should you have any questions regarding this, please feel free to call me at 651-604-4849 Very Truly Yours, BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC. Michael P. Spack Enclosures MPS:dsb 1 .W-^enclienifinalpaycstltr.doc 2335 West Highway 36 • St. Paul, MN 55113 ■ 612-636*4600 ■ Fax; 612-636-1311 r Bonestroa ie Ij For Period: Stan to October 26,1998 Owner City of Orono, 750 Kelly Parkway. Long Lake. MN 5S356 •Date: October 27. 1998 Request No: I ^ ^ « I ■ iContractor Electrical Installation & Maintenance. 4985 Broadmoor Drive. Maple Plain, MN 55359 1/Final REQUEST FOR PAYMENT TRUNK raOHWAY 12 AND OLD CRYSTAL BAY ROAD SIGNAL SYSTEM REVISION BRA FILE NO. 139-GEN SUMMARY 1 Original Contract Amount 2 Change Order • Addition 3 Change Order - Deduction 4 Revised Contract Amount 5 Value Completed to Date 6 Material on Hand 7 Amount Earned 8 Less Retainage 0% 9 Subtotal 10 Less Amount Paid Previously 11 AMOUNT DUE THIS REQUEST FOR PAYMENT NO. $ S 1/Final $ S S s $ $ s $ 8,250.00 8,250.00 8.250.00 0.00 8.250.00 0.00 8,250.00 0.00 8,250.00 Recommended for Approval by: BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC. ELECTRICAT. INSTALLATION & MAINTENANCE Approved by Owner: cm’ OF ORONO Specified Contract Completion Date:Date; I:' 139\139-GENVequesLwb2 'I No.Item Unit Contract Quantity Unit Price Quantity to Date Amount to Date Base Bid 1 Revise Signal System Total Work Completed To Date 8.250.00 8.250.00 8;i50.00 % ' .we IA139M3»<3ENVra<)uesLwb2 r PROJECT PAYMENT STATUS Owner Cmf OF ORONO Project No. 139-GEN FUeNo. 139-GEN Contractor ELECTRICAL INSTALLATION & MAINTENANCE CHANGE ORDERS No.Date Description Amount I 2 3 Total Change Orders PAYMENT SUM^URY 1 Start 10/26/98 8,250.00 8.250.00 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Material on Hand Total Payment to Date S8.250.00 Original Conttact S8.250.00 Reiainage. Payment No. 1/F Change Orders Total Amount Earned S8.250.00 Revised Contiact $8,250.00 I.A139V139-QEN\requestwb2 Boneitroo Rosene ;Own<r: City of Orono, 2750 Kelly Pkv>.y. Orono. MN 55323-0066 Date: November 9. 1998 m fiPor Period: Start to October 31.1998Associates--------------------------------------Request No: t-w«f»i4A«i»u«iContractor: Shank Ccnsmictors. Inc.. 3501 85th .Ave N. Brooklyn Park. MN 55445 REQUEST FOR PAYMENT NAVARRE WATER TREATMENT FACILITY RENOVATION BRA FILE NO. 13997 t . • W I J -m *.•/ fioy 1 ^ 1990 IY ur u.-;c.\'0 SUMMARY I Original Contract Amount Change Order • .Addition Change Order • Deduction Revised Contract Amount Value Completed to Date Material on Hand Amount Earned 8 Less Retainage 5% 9 Subtotal 10 Less Amount Paid Previously II AMOUNT DUE THIS REQUEST FOR PAYMENT NO. 2 3 4 5 6 7 S s s s s s s s s s Recommended for Approval by: BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC X//. Approved by Contractor SHANK jGONSTRUCTORS, INC r Approved by Owner: CITY OF ORONO Specified Contract Completion Date: tS^/ 5^^ <0.)Date: l:\139\13997\REQUEST.WB2 636.600 636.600 58,969 24,518 83,487 4,174 79,313 79.313 No. Item Contract Unit Quantity Unit Quantity Current Price to Date Quantity Amount to Date Total price for the renovation of the Navarre Water Treatment Facilitv*. including demolition, process equipment (by base bid manufacturers, as described in Part III of this Proposal) plumbing, HVAC. electrical work, controls and instrumentaticn, process piping, painting, and all other items shown, specified, or implied to place the facility into full operation for the LUMP SUM of:LS 636.600.00 Breakdown of above; 1 Mobilization & Div. 1 37,894.00 lOOVo I00<!»37.894 Demo - Lab.12.944.00 85%85%11,002 3 Demo • Mat.11,850.00 85%85%10.073 4 Concrete Bottom - Lab.10,121.00 5 Concrete Bottom - Mat 10,360.00 6 Div. 5 - Lab.493.00 7 Div. 5 • Mat.1,173.00 8 Div 8 - Lab.1,190.00 9 Div. S • Mat.4,989.00 10 Softening Equip - Ext 5,200.00 II Softening Equip • Int 9,000.00 12 Filter Equip • Ext 13,500.00 13 hiker Equip - Int 31,000.00 14 Pipir4g & Valves 13,600.00 15 Interior 6,600.00 16 Filter Equip • Lab.15,692.00 17 Filter Equip • Mat 53,793.00 IS Softening Equip • Lab.2.352.00 19 Softening Equip • Mat 17,038.00 20 Filter Media-Lab.4,200.00 21 Filter Media • Mat.28,375.00 * 22 Softening Media • Lab.563.00 23 Softening Media - Mat 18.554.00 24 Chemical Feed - Lab.7.352.00 25 Chemical Feed - Mat 8,393.00 26 Pumps - Bal.7.500 00 27 Pumps - Mat 16,827.00 28 Blower • Lab.5.987.00 29 Blower - Mat 6.757.00 ;o Piping Si Valves • Lab.26.922.00 31 Piping & Valves • Mat 87,181 jO l;\139M 3997\REQUEST.WB2 32 Hvac 33 Electrical 34 Steel 33 Welding 36 Grinding 16.200.00 134,000.00 1.200.00 5.300.00 2.300.00 ] Total Work Completed To Date 38,969 Materials Stored Piping & Valves • Mat.24.518,00 Total Materials 24.318.00 l:\139U3997\REQUEST WB2 PROJECT PAYMENT STATUS Owner CITY OF ORONO Project No. File No. Contractor SHANK CONSTRUCTORS. INC. CHANGE ORDERS No. Date Description Amount 1 11 2 3 Total Change Orders PAYMENT SUMMARY No. Period Payment Retainage Completed 1 Scan 10/31/98 79.313.00 4,174.00 58.969.00 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Material on Hand S24.5I8.00 Total Paymen' tc Date S79.3I3 Original Contract S636.600 00 Retainage. Payment No. 1 S4.174 Change Orders Total Amount Earned S33.487 Revised Contract S636.600.00 i.\139M3997U^EQUEST WB2 COUNCIL MEETINq NOV 2 5 1998 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION ciT)' r - DATE: November 20,1998 ITEM NO: Department Approval:Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Name Ron Moorse /f'l City Administrator's Title City Administrator Report Item Description: Renewals of Police Service Contracts The cities of Spring Park and Minnetonka Beach have approved the renewal of their police service contracts with the City of Orono for 1999. The City of Long Lake has approved the renewal of its police r.ervice contract with the City of Orono for 1999/2000/2001. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to approve the renewal of the police service contracts witli the cities of Minnetonka Beach, Spring Park and Long Lake. i REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION COUNCIL M££TINa NOV 2 3 1998 C TTY :* DATE: November 20,1998 ITEM NO:<35 Department Approval: Name Ron Moorse Title City Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: City Administrator’s Report Item Description: Long Lake Fire Department Proposal to Purchase 5 Inch Fire Hose Attached is a letter from the Long Lake Fire Department regarding the purchase of 5 inch fire hose, a listing of the advantages of 5 inch fire hose, and the allocation of costs for the fire hose among the three participating cities. The proposal is to purchase 2,000 feet of 5 inch fire hose at a cost of $12,300. Orono's share of this cost is $8,639.52. The key advantage to Orono is that the 5 inch hose enables high volume water flow to properties with limited or difficult access. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to approve the purchase of 2,000 feet of 5 inch fire hose by the Long Lake Fire Department at a total cost of $12,300 (with Orono ’s share being $8,639.52), and to amend the 1998 Improvement and Equipment Outlay Fund budget to reflect this expenditure. Long Lake Volunteer Fire Dept. 1964 Park Avenue Long Lake, Minnesota 55356 Office: 612-473-9701 • Fax: 404-9612 November 6, 1998 Ron Moorse, City Administrator Orono Fire Committee Members City of Orono P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 i#j 0 V \m ................ -'-■■'j Dear Committee Members & Ron: The Long Lake Volunteer Fire Department (LLVFD) has been talking about the potential purchase of 5 inch hose for fire fighting purposes in the Long Lake fire contract area for the last two years. We have had some discussion with you as a contract city about the desire of the Fire Department to have this piece of equipment r.nd the advantages to your community for having it. The LLVFD would like to invite you to attend a meeting on Wednesday, November 18, 1998 at 3:30 p m. in the Council Chambers at City Flail to hear a formal recommendation that the contract cities purchase 5 inch hose. Enclosed within is a copy of a list of the reasons that the LLVFD feels it needs this equipment and more advantages to your community. After that meeting, we would respectfully request that you take this information back to your full City Council and approve the purchase and payment of your share at your next regularly scheduled City Council meeting. We would ask that you attempt to do this within 30 days after the meeting. Please provide us with a copy of your City Council minutes authorizing this purchase. If you cannot attend this meeting, please designate another individual(s) to attend on your behalf. The LLVFD would like to move ahead with this purchase as quickly as possible due to the fact that the pricing is subject to change. .Sincerely, *^1ike Brdwn, Fire Chief ^ Jim Cox, Assistant Fire Chief cc: Joe Lynch, City Administrator Long Lake Fire Committee Advantages of 5 inch Fire Hose Provides nearly seamless water flow for properties with limited or difficult access. Provides nearly the same water volume and pressure as exists at any fire hydrant. Allows the Fire Department to provide multiple lines from single lines. Allows for more flexibility with fire fighter deployment, especially at daytime fire scenes. Allows for more flexibility in fire scene set up and management Does factor Into the Insurance rate risk for the properties covered. Updated 11/10/98 City of Long Lake Fire Department 5" FIRE HOSE Long Lake 21.51% Orono 70.24% Medina 8.25% TOTAL $12,300.00 $ 2,645.73 $ 8,639.52 $ 1.014.75 si 11/6/98 Page 1 COUNCIL M££Ti.\'Q NOV 2 3 1998 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION c ii V or r p.ov'o DATE: November 18,1998 ITEM NO = .3V Department Approval: Name Lin Vee Title City Clerk Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Licenses Item Description: List of Licenses for Council Approval On Sale Liquor & Sunday Jimmies Lounge 3380 Shoreline Drive Off Sale Liquor 12 Hi Liquor 2160 West V/ayzata Boulevard Navarre Liquors Inc. 3421 Shoreline Drive Club Woodhill Country Club 200 Woodhill Road COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to approve/deny the above listed license(s). Date:November 18,1998 To:Ron Moorse, City Administrator From: Gary Cheswick, Chief of Police Subject: Liquor License - Jimmies Lounge —' I have reviewed the application submitted by Jimmie Holtz on behaif of Jimmies Lounge. In looking at the background investigation and checking past history of the establishment, only one liquor law violation was recorded, that being in 1993. No violations have been recorded since that time. I have no objection to the issuance of the liquor license. Date:November 18,1998 To:Ron Moorse, City Administrator From:Gary Cheswick, Chief of Police Subject:Liquor License -12 Hi Liquor I have reviewed the application submitted by William W. Wear on behalf of 12 Hi Liquors. In looking at the background investigation and checking past history of the establishment, no problems were found. I have no objection to the issuance of the liquor license. ftmi ‘ Date:November 18, 1998 To:Ron Moorse, City Administrator From:Gary Cheswick, Chief of Police^ Subject: Liquor License - Navarre Liquors I have reviewed the application submitted by Steven M. Corl on behalf of Navarre Liquors. In looking at the background investigation and checking past history of the establishment, no problems were found. I have no objection to the issuance of the liquor license. Date;November 18, 1998 To;Ron Moorse, City Administrator From;Gary Cheswick, Chief of Police Subject; Liquor License - Woodhill Country Club I have reviewed the application submitted by Mark A. Albrecht on behalf of the Woodhill Country Club. In looking at the background investigation and checking past history of the establishment, no problems were found. I have no objection to the issuance of the liquor license. * I i J 20 Hov 1998 Fri 1:28 PM Check Regiiter City of Orono Page 2 Check Transaction Check Kumber 57668 ELECTRICAL INST & MAINTENANCE S7668 19-NOV-98 ELECTRICAL INST k MAINTENANCE Totals Check Number S7668 ELECTRICAL INST k MAINTENANCE Check Number 57669 ENGINEERING REPRO SYSTEMS 57669 57669 19-Nov-98 19-NOV-98 ENGINEi^RING REPRO SYSTEMS ENGINEERING REPRO SYSTEMS Totals Check Number 57669 ENGINEERING REPRO SYSTEMS Check Number 57670 FIEDLER, JOSEPH ii MARY 57670 20-NOV-98 FIEDLER, JOSEPH k MARY Totals Check Number 57670 FIEDLER. JOSEPH k MARY Check Number 57672 GENUINE PARTS CO. 57672 17-NOV-98 GENUINE PARTS CO. Number Date Name Amount Comments Check Number 57664 OSSHICK.GARY Totals Check Number 57664 CHESWICK,GARY 17.39 Check Number 57665 COLONIAL LIFE INSURANCE CO. 57665 16-NOV-98 COLONIAL LIFE INSURANCE CO.980.66 NOVEMBER INS Totals Check Number 57665 COLONIAL LIFE INSURANCE CO.980.66 Check Number 57666 CYS UNIFORMS 17-NOV-98 CYS UNIFORMS 12.00 SEW EMB. RPR LINING 57666 19-NOV-98 CYS UNIFORMS 59.95 PANTS 57666 17-NOV-98 CYS UNIFORMS 49.90 SHIRTS, EMBLEMS Totals Check Number 57666 CYS UNIFORMS 121.85 Check Number 57667 DAHLGREN SHARDLOW k UBAN 57667 19-NOV-98 DAHLGREN SHARDLOW k UBAN 2,312.00 HWY 12 COM CNCPTS REPORT 57667 19-Nov-98 DAHLGREN SHARDLOW k UBAN 1,188.98 PC WKSHP, REV SITE PLANS 57667 19-NOV-98 DAHLGREN SHARDLOW k UBAN 322.50 PRECINCT MAP 57667 19-NOV-98 DAHLGREN SHARDLOW k UBAN 294.96 PRELIM WORK - DICKEY PARK 57667 19-NOV-98 DAHLGREN SHARDLOW k UBAN 170.30 MTK WDS, TREE PRES. HW 12 57667 19-Nov-98 DAHLGREN SHARDLOW k UBAN 55.00 CALC SCH DIST SIZES 57667 19-NOV-98 DAHLGREN SHARDLOW k UBAN 21.00 MISC CONSULTATION 57667 19-NOV-98 DAHLGREN SHARDLOW k UBAN 465.22 B6Z, PARK DED ISSUES Totals Check Number 57667 DAHLGREN SHARDLOW k UBAN 4,829.96 8.250.00 8.250.00 PROJ 152-102-13 RFP 81 27.27 124.18 SCAN\PLOT 4270 WTRTOWN RD SCANXPLOT 1375 PARK 151.45 5.304.02 5.304.02 REFUND 373 WESTLAKE ms f ir\ 14.08 HEADLIGHT 20 Nov 1998 Check Register Page 3 Frl 1:28 PM City of Orono Check Transaction Nuinber Date Name Amount Comments Chepk Number 57572 GENUINE PARTS CO. 57672 17-NOV-98 GENUINE PARTS CO.5.17 FASTENERS 576^2 17-NOV-98 GENUINE PARTS CO.8.17 BLOWGUN, COUPLER 57672 17-NOV-98 GENUINE PARTS CO.20.74 BLOWGUN, COUPLER 57672 17-NOV-98 GENUINE PARTS CO.7.37 LENS 57672 17-NOV-98 ODN’JINE PARTS CO.38.08 TAIL LIGHT 57672•17-NOV-98 GENUINE PARTS CO.7.04 HEADLAMP 57672 17-NOV-98 GENUINE PARTS CO.23.77 CC CLEAI^ER, WD 40 57672 17-NOV-98 GENUINE PARTS CO.27.66 OIL, WASHER FLD, LIGHTER 57672 17-NOV-98 GENUINE PARTS CO.1.05 CLIP ♦♦708 57672 17-NOV-98 GENUINE PARTS CO.-34.07 WRENCH 57672 17-NOV-98 GENUINE PARTS CO.2.11 FARTS ♦♦708 57672 16-NOV-98 GENUINE PARTS CO.4.78 RAIN X 57672 17-NOV-98 GENUINE PARTS CO.-2.81 STMT BALANCE Totals Check Number 57672 GENUINE PARTS CO.123.94 Check Number 57673 GERRING*S CAR WASH 57673 16-Nov-98 GERRING'S CAR WASH Totals Check Number 57673 GERRING'S CAR WASH Check Number §7674 HASEMAN, CAROLE 57674 17-NOV-98 HASEMAN. CAROLE Totals Check Number 57674 HASEMAN. CAROLE Check Number 57675 HEALTHPARTNERS 57675 57675 57675 16-NOV-98 16-Nov-98 16-Nov-98 HEALTHPARTNERS HEALTHPARTNERS HEALTHPARTNERS Totals Check Number 57675 HEALTHPARTNERS Check Number 57676 HENNEPIN COUNTY SHERIFF 57676 16-Nov-98 HENNEPiN COUNTY SHERIFF Totals Check Number 57676 HENNEPIN COUNTY SHERIFF Check Number 57677 HINSHAW k CULBERTSON 57677 57677 57677 57677 57677 57677 57677 20-NOV-98 20-Nov-98 20-NOV-98 20-Nov-98 20-NOV-98 20-NOV-98 20-NOV-98 HINSHAW HINSHAW HINSHAW HINSHAW HINSHAW HINSHAW HINSHAW k CULBERTSON k CULBERTSON k CULBERTSON k CULBERTSON k CULBERTSON k CULBERTSON k CULBERTSON 7.63 7.63 41.37 41.37 328.50 163.77 6.708.99 7,201.26 15.00 15.00 165.00 592.50 88.00 7.605.06 327.41 275.00 16.00 CAR WASH MILEAGE REIM DECEMBER HEALTH INS DECEMBER HEALTH INS DECEMBER HEALTH INS CRIM INV CHILD ABUSE-SCHO APPLICATIONS BROOK PARK REALTY GORDON NELSON BROOK PARK REALTY POLICE LABOR MATTER LEGAL SERVICE SEPT MOE VACATED ROADWAY 20 Nov l$$B Fri 1:28 PM Check Register City of Orono Check Number Date Name Check Number 57677 57677 57677 HINSHAH k CULBERTSON 20-Nov-98 HINSHAW k CULBERTSON 20-Nov-98 HINSHAW k CULBERTSON Totals Check Number 57677 HINSHAW k CULBERTSON Check Number 57678 KENNETH N. POTTS. PA 57678 16-NOV-98 KENNETH N. POTTS. PA Totals Check Number 57678 KENNETH N. POTTS. PA Check Number 57679 KWOM 57679 16-Nov-98 KHOH Totals Check Number 57679 KWOM Check Number S7680 LARSON. STEPHEN k LUCINDA 57680 19-NOV-9C LARSON. STEPHEN k LUCINDA Totals Check Number 57680 LARSON. STEPHEN k LUCINDA Check Number 57681 LONG LAKE FAMILY PHYSICIANS 57681 17-NOV-98 LONG LAKE FAMILY PHYSICIANS Totals Check Number 57681 LONG LAKE FAMILY PHYSICIANS Check Number 57682 MEDICA CHOICE 57682 57682 17-NOV-98 17-NOV-98 KEDICA CHOICE MEDICA aiDICE Totals Check Number 57682 MEDICA CHOICE Check Number 57683 MEDTOX LABORATORIES 57683 16-NOV-98 MEDTOX LABORATORIES Totals Check Number 57683 MEDTCX LABORATORIES Check Number 57684 MET COUNCIL ENVIRONMENTAL SVCS 57684 16-Nov-98 MET COUNCIL ENVIRONMENTAL SVCS Totals Check Number 57684 MET COUl^CIL ENVIRONMENTAL SVCS Check Number 57685 MET COUNCIL ENVIRONMENTAL SER S7685 16-Nov-98 MET COUNCIL ENVIRONMENTAL SER Totals Check Number 57685 MET COUNCIL EN’^IRONMENTAL SER Transaction Amount 843.34 1.102.00 11.014.31 2.291.66 2.291.66 24.00 24.00 3.700.00 3.700.00 51.00 51.00 202.25 10.587.00 10.789.25 53.00 53.00 21.942.16 21.942.16 4.950.00 4.950.00 Page 4 Comments WCODHILL CC - ROAD DISPUT LEGAL SERVICE SEPT SEPTEMBER PROSECUTIONS 10/2 ADVERTISEMENT GRINDER PUMP\INSTALLATION MCNALLY-HEP B DECEMBER HEALTH INS DECEMBER HEALTH INS DRUG TESTING DECEMBER SWR SERVICE SEPTEMBER SAC t 20 Nov 1998 rrl 1:28 PM Check Register City of Orono Page 5 Check Number Date Name Check Number 57686 576^ iINN STATE TREASURER 19-KOV-98 MINN STATE TREASITIER Totals Check Number 57686 MINN STATE TREASURER Check Number 57687 MINNEAPOLIS OXYGEN COMPANY 57687 57687 16-NOV-98 16-NOV-98 MINNEAPOLIS OXYGEN COMPAflY MINNEAPOLIS OXYGEN COMPANY Totals Check Number 57687 MINirEAPOLIS OXYGEN COMPANY Ch-ck Number 57688 MN INST OF PUBLIC HEALTH 57688 16-NOV-98 MN INST OF PUBLIC HEALTH Totals Check Number 57688 MN INST OF PUBLIC HEALTH :heck Number 57689 MN POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY 57689 19-NOV-98 MN POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY Totals Check Number 57689 MN POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY Check Number 57690 MN POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY Transaction Amount 40.00 40.00 13.50 95.54 109.04 15.00 15.00 40.00 40.00 Comments Lie CROSS PUB LAND & WTR OXYGEN OXYGEN SCHOENHOFF-TAP TO TEENS WST DISP FAC OPERATOR CER 57690 19-NOV-98 MN POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY 240.00 SAN SWR PERMT Totals Check Number 57690 MN POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY 240.00 Check Number 57691 MTGF 57691 16-Nov-98 MTGF 95.00 MTGF CONFERENC Totals Check Number 57691 MTGF 95.00 Check Number 57693 NAVARRE HARDWARE 57693 17-Nov-98 NAVARRE HARDWARE 7,21 SRV CHGS 57693 17-NOV-98 NAVARRE HARDWARE 7.22 MORTAR MIX 57693 17-NOV-98 NAVARRE HARDWA.’IE 12.34 MISC SUPPLIES 57693 17-NOV-98 NAVARRE HARDWARE 2.11 LIGHTER 57693 17-NOV-98 NAVARRE HARDWARE 10.30 MISC SUPPLIES 57693 17-NOV-98 NAVARRE HARDWARE 0.32 SCREWS 57693 17-NOV-98 NAVARRE HARDWARE 1.37 NIPPLE 57693 17-NCV-98 NAVARRE HARDWARE 24.12 SHOP SUPPLIES 57693 17-NV/-98 NAVARRE HARDWARE 5.04 lOOZ STIK TAX 57693 17-Nov-98 NAVARRE HARDWARE 10.10 SCREWS 57693 17-KOV-98 NWARRE HARDWARE 4.25 TIRE CLNER 57693 17-NOV-98 NAVARRE HARDWARE 2.11 KEY 57693 17-Nov-98 NAVARRE HARDWARE 7.41 PD SUPPLIES 57693 17-Nov-98 NAVARRE HARDWARE -3.17 GC SUPPLIES 20 Nov 1998 Check Register Pri 1:28 PM City of Orono Check Transaction Number Date Name Amount Comments Check Number 57693 NAVARRE HARDWARE 57693 17-Nov-98 NAVARRE HARDWARE 26.14 GC SUPPLIES 57693 17-NOV-98 NAVARRE HARDWARE 1.05 KEY 57693 17-NOV-98 NAVARRE HARDWARE 13.07 SOAP, LYSOL 57693 17-NOV-98 NAVARRE HARDWARE 13.39 SOCKETS 57693 17-NOV-98 NAVARRE HARDWARE 1.36 WASHERS, BOLTS 57693 17-NOV-98 NAVARRE HARDWARE 3.18 BATTERIES Page 6 Totals Check Number 57693 NAVARRE HARDWARE Check Number 57694 NORLING LANDSCAPE & GRADING 57694 16-NOV-90 NORLING LANDSCAPE k GRADING Totals Check Number 57694 NORLING LANDSCAPE k GRADING Check Number 57696 OFFICE DEPOT Check Number 57697 OMAN, LYLE Check Number 57698 57698 OTTEN BROTHERS 19-NOV-98 OTTEN BROTHERS Totals Check Number 57698 OTTEN BROTHERS Check Number 57699 PATTERSON. DEAN 57699 19-NOV-98 PATTERSON. DEA.N Totals Check Number 57699 PATTERSON. DEAN 148.92 1,117.50 1,117.50 143.84 143.84 3,700.00 3,700.00 RIP RAP - CASEY RESIDENCE Check Number 57695 NSP 57695 19-NOV-98 NSP 49.63 ELEC 10/98 57695 19-NOV-98 NSP 42.08 ELEC 10/98 57695 19-NOV-98 NSP 1,195.04 STRT LIGHTING Totals Check Number 57695 NSP 1,286.75 57696 19-NOV-98 OFFICE DEPOT 587.86 OFFICE SUPPLIES 57696 19-NOV-98 OFFICE DEPOT -15.67 RETURN 4- magn: 57696 19-NOV-98 OFFICE DEPOT 3.11 OFFICE SUPPLIES 57696 19-NOV-98 OFFICE DEPOT 205.30 OFFICE SUPPLIES 57696 19-NOV-98 OFFICE DEPOT 3.80 OFFICE SUPPLIES 57696 19-NOV-98 OFFICE DEPOT 30.97 OFFICE SUPPLIES Totals Check Number 57696 OFFICE DEPOT 815.37 57697 17-NOV-98 OMAN,LYLE 19.20 MILEAGE REIM 57697 17-Nov-98 OMAN,LYLE 18.24 MILEAGE REIM 57697 17-NOV-98 OMAN,LYLE 25.28 MILEAGE REIM 57697 17-NOV-98 OMAN,LYLE 24.96 MILEAGE REIM Totals Check Number 57697 OMAN,LYLE 87.68 BEAL TREE GRINDER PUMPxTNSTALLATION i i 20 Nov 1998 Fri 1:28 FM Check Nun^r Check Number 57700 57700 Check Register City of Orono Date Name 57700 PERRY'S SANDBIASTXKS 19-N0V-98 PERRY'S SANDBLASTING 19-NOV-98 PERRY'S SANDBLASTING Transaction Amount 98.27 69.23 Totals Check Number 57700 PERRY'S SANDBLASTING 167.50 Page 7 Comments TOW - FORD P/U TO IMPOUND TOW - SIEZURE/OLDS Check Number 57701 RICKS SUPERVALUE 57701 19-NOV-98 Totals Check Number RICKS SUPERVALUE 57701 RICKS SUPERVALUE Check Number 57702 57702 RISKO, GEORGI k NANCY 19-NOV-98 Totals Check Number RISKO, GEORGI k NANCY 57702 RISKO. GEORGI k NANCY Check Number 57703 RIT2 CAMERA 59.27 59.27 3,700.00 3,700.00 GC MISC SUPPLIES GRINDER PUMP\INSTALLATION 57703 16-NOV-98 Totals Check Number RITZ CAMERA 57703 RITZ CAMERA 21.19 21.1 FILM Check Number 57704 SENIOR COMMUNITY SERVICES 57704 19-Nov-98 Totals Check Number SENIOR COMMUNITY SERVICES 57704 SENIOR COMMUNITY SERVICES Check Number 57705 57705 SHANK CONSTRUCTORS 19-NOV-99 Totals Check Number SHANK CONSTRUCTORS 57705 SHANK CONSTRUCTORS Check Number 57706 57706 SNYDER DRUG STORES 16-NOV-98 Totals Check Number SNYDER DRUG STORES 57706 SNYDER DRUG STORES Check Number 57707 57707 SPRING PARK CAR MASH 16-NOV-98 Totals Check Number SPRING PARK CAR WASH 57707 SPRING PARK CAR MASH Check Number 57708 57708 57708 STREICHERS 16-NOV-98 16-Nov-98 STREICHERS STREICHERS 3,405.00 3,405.00 79,313.00 79,313.00 17.55 17.55 142.50 142.50 229.95 15.91 4TH QTR CONTRIBUTION NVR WTR REHAB - RFP #1 BATTERIES 30 TICKETS DUTY JACKET RELAY, SPOT LIGHT 20 Nov 1998 Fri 1:28 PM Check Register City of Orono Page 8 Check Number Date Name Check Humber 57700 57708 STREICHERS 16-NOV-98 STREICHERS Totals Check Number 57706 STREICHERS Check Number 57709 TALLEN AND BAERTSCHI 57709 16-Nov-98 TALLEN AND BAERTSCHI Totals Check Number 57709 TALLEN AND BAERTSCHI Check Number 57710 TRI-K SERVICES 57710 16-Nov 98 TRI-K SERVICES Totals Check Number 57710 TRI-K SERVICES Check Number 57711 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED 57711 17-NOV-98 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED Totals Check Number 57711 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED Check Number 57712 UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE 57712 16-Nov 98 UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE Totals Check Number 57712 UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE Check Number 57713 US WEST CO^«UNICATIONS Check Number 57715 57715 WESTONKA GLASS SERVICE 16-NOV-98 WESTONKA GLASS SERVICE Totals Check Number 57715 WESTONKA GLASS SERVICE Grand Total Transaction Amount Comments 13.79 259.65 MNTO KIT - SPOT LGHT 15.92 15.92 SEPTEMBER PROSECUTIONS 199.37 199.37 PULVERIZED BLACK DIRT 103.00 103.00 TROUSERS. BELT 1.800.00 1.800.00 POSTAGE FOR METER 57713 19-NOV-98 US WEST COMMUNICATIONS AO.59 PHONE SRVe 612-404-9937 57713 19-NOV-98 US WEST COrWUNICATIONS 45.94 PHONE SRVe 612-E44-0016 57713 19-NOV-98 US WEST COMMUNICATIONS 77.12 PHONE SRVe 612-E07-7466 Totals Check Number 57713 US WEST COMMUNICATIONS 163.65 Check Number 57714 VEE.LIN 57714 17-Nov-98 VEE. LIN 77.76 MILEAGE REIM Totals Check Number 57714 VEE. LIN 77.76 27.50 27.50 STORM WINDOWS 195.746.73 . <41 I 18 Nov 1998 Wed 11:03 AM Check Number Check Register City of Orono Date Name Transaction Amount Page 1 Comments Check Number 57642 57642 CITY COUNTY CREDIT UNION 18-NOV-98 CITY COUNTY CREDIT UNION Totals Check Number 57642 CITY COUNTY CREDIT UNION 7,409.00 7,409.00 SAVINGS W/H k TRANSFERRED Check Number 57643 FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF LAKES 57643 57643 57643 ?8-Nov-98 18-NOV-98 18-NOV-9B Totals Check Number FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF LAKES FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF LAKES FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF LAKES 57643 FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF LAKES 3,541.57 3,541.57 8,539.21 15,622.35 FICA & MEDICARE W/H FICA,MEDCR CITY SHARE FEDERAL WITHHOLDING Check Nuinber 57644 57644 GREAT WEST LIFE ASSURANCE CO. 18-Nov-98 Totals Check Number GREAT WEST LIFE ASSURANCE CO 57644 GREAT WEST LIFE ASSURANCE CO, 980.68 980.68 DEFERRED COMP W/H Check Number 57645 57645 ICMA RETIREJ^NT TRUST - 457 18-NOV-98 Totals Check Number ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST - 457 57645 ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST - 457 225.00 225.00 DEFERRED COMP W/H Check Number 57646 LAW ENF0RCMEN7 LABOR SERVICE 57646 18-NOV-98 Totals Check Number LAW ENFORCMENT LABOR SERVICE 57646 LAW ENFORCMENT LABOR SERVICE 452.16 452.16 UNION DUES WH Check Number 57647 57647 MINNESOTA CHILD SUPPORT PMT CT 18-NOV-98 Totals Check Number MINNESOTA CHILD SUPPORT PMT CT 57647 MINNESOTA CHILD SUPPORT PMT CT 179.51 179.51 SKREEN #0010755723 Check Number 57648 57648 MINNESOTA CHILD SUPPORT PMT 18-NOV-98 Totals Check Number MINNESOTA CHILD SUPPORT PMT 57648 MINNESOTA CHILD SUPPORT PMT 0.00 0.00 THOMTON #C0266780 Check Number 57649 57649 MN DEPT OF REVENUE 18-NOV-98 Totals Check Number MN DEPT OF REVENUE 57649 MN DEPT OF REVENUE 3,612.27 3,612.27 STATE TAX W/H Check Number 57650 57650 MN MUTUAL LIFE 18-NOV-98 MN MUTUAL LIFE 745.30 DEFERRED COMP W/H Totals Check Number 57650 MN MUTUAL LIFE 745.30 le t!ov 199d Wed 11:03 AM Check Number Check Register City of Orono Date Name Transaction Amount Page 2 Comments Check Number 57651 57651 MN STATE RETIREMENT-DL" COMP 18-Nov-98 MN STATE RETIREMENT-DEF COMP Totals Check Number 57651 MN STATE RETIREMENT-DEF COMP Check Number 57652 57652 PEBSCO/OBRA 18-NOV-98 Totals Check Number PEBSCO/OBRA 57652 PEBSCO/OBRA Check Number 57653 57653 PEBSCO/US CONF OF MAYORS 18-Nov-98 Totals Check Number PEBSCO/US CONF OF MAYORS 57653 PEBSCO/US CONF OF MAYORS Check Number 57654 57654 57654 PERA 18-NOV-98 10-NOV-98 Totals Check Number PERA PERA 57654 PERA Check Number 57655 57655 UNITED WAY 18-Nov-98 Totals Check Number UNITED WAY 57655 UNITED WAY Grand Total 227.00 227.00 21.11 21.11 2.424.35 2.424.35 4.672.52 6.179.01 10.851.53 31.00 31.00 42.781.26 DEFERRED COMP W/H OBRA DEFERRED COMP W/H USCM DEFERRED COMP W/H PERA EMPLOYEE W/H PERA CITY SHARE CHARITY DONATIONS W/H 18 Nov 1998 Wed 9:48 AM Check Register City of Orono Check iNumber Emplc Name Check Number 045202 045202 JOHNSON, MARY ANN Totals Check Number 045202 Check Number 045203 045203 GEMAR, JAMIE L. Totals Check Number 045203 Check Number 045204 045204 HASEMAN, CAROLE A. Totals Check Number 045204 Check Number 045205 045205 MOORSE, RONALD J Totals Check Number 045205 Check Number 045206 045206 VEE, LINDA S. Totals Check Number 045206 Check Number 045207 045207 KUEHN, THOMAS M. Totals Check Number 045207 Check Number 045208 045208 OLSON, RONALD J. Totals Check Number 045208 Check Number 045209 045209 PETTIT. SANDRA K. Totals Check Number 045209 Check Number 045210 045210 ANDERSON, BRUCE L. Totals Check Number 045210 Check Date 18-NOV-9B 18-NOV-98 18-Nov-98 18-NOV-98 18-NOV-98 18-NOV-9B 18-NOV-98 lB-Nov-98 18-NOV-98 Page 1 Check Amount 485.00 485.00 215.53 215.53 987.19 987.19 1,468.50 1,468.50 1,003.71 1,003.71 950.79 950.79 132.68 132.68 758.29 758.29 1,231.82 1,231.82 i J i \1 18 Nov 1998 Wed 9:48 AM Check Register City of Orono Check Number Employee Name Check Number 045211 045211 BOBZIEN* SUE A. Totals Check Number 045211 Check Number 045212 045212 BORIS, SCOTT W. Totals Check Number 045212 Check Number 045213 045213 CARLSON, MICHAEL B. Totals Check Number 045213 Check Number 045214 045214 CHESWICR, GARY B. Totals Check Number 045214 Check Number 045215 045215 CORNICK, JAMES L. Totals Check Number 045215 Check Number 045216 045216 DEMBOUSKI, JAY C. Totals Check Number 045216 Check Number 045217 045217 ERICKSON, KURT R Totals Check Number 045217 Check Number 045218 045218 FARNIOK, CORREY L. Totals Check Number 045218 Check Number 045219 045219 FISCHENICH, DAN T. Totals Check Number 045219 Check Number 045220 Check Date 18-Nov-98 18-NOV-98 18-NOV-98 18-NOV-98 18-NOV-98 18-Nov-98 18-Nov-98 18-NOV-98 18-NOV-98 Page 2 Check Amounc 636.38 636.38 1,113.69 1,113.69 430.16 430.16 1,576.52 1,576.52 1,545.30 1,545.30 1,161.55 1,161.55 1,250.82 1,250.82 1,137.87 1,137.87 1,336.04 1,336.04 18 Nov 1998 Wed 9:48 AM Check Number Employee Na^.e Check Register City of Orono Check Date Page 3 Check Amount Check Number 04522C 045220 FISCHER, CHRISTOPHER K. Totals Check Number 045220 Check Number 045221 045221 HANSING, CAROL J. Totals Check Number 045221 Check Number 045222 045222 JOHNSON, BRADLEY ?. Totals Check Number 045222 Check Number 045223 045223 KNOLLENBERG, KRISTIN L. Totals Check Number 045223 Check Number 045224 045224 MCNALLY, STEVEN A. Totals Check Number 045224 Check Number 045225 045225 MCNICHOLS, DAVID L. Totals Check Number 045225 Check Number 045226 045226 MOROHCZYNSKI, JAMES Totals Check Number 045226 Check Number 045227 045227 PERSELL, WILLIAM R. Totals Check Number 045227 Check Number 045228 045228 SCHOENHOFF, JOHN B. Totals Check Number 045228 18-NOV-98 18-NOV-98 18-NOV-98 18-NOV-98 18-NOV-98 18-NOV-98 18-NOV-98 18-NOV-98 18-NOV-98 1,175.00 1,175.00 309.09 309.09 1,183.53 1,183.53 679.56 679.56 995.09 995.09 1,038.97 1,038.97 1,50 .45 1,506.45 391.07 391.07 1,166.88 1,166.88 Check Number 045229 18 Nov 1998 Wed 9.48 AM Check Register City of Orono Check Number Employee Name Check Number 045229 045229 TOMCHECK, LAWRENCE F. Totals Check Number 045229 Check Number 045230 045230 TOMC2YK, MARK W, Totals Check Number 045230 Check Number 045231 045231 HAGEN, MATTHEW D. Totals Check Number 045231 Check Number 045232 045232 JOHNSON, JEFFREY D. Totals Check Number 045232 Check Number 045233 045233 WITTKE, ANTHONY A. Totals Check Number 045233 Check Number 045234 045234 GAFFRON, MICHAEL P. Totals Check Number 045234 Check Number 045235 045235 GAPPA, GREGORY A. Totals Check Number 045235 Check Number 045236 045236 OMAN, LYLE E. Totals Check Number 045236 Check Number 045237 045237 VAN ZOMEREN, ELIZABETH Totals Check Number 045237 Check Number 045238 Check Date lB-Nov-98 18-NOV-98 18-NOV-98 18-NOV-98 18-NOV-98 18-NOV-98 18-NOV-98 18-NOV-98 18-NOV-98 Page 4 Check Amount 641.16 641.16 1,233.52 1,233.52 155.27 155.27 602.31 602.31 82.93 82.93 1,116.66 1,116.86 1,422.60 1,422.60 232.75 232.75 1,067.68 1,067.68 1 I? ''4 j» 18 Nov 1998 Wed 9:48 AM Check Register City of Orono Check Number Employee Name Check Number 045238 C45238 VANG, BRUCE L. Totals Check Number 045238 :heck Number 045239 045239 WECKMAN, STEPHEN J. Totals Check Number 045239 Check Number 045240 045240 WEINBERGER, PAUL E. Totals Check Numi-r 045240 Check Number 045241 045241 BRINKHAUS, JOHN P. Totals Check Number 045241 Check Number 045242 :45242 DEBAERE, DONALD L. Totals Check Number 045242 Check Number 045243 345243 GREGORY, JAMES D. Totals Check Number 045243 Check Number 045244 345244 HANSEN, STEVEN C. Totals Check Number 045244 Check Number 045245 345245 OBERAIGNER, SCOTT G. Totals Check Nun^er 045245 Check Number 045246 345246 OBRIEN, RANDY L. Totals Check Number 045246 Check Number 045247 Check Date 18-NOV-98 10-NOV-98 18-NOV-98 18-NOV-90 18-NOV-98 18-NOV-98 18-NOV-98 18-NOV-98 18-NOV-98 Page 5 Check Amount 976.33 976.33 29.68 29.68 759.06 759.06 1,054.36 1,054.36 809.65 809.65 771.33 771.33 712.81 712.81 603.67 603.67 473.32 473.32 18 Nov 1998 Wed 9:48 AM Check Register City of Orono Check Number Employee Name Check Number 045247 045247 PALMER, GREGORY A Totals Check Number 045247 Check Number 045248 045248 RATHBUN, BARRY J. Totals Check Number 045248 Check Number 045249 045249 SKREEN, DALE S. Totals Check Number 045249 Check Number 045250 045250 STEFFENHAGEN, RONALD E Totals Check Number 045250 Grand Total Check Date 18-NOV-90 18-NOV-98 18-NOV-98 18-NOV-98 Page 6 Check Amount 697.29 697.29 895.70 895.70 633.52 633.52 1,054.36 1,054.36 41,893.64 i E^ORMATION ITEMS COUNCIL MEETING COUNCIL MEETINQ NOV 2 5 1998 CTTYOFORONO OF n (MUiici^d KD(ttTvJ~" aVo Oh O' ftrV V (70 c C R I M Right t( A nioto with a c known I motorist engage i the motorist did not produce a driver’s license, the officer asked her to sit in the squad car. The officer frisked the motorist and discovered crack cocaine. The Minnesota Supreme Court held that the frisk was unlawful. During routine traffic stops for minor traffic violations, police officers may not frisk motorists for weapons unless some additiciUl suspicious behavior or threatening circumstances suppon a reasonable basis that a motorist may be armed and dangerous. Although officers may frisk persons before placing them in squad cars, the inability of a minor traffic violator to produce a driver’s licerse is not a reasonable basis to rconire rhe driw.r to sit in tfn !;ack. 4 of a squad Car. SxM r, I ___ N.W.ld___(Minn. Aug. 6, 1998). IMMUNITY Paraiiiedic immune for emergency vehicle driving A city* paramedic was driving to the scene of a medical emergency when his vehicle struck a pedestrian in a marked crosswalk. The pedestrian sued the city, arguing the dnver negligently operated the emergency vehicle. The Minnesota Supreme Court detennined the driver’s conduct was discretionary’ conduct protected by official inununity’. The court disagreed \\*ith the pedestrian’s argument that immunity* cannot apply where a driver violates i traffic statute requiring all vehicles, including emergency vehicles, to yield to pedes­ trians in a crosswalk. The court stated that absent malice, drivers of vehicles responding to emergencies should not be subject to second-guessing m the r vehicles. Kari u. City . N.W.2d___(Minn. OCK M l N A T I O N gainst women with ed A teacher applied for a school district position that also involved coaching. The district did not hire her because she had young children whose needs, the principal claimed, were incompat­ ible with coaching after school. The Minnesota Court of Appeals allowed the claim to move forsvard, finding that a hiring practice that treats women with young child/en different than men states a claim unce»* the Minnesota Human Rights Act (MHRA), eve** though the MHRA does not specifi­ cally prohibit familial status discrimina­ tion. The teacher’s allegations permit an inference that the school district, relying on characterizations of the domestic role of women, took adverse employment action against the teacher thaC it would not have taken had the teacher been a man. I^dLir v. Indepen­ dent Sell. Dist. i\o. 701 ____N.W.2d ___(Minn. App. Aug. 11, 1998). * WHISTLEBLOWERS Reporting of state law violations protected City firefighters sued the fonner fire chief and the city, alleging retaliation after they reported misconduct. Among several reported violations, the fire­ fighters alleged falsification of roll call sheets. Although there were fact questions as to what occurred, the Minnesota Supreme Coun allowed the case to move forward. The court rejected the city’s argument that falsify ing roll call sheets was an internal impropriety that did not implicate any statute. There are statutes regulating filse claims by public employees. Also, public policy is implicated where m ri (fO'' 2 3 1938 1 L the reported violation involves public funds. The court concluded the fire­ fighters implicated state law v*iolations and public policy, and their reports fall within the protection of the whistle­ blower Act if the reports were made in good faith. Hcd^^lin u. City oflWImar, _ N.W.2d _‘(Minn. Aug. 13, 1998). ZONING 4K60-day rule clarified A feedlot operator sought a conditional use permit (CUP) to e.xpand operation. The rowTi ’ihip was required to render a decision or seek a continuance within 60 days. Within the 60 days, the to\\*n- ship sent a letter stating it “wished to exercise its option to take an additional 60 cLiys to make a decision.” The township later denied the CUP. The feedlot operator sought to compel issuance of the CUP, arguing the township failed to comply with the 60-day rule provision and stated that the notification to extend the time limits “must state the reasons for the extension.” Minn. Stat. § 15.99, subd. 3(f). The Minnesota Court of Appeals upheld the township ’s e.xtension, noting the statute does not mention what type of reason for extension must be supplied to die applicant. The court stated that to take more time to make a decision is a reason; thus, the township complied with subdivision 3(f). The court found the township substantially complied with subdivision 3(f). Tech­ nical defects in compliance with a statute will not invalidate government action if there is no bad faith, the rights of a party’ are not prejudiced, and the action does not undermine the purpose of the statute. Manco of Fdinnont, Inc, v. Town Bd, of Rock Dell Township,__ N.W.2d__(Minn. App. Aug. 25, 1998). IVritten by Chris Smith, staff attorney until the Leaxue of ,Minnesota Cities. October J998 Minnesota (! i t i e s ^1 /> *.• . •• '* 1 ■*. • • * . • Board of H ennepin County Commissioner ^' A-2400 Government C enter Minneapolis . Minnesota 55457-0240 November 13, 1998 A Co?i of lUi^' Lt/,.iT,;w IS /il/AILIpLE A1 C\\^The Honorable Gabriel Jabbour Mayor, City of Orono P. 6. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 l-l^lL fotL yc/ttk. RfVlEu/ NOV 2 3 1938 Dear Mayor Jabbour:IS /61 V^Ch\i\3 C1TYO;"GROMO Enclosed for your consideration is the proposed Hennepin County Solid Waste Management Master Plan. This document is the master plan for managing Hennepin County's solid waste through the year 2017. The enclosed plan is the culmination of efforts by the Solid Waste Management Advisory Committee, comprised of citizen representatives, municipal officials, and representatives from waste management firms, and the Hennepin County Department of Environmental Ser\'ices. 1 served as chair of the committee. Last year, the Minnesota Office of Environmental Assistance and the seven metropolitan counties, joined through a Joint powers agreement and known as the Solid Waste Management Coordinating Board, together prepared the Metropolitan Solid W'aste Management Policy Plan. This plan guides the development of county solid waste master plans, ordinances, and proposals for waste reduction, recycling and waste processing through the year 2017. The Hennepin County plan provides an oveiriew ot the integrated approach that has been taken by the county to address the growth in mixed municipal solid waste, household hazardous wastes, and other problem materials. The plan also contains strategies the county will use to reduce future growth in waste, to decrease toxicity levels in the waste stream, and to educate citizens and businesses on alte.native methods and products that are compatible with our environment. Hennepin County's plan is part of a Regional/County Solid Waste Master Plan. The Regional/County Solid W’aste Master Plan has not yet been completed. A public hearing to obtain input on the proposed Hennepin County plan has been scheduled for Tuesday, December 8, 1998. at 2:00 p.m. before the Environment and General Government Committee of the Hennepin County Board. If you or someone from your city would like to testify at the public hearing, please phone Maria Franz, committee clerk, at 348-4019. or send written comments to her attention at A2400 Government Center, Minneapolis. Minnesota. 55487. Ii is anticipated that the Hennepin County Board will take action on the Hennepin County plan on Tuesday, December 15. November 13,1998 Page 2 Some time after January 1, 1999, the Hennepin County Board will take action on the Regional/County Solid Waste Master Plan. At that time, the Hennepin County plan will be reformatted to incorporate elements of the regional plan. If you should have any questions regarding the plan or approval process, please feel free to contact Darrell Washington with the Department of Environmental Services at 348-4787. I want to thank you for your attention to this matter. Sincerely, Commissioner Enclosure C: Hennepin County Board of Commissioners City Managers proposed - 1998 Hennepin Countv Master Plan 1 I. I I i i i I Marilynn J. Corcoran, Program Administrator Phil R. Forseth, Mayor Marvin D. Johnson, Mayor Steve Minn, Council Member B"* Ward Fred E. Hanus A cknowledgement outcomes and strategies that will provide the foundation for future program developnTent. Solid Waste Management A dvisory Committee Co»„„/n.vO,o,>rno,Mv.,ingi p,„„, Commissioner \fimicipal Representatives City of Brooklyn Park, Brooklyn Center, Crystal and New Hope City of Da>ton City of Independence City of Minneapolis City of Minnetonka Citizen Representatives Richard Enrooth Dean A. Elstad John F. Bergford Jr. Citizen Representative from the Cit\'of Rmnkh n Pm-L- Harold J. Jebens Citizen Representative from the Cit\' nfMhwpnpnli^ Michael L. Krause Qjizen Representative from the City ofhfnph r.mva Paul E. Pagel PfivoteHoste Klonasenient Firm Representativea Robert W. Elliott, Quality Waste Control, Inc. Andy Schweizer, Aagard Environmental Services Douglas R. Kruell, Minneapolis Refuse, Inc. Paul K. Rosland, Browning Ferris Industries Mliwesola Office.of £m-irom,eMal Assi.lanr, K^r'-'^sentaln-e David Benke, Supervisor - Local Government Section Hennepin County Department of Environmental Services 417 North Fifth Street, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401-1397 Master Plan Coordinator; Darrell Washington, Senior Planner John R. Evans Ismail A. Ismail Solid \\ astc Management Ad\ isoiy' Committee Page ii Proposed - 1998 Hennepin County Master Plan I. Executive Summary Hennepin County's Solid Waste Management Master Plan was developed by the Department of Environmental Services in cooperation with the Hennepin County Solid Waste Management Advisory Committee and approved by the Hennepin County Board of Commissioners. This plan demonstrates the county's commitment to conserve natural resources and to protect the environmental health and safety of current and future Hennepin County residents. The county' is a national leader in environmental management. The Solid Waste Management Master Plan was developed with the goal of maintaining and strengthening the county’s leadership position. In the 1970s, concerns for water quality, remaining capacity of local landfills, and future costs to clean up landfills led to the adoption of the state’s Waste Management Act. The Act directs the Minnesota Office of Environmental Assistance (OEA) to develop a long-range solid waste management plan for the metropolitan area. Additionally, the Act gave counties the primary responsibility of implementing programs in their jurisdiction to execute the policies and objectives in the regional plan. The Metropolitan Solid Waste Management Policy Plan 1997-2017 sets forth a vision of sustainability for the metropolitan region. The regional policy plan also establishes five specific goals of the metropolitan area. The goals for the region are: 1. Manage waste generated in the Metropolitan Area In a manner that w’ill protect the environment, public health and conserve resources. 2. Manage the region ’s waste in an integrated waste management system, in accordance with the hierarchy as stipulated in Minnesota Statutes 115A.02 to minimize landfilling. 3. Manage the region ’s waste in a cost-effective manner and strive to minimize the potential liability of the citizens, businesses and taxpayers in the region. 4. Encourage generators to take responsibility for the environmentally sound management of their waste. 5. Allocate solid waste costs equitably among those who use or benefit from the system. The Hennepin County Board of Commissioners stated that its mission is "'to enhance the lives and communities of its citizens in ways that are compassionate, respectful, ethical, innovative and cost- effective." To that end. Hennepin County developed an environmental vision statement that states: "Members of the Hennepin County Board envision a community with a clean and healthy environment, a county that has ample open spaces, parks and recreational areas available and high quality natural features. " I I I Page 1 Exet utivc Summan J 1 I I I I 1 Proposed - 1998 Hennepin County Master Plan j I I 1 I 1 1 The Hennepin County Department of Environmental Services (DES) is charged with protecting and conserving the county’s natural environment. The department fulfills the Board’s vision by developing: Sustainable programs encompassing economic development and environmental protection: Partnerships between business, government and the public: and Delivery of services through customer-oriented programs. m m Hennepin County is committed to implementing its environmental mission of sustaining and enhancing its citizen’s natural resources for enjoyment by future citizens by adhering to the state’s waste management practices hierarchy as delineated in Minnesota Statute 1 15A.02: 1. 3. 4. 5. 6. Waste and toxicity reduction; Reuse; Waste recycling; Composting of yard waste and food waste; Resource recovery through mixed municipal solid waste composting or incineration; and Land disposal. Hennepin County has and will continue to develop programs with the aid of public and private partners. Hennepin County is committed to maintaining an integrated solid waste management system that seeks: 1. To reduce the amount of wastes needing to be managed; 2. To detoxify the waste stream and initiate programs that properly manage problem materials and household hazardous wastes; 3. To reuse and recycle solid wastes from businesses, homeowners and multi-family buildings; and 4. To effectively utilize resource recovery facilities for materials not recycled or reused. The county believes its most important projects are those that educate homeowners, renters, and businesses on how to reduce and detoxify the amount of waste they generate. The county is committed, as evidenced by its leadership and financial support, to work with businesses, residents, and others to identify the types of hazardous waste and problem materials they generate and educate them about using less toxic materials, reuse or recycling management options. In addition to educating businesses and residents on reducing their waste stream, Hennepin County provides two permanent Citizen Drop Off Centers and annual neighborhood collection events to help residents properly manage recyclables and problem materials. Problem materials that residents can drop off include latex and oil-based paints, used oil, flammable liquids, household and garden chemicals, appliances, consumer electronics, household and automotive batteries, tires, and mercuiy-filled products. 1 Executive Summaiy Page 2 Proposed - 1998 Hennepin County Master Plan Figure 1.1 Volume or HHVUIProbtem Materials Received and Total Participants 350 000 ^ ^ 3000CO t I 250,000 t 200,000 ai =■ 2 -D 150 000 III 100,000 50 000 t •50,000 60.000 n »° Q. o Z 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 199S 1996 1997 t=3HHWColected -‘“Partidpants (Not Incluuve ol all Malenals Recer/eO) From 1986 through 1997, over 263.000 vehicles, or 315,000 households, (first time and repeat visits) have dropped off 1.6 million gallons of liquid problem materials; 3,300 tons of household batteries, mercury items, electronics and tires; 33.000 automobile batteries, 250.000 fluorescent and HID lamps; and 42,500 major appliances. Also, from 1992 through 1997, the Free Product Center served over 11,000 customers that have picked up over 104.000 items. Those free items were made available to residents after they were originally brought to the facilities for disposal. Between 1991 and 1997, Hennepin Couulj ’s residents and businesses recycled over 4.75 million tons of materials. Appro.ximately 60% of those tons have come from the commercial and industrial sectors. A large number of businesses located in Hennepin County are leaders in utilizing waste reduction practices and recycling programs. Hennepin County is committed to supporting those businesses and encouraging others to follow their lead. In addition, the Hennepin County Board of Commissioners has shown leadership by approving a municipal recycling policy that encourages residents to set out a wide array of materials for recycling to reduce the amounts of waste needing to be processed or disposed of in landfills. Another component of Hennepin County’s integrated waste management system is its r^source recovery operation. Hennepin County has agreements with two private firms to process 600,000 tons of MSW each year. From 1989 through 1997, appro.ximately 4.8 million tons of MSW generated in Hennepin County' was converted from trash into electricity. The Hennepin Energy Resource Co. (HERO is a mass-bum facility that is designed to bum approximately 1,212 tons of MSW per day. Currently, HERC is legally permitted to bum an average of 1,000 tons per day which it has done from 1990 through 1997. Hennepin County is also contracted to deliver beUveen 1,200 to 4,800 tons of MSW per week to the Elk River Resource Recovery Facility (ERRRF). From 1990 through 1997, Hennepin County delivered between 4,000 - 4,800 tons of MSW per week to ERRRF. This waste was converted at ERRRF to refuse-derived fuel (RDF). The RDF is burned at an electrical power plant owned and operated by United Power Association. The county uses nvo solid waste transfer stations to provide consolidation and transfer of waste to the resource recovery facilities. P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P i Page 3 Executive Summary I 1 Proposed - 1998 Hennepin County Master Plan Hennepin County finances its solid waste programs as an “enterprise fund’*. Money to operate these programs is segregated from other county revenues and expenditures. The primary sources of revenue for the county ’s solid waste programs are from: Solid waste tipping fees paid by waste haulers; Solid waste management fees paid by waste generators to their waste hauler, who remits it to the county; Solid waste management fees paid by waste generators based on property' tax assessments; and Grants received from the state of Minnesota and other agencies for special purposes. The Metropolitan Solid Waste Management Master Plan sets forth the policies and implementation strategies required to meet state waste management goals through the year 2017. Sustainability, environmental protection and cost effectiveness remain important goals for achievement. To adhere to the regional policies and meet the objectives as stated in the regional plan, the Hennepin County- Solid Waste Management Master Plan identifies strategies to meet the following outcomes: 1 Product Stewardship • Hennepin County will implementing product stewardship throughout its own business practices • Hennepin County will be recognized as a leader in promoting and advocating to others all aspects of product stewardship. Waste Reduction • Waste growth generated per person in Hennepin County- households will stabilize and decline. • Waste growth generated by the commercial and industrial sectors will stabilize and decline. • Hen.'.epin County and local govemm ints w ill act as leaders in efforts to reduce their own wastes. Toxicity- Reduction • The amount of hazardous chemicals in solid waste including both consumer products and materials used by business and industry will be reduced. I 1 Recycling • Current per household levels of recyclables collected will be maintained while increasing participation rates, especially from residents living in multi-family housing. • To assure a total county-wide recycling rate of 50 percent, Hennepin County will promote and encourage increased Commercial and Industrial recycling initiatives. • Hennepin County- will increase its procurement of environmentally responsible products that contribute to sustainability. 1 Executive Summarv Page 4 Proposed - 1998 Hennepin County Master Plan Resource Recovery • The county will maximize the amount of MSW burned to generate electricity at its contracted resource recovery- facilities. • The county will optimize the available capacity at its facilities by maximizing the amount of reuse and recycling. • The county will continue to monitor and use new pollution control technologies that minimize the environmental impact of emissions at its contracted resource recovery facilities. • Public entities shall manage their waste (that is not reduced, reused, or recy cled) consistent with this Master Plan as required by Minnesota Statute 115A.46 Subd. 5. • The county will investigate economically feasible and environmentally-safe alternatives for processing combustion by-products (residue and ash). Landfilling • The county will contract for landfill services with landfills that meet or exceed State of Minnesota standards. • Generators will understand the implications of their own waste disposal practices. Non-MSW Management • The county will manage non-hazardous industrial waste in accordance with the county’s Industrial Waste Plan and Solid Waste Ordinance Number Two. • The county will manage construction and demolition materials in a manner that promotes reuse, recycling, and processing instead of landfilling. I. Introduction A. Background - State ’s Role The Minnesota Office of Environmental Assistance (OEA) is required by Minnesota statutes to prepare and adopt the Metropolitan Solid Waste Management Policy Plan. This regional policy- plan guides the development of county- solid waste master plans, ordinances, and proposals for waste reduction, recycling and waste processing throughout the seven-county metropolitan area. The OEA and the Solid Waste Management Coordinating Board (SWMCB) jointly- prepared the 1997 regional plan. The SWMCB is a Joint powers board of six metropolitan counties that includes Anoka, Carver, Dakota, Hennepin, Ramsey and Washington Counties. B. Hennepin County’s Responsibility After the adoption of the OEA’s regional plan, Hennepin County is required by law to prepare and submit for approval by the OEA, a revised county solid waste plan that implements the goals and policies in the regional solid waste plan. This document is the master plan for managing Hennepin County’s solid \waste through the year 2017. This Hennepin County Solid Waste Management Master Plan replaces the previous county master plan that was adopted on November 24, 1992. P P Page 5 Executive Summary P P P P P P P i P P I f I I I Proposed - 1998 Hennepin Count>- Master Plan 1 I 1 I 1 4 1 1 C. Municipal Responsibility In order to achieve the County ’s waste abatement objectives as stipulated in this plan, municipalities are required by Hennepin County Ordinance 13 to adopt local laws relating to the separation of recyclables from waste. To help cities reach their waste abatement objectives, Hennepin County adopted the Residential Recycling Funding Policy that, in part, facilitates the transfer of appro.\imately $3 million in SCORE funds, which the countv- receives from the state, to municipalities for support of their curbside recycling programs. This funding policy requires curbside collection of several material t>T3es to assure municipalities achieve a minimum of 18/o recycling of residential waste. In addition, Hennepin County required municipalities to adopt an ordinance requiring recycling at multi-housi.ig residences. D. Private Sector Responsibility Individuals and businesses are expected to follow the state, county and municipal laws and regulations and participate in waste management programs. Generally, the public sector is relying on the private waste management industry- to provide waste management services including waste and recycling collection, disposal of ash and residues, and handling of problem materials and hazardous wastes. E. Preparing the County Plan Hennepin County's Master Plan was developed in cooperation with the Solid Waste Management Advisorv' Committee (see Appendix One for information on the Solid Waste Advisory- Committee and the master plan development process). This committee, along with input from citizens, private organizations, and public and nonprofit groups, has developed environmental outcomes, or results, that are to be achieved. To meet these outcomes, the group developed strategies that provide a framework for the county'’s waste management activities. These outcomes and strategies address issues such as product stewardship, waste and toxicity- reduction, recycling and processing waste to energy. F. Ho>v the County Master Plan Will Be Used Hennepin County ’s Master Plan will be used as follows: The county master plan: 1) informs citizens and businesses about their role in waste and toxicity prevention, and recycling; 2) educates citizens and businesses about solid waste issues; 3) identifies how the countv has managed solid waste over the past decade; and 4) serves as a guide to citizens and businesses about the strategies the county- will undertake to manage solid wastes in the ftiture. Introduction Page 6 Proposed - 1998 Hennepin County Master Plan Public Entities The county's master plan was developed with input from local government units. The county also sought direction in developing strategies to manage solid waste from affected public organizations. It is the county’s belief that because of these organizations valued input into the direction the county will proceed in regards to solid wa.ste management, that public organizations and entities will advocate and promote the strategies to be taken by the county . G. The Plan ’s Contents The Hennepin County Master Plan provides an overview of the integrated approach that has been taken by the county to address the growth in mi.xed-municipal solid waste, household hazardous wastes (HHW), and problem materials. This plan also contains strategies the county will use to reduce future MSW growth, decrease toxicity levels in the waste stream, and inform citizens and businesses on alternative methods and products that are compatible w ith our environment. The county and the Solid Waste Management Advisory Committee believe continued emphasis on the county’s integrated approach to managing solid waste is paramount to achieve its envisioned outcomes. The county's integrated solid waste management programs epitomize the state's goals “to protect the state ’s land, air, water, and other natural resources and the public health by improving waste management in the state.” Hennepin County’s Master Plan is organized into the following sections: Section 111: Hennepin County's Vision for the Environment summarizes the goal of the Hennepin County Board of Commissioners to enhance the lives and communities of its citizens with respect to the environment. This section also explains that the Board has charged the Department of Environmental Services w ith implementing that vision. • Section IV: Existing Solid Waste System is a description of Hennepin County’s solid waste management system in place in 1998. Section V: Outcomes and Implementation Strategies - 1998-2017 identifies what results Hennepin County expects to achieve in the next twenty years (outcomes) and how the county will achieve those results (strategies). The outcomes are in seven topical areas: Product Stewardship. Waste Reduction; Toxicity Reduction: Recycling: Resource Recovery; Landfilling: and Non-MSW Waste Management. Section VI: Regional Outcomes and Implementation Strategies - 1998-2017 identifies what results the Metropolitan Region expects to achieve in the next twenty years (outcomes) and how' each of the six counties (Anoka, Carver, Dakota, Hennepin. Ramsey and Washington) working together and individually will achieve those results (strategies). The outcomes are in seven topical areas: Waste Reduction: Toxicity Reduction: Recycling; Resource Recovery : Landfilling: and Non-MSW Waste Management. (This section is being drafted by the SWMCB and will be included in Hennepin County s Solid Waste Management Master Plan when the SWMCB and each individual member county have approved it. i Pace 7 Introduction ORONQ » 24 r healthy YOUTH V PROGRAMSI YMCA Camp Biduhapi, Box -7. Loretto MN 55357 - Phone: (612) 479-1146 FAX: (612) 479-1333 C.;i. Hov i!>98 November 17, 1998 <-rj > i« t99r> I.. . i ^• -.. „ * %0 Dear Mayors and City Council members, The Orono district’s Healthy Communities*Healthy Youth initiative would like to invite each of you to a breakfast Wednesday, DecemberjBC*} at 8 a.m. at St. George’s Church Community Room in Long Lake, 133 Brown Road. We will invite city officials, school board members, legislative representatives and county commissioners. Your participation and discussion will help us identify common issues and concerns. Also, attending will help you convince you of your desire to step forth as your city ’s contact for the HC*HY board as an information contact in the event of our need for quick action or input. Further information and an agenda will be sent to you prior to December^? Please plan to attend. On behalf of HC*HY,I Teri Cain Youth & Family Development Coordinator City of Wayzata 600 Rice Street East Wavzata. MN 55391-1799 .-O October 29,1998 ^ Ir. Ronald Moorse Citv Administrator City of Orono PO Box 66 Orono, MN 55343 Dear Mr. Moorse: Mavor: Bjrr\ Pciii . i\ ^ Council .Members: . • 1 \ * • ' •Robert Ambrose ^0 Rob\nCook Andrew Humphre> mm Christine .A Morr.son City .Manager: Allan Orscn Nov 2 3 me CITVcr-CHONO As you may be aware, at the Mayor ’s Breakfast held at the Lafayette Club on September 30,1998, local officials requested that a meeting be scheduled with representatives of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District to discuss a possible split of the District, the status of Rule B, and other concerns which were expressed by city officials, public agencies, and developers at a meeting hosted by the MinnehCiha Creek Watershed District in June 1997. On October 28, 1998, Mayor Petit of Wayzata, Mayor Karen Anderson of Minnet*. , and Mayor Steve Finch of Excelsior held a meeting with Manager Pam Blixt, Manager Malcolm Reed, and Acting Director Pete Cangialosi of the Mirmehaha Creek Watershed District to discuss the aforementioned issues. The representatives of the MCWD. indicated they were not receptive to a possible split of the District and stated they ha\ e been making changes to improve the overall operations of the organization. Mayor Petit directed Project Coordinator Terr>' Schwalbe of Wayzata to update member cities regarding the outcome of the meeting. He also requested that member cities monitor and evaluate the progress made to the District operations over the next six-months and indicated that a follow-up letter requesting an evaluation of the MCWT) will be forwarded by Apr il 30, 1999. Additionally, the MCWD will forward a quarterly budget report (budget vs. actual expenditures) to all member cities. The representatives of the MCWT) stated it is anticipated revised Rule B will be approved on November 12, 1998 and agreed to forward a copy of revised Rule B to all members of the Task Force for review prior to adoption. Phone: oi:-4 ‘’3-0234 Fav 6i:-404..<3l8 c-nuil: cit> '•< wayzata orj:home pa^rc: www.wayzata org October 29,1998 Ronald Moorse Page 2 If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at your convenience, Sincerely, Terry Schwaloe Project Coordinator REPORT NBR. BPRMTISS-1 DATE OF RUI^ 11/02/98 PERMIT TYPE Building SGL FAMILY-NEW SF-ADD/REMODEL SF-ACC STRUCTURE DEMO/PRINCIPAL COMMERCIAL-NEW COM-ADD/REMODEL COM-ACC STRUCTUR DEMO INST-ADD/REMODEL INST-ACC STRUCT DEMO-ACCESSORY ACC/GARAGES Sub-total Mechanical HEATING SYSTEMS AIR CONDITIONING WOOD STOVE/FLUE FIREPLACE VENTILATION FUEL STORAGE GAS LINE INSPECT QTY 31 324 38 14 1 C 5 1 4 0 6 23 453* 90 21 2 69 8 0 8 SEPTIC CONNECTIN 1 SEWER DISCONNECT 1 SEWER REPAIR 2 SEWER U WATER 1 UNDEFINED 1 Sub-total 126* Sign PERMANENT/POSTED 1 PERMITS ISSUED/FEES COLLECTED YEAR-TO-DATE***** PERMIT ISSUED REPORT *****CITY OF ORONO COUNCIL M££TIN3 PAGE; 1REQUESTER; CAROLE -- CURRENT 01/01/98 - BASE FEE 76,599 80,004 9,008 730 6,365 3,051 1,462 50 977 0 180 4,998 183,426 .00 .50 .00 .00 .25 .25 .25 .00 .00 .00 .00 .75 .00* 12,845.40 1,031.10 70.00 2,910.19 280.00 0.00 280.00 DUCT WORK ONLY 17 611125 REMOVE OIL TANK 11 481.25 UNDEFINED 0 0.00 Sub-total 226*18,509.19 Plumbing FIXTURES 147 12,736.56 SPRINKLER 1 82.75 WATER METER 10 1,670.00 VACUUM BREAKER 10 350.00 UNDEFINED 1 35.00 Sub-total 169*14,874.31 Sewer & Water SEWER CONNECTION 41 1,435.00 WATER CONNECTION 1 35.00 NEW SEPTIC SYSTE 32 3,150.00 DRNPLD (c/OR TANK 2 100.00 SAC ONLY 44 43,250.00 50 35 70 70 0 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 48,195.00* 137.25 RAI4GE- - - 10/31/98 VALUATION 14 7 ,141, ,182, 858, ,492, 367, 110, 124, 339, ,616, 739.44 968.70 190.00 0 000 555 000 0 980 0 0 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 059.20 492.34 1,009,835.44 71,105.52 3,000.00 162,093.00 10.135.00 0.00 7,984.00 24.683.00 19,213.75 0.00 1,308,049.71* 884,450.38 6,620.00 2.725.00 2.600.00 600.00 896,995.38* 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 750 0 0 750 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00* 7,800.00 PLA.N REVIEW 01/01/97 - 10/31/97 ^ BASE FEE VALUATION • PLAll REVIEW 49,716.33 ClTY.q?uR0fiO^2,328.50 10, 086,932.41 • ' 40,513.40 34,205.47 272 66,625.00 5,996,533.17 31,590.63 5,506.67 24 4,548.50 365,641.60 2,922.09 0.00 14 790.00 0.00 0.00 •i,137.41 1 887.25 100,000.00 576.71 1,765.07 9 3,329.00 363,646.00 494.Ml 105.46 0 0.00 0.00 0 . UU 0.00 2 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2 1,579.50 194,310.00 219.21 0.00 1 29.25 775.00 19.01 0.00 10 330.00 0.00 0.00 3,083.62 10 2,094.50 135,807.80 1,361.43 98,520.03*376*142,641.50*17,243,645.98*77,697.40* 0.00 93 9,158.30 710,035.38 0.00 0.00 11 527.88 36,395;00 0.00 0.00 1 35.00 2, 500-.00 0.00 0.00 54 2,009.69 96,098.55 0.00 0.00 7 245.00 11,060.00 ii. 00 0.00 1 125.00 10,000.00 0.00 0.00 21 735.00 10,335.00 0.00 0.00 7 245.00 8,365.00 0.00 0.00 12 1,235.00 80,250.00 0.00 0.00 1 35.00 900.00 0.00 0.00*208*14,350.87*965,938.93*0.00* 0.00 . 150 ro,896.06 691,450.85 0.00 0.00 4 231.69 14,535.00 0.00 0.00 11 2,058.99 0.00 u. uo 0.00 5 175.00 1,200.00 0.00 0.00 4 141.25 6,400.00 0.00 0.00*174*13,502.99*713,585.85*0.00* 0.00 13 455.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3 105.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 35 3,500.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4 250.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 12 9,500.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 o'. 00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4 280.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3 105.00 0.00 0.00 0.00*»14,195.00* t 0.00* % 0.00* 0.00 0 d.oo *(T.OO 0.00 PERMITS ISSUED/FEES COLLECTED YEAR-TO-DATEREPORT NBR. BPRMTISS-1 ***** PERMIT ISSUED REPORT ♦ ♦ 111 PAGE: :DATE OF RUN 11/02/98 CITY OF ORONO REQUESTER:CAROLE /^TtT^ n T?1kT*T»O TV RATJGE- - - - - - -- 01/01/98 - KAWoCi ------- 10/31/98 01/01/97 -10/31/97 PERMIT TYPE QTY BASE FEE VALUATION PLAN RE\lEW QTY BASE FEE VALUATION PLAN REVIEV/ PER./FREE STANDG 1 74.75 2,500.00 J.OO 3 118.25 3,300.00 0.00 TEMPORARY 2 70.00 0.00 0.00 4 120.00 0.00 0.00 Sub-total 4*282.00*10,300.00*0.00*7*238.25*3,300.00*0.00* 1 Fire FIRE SPRINKLER 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 140.00 11,200.00 0.00 ‘ FIRE SPRINKLER 1 3,650.00 292,000.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 Sub-total 1*3,650.00*292,000.00*0.00*1*140.00*11,200.00*0.00* User Defined LAND ALTERATION 32 1,700.00 500.00 0.00 16 825.00 0.00 0.00 TREE REMOVAL 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 3 90.00 0.00 0.00 RETAINING WALLS 1 87.25 4,000.00 0.00 .1 62.25 2,000.00 0.00 DOCKS 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 3 90.00 2,500.00 0.00 LAWN SPRINKLER 31 1,085.00 0.00 0.00 30 1,050.00 0.00 0.00 Sub-total 64*2,872.25*4,500.00*0.00*53*2,117.25*4,500.00*0.00* Grand-total 1,043** 271,808.75** 27 ,129,087.43**98,520.03**893**187,185.86** 18 ,942,170.76** 77 ,697.40' 1 't. PERMITS ISSUED/FEES COLLECTED YEAR-TO-DATEREPORT NBR."DFEERPT2-1 DATE OF RUN 11/02/98 BUILDING BASE FEE 183,426.00 PLAN REVIEW 98,520.03 SURCHARGE 12,104.96 Lie. SEARCH FEE 0.00 SAC 2,000.00 INVESTIGATION 9,256.75 DEPOSIT 0.00 MAIL IN *92 STUBBS BAY SEWER CONN CHARG SEWER CONNECTION WATER CONNECTION STAFF FEES 1.50 14,655.00 1,440.00 ESCROW 0.00 PERMIT TOTAL 321,404.24 REPORT NBR. BFEERPT2-1 DATE OF RUN 11/02/98 REPORT TOTAL BASE FEE ^271,808.75 PLAN REVIEW 98,520.03 SURCHARGE 13,430.99 Lie. SEARCH FEE 0.00 SAC 7,000.00 INVESTIGATION 9,411.75 DEPOSIT 0.00 MAIL IN •92 STUBBS BAY SEWER CONN CHARG SEWER CONNECTION WATER CONNECTION STAFF FEES 283.60 14.655.00 10.140.00 4,190.00 530.00 ESCROW 0.00 lELMlT l^TAL 429,970.12 * • * * t PERMIT FEE REPORT CITY OF ORONO FROM 01/01/98 TO 10/31/98 It t it t n MECHA^IICAL 18,509.19 0.00 659.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 194.70 PLUMBirCG 14,874.31 0.00 462.73 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 73.90 SEWER fit WATER 48,195.00 0.00 40.50 0.00 5,000.00 0.00 0.00 4.50 8.700.00 4.190.00 0.00 19,363.19 0.00 15,410.94 0.00 66,130.00 « * # • «PERMIT FEE REPORT ** CITY OF ORONO FROM 01/01/98 TO 10/31/98 USER 2,872.2*5 0.00 17.50 0.00 0.00 155.00 0.00 9.00 530;00 0.00 3,583.75 4PAGE: ]REQUESTER: CAROLE SIGN 282.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 FIRE 3,650.00 0.00 146.00 I 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 282.00 0.00 3,796.00 PAGE: i REQUESTER: CAROLE PERMITS ISSUED/FEES COLLECTED YEAR-TO-DATE REPORT NBR. BPRMTISS-1 DATE OP RUN 11/02/98 ***** PERMIT ISSUED REPORT CITY OF ORONC It It it t H -- CURRENT RANGE - 01/01/98 - 10/31/98 PAGE: REQUESTER: CAROLE -- PREVIOUS RANGE - 01/01/97 - 10/31/97 PERMIT TYPE QTY BASE FEE VALUATION PLAN REVIEW QTY BASE FEfE VALUATION PLAN REVIEW j User Defined • SUBDIVISION 16 7,037.50 0.00 0.00 12 16,885.00 0.00 0.00 , VARIANCE 62 15,510.00 0.00 0.00 69 15,680.00 0.00 0.00 CUP 16 3,000.00 0.00 0.00 15 3,475.00 0.00 0.00 SKETCH PLAN 3 900.00 0.00 0.00 6 1,500.00 0.00 0.00 VARIANCE/CUP 7 1,900.00 0.00 0.00 3 795.00 0.00 0.00 VACATION 1 300.00 0.00 0.00 3 800.00 0.00 0.00 ' REZONING 1 350.00 0.00 0.00 2 0.00 0.00 0.00 RQST SIMILAR USE 2 250.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 ■ Sub-total 100*29,247.50*0.00*0.00* 110* % 39,135.00*0.00*0.00* Grand-total 108** •29,247.50**0.00**0.00**110**39,135.00**0.00**0.00*’ REPORT NBR. BFEERPT2-1 DATE OF RUN 11/02/98 ** PERMIT FEE REPORT ** CITY OF ORONO FROM 01/01/98 TO 10/31/98 PAGE: REQUESTER; CAROLE USER . REPORT TOTAL BASE FEE 29,247.50 29,247.50 PLAN REVIEW 0.00 0.00 SURCHARGE 0.00 0.00 Lie. SEARCH FEE 0.00 0.00 SAC 0.00 0.00 INVESTIGATION 0.00 0.00 DEPOSIT 0.00 0.00 ESCROW 0.00 0.00 PERMIT TOTAL 29,247.50 29,247.50 1998 RECAP OF CONTRACT CITIES January February March Apri 1 May June July August Scptcfnber October Noveniber December YTD Totals Spring Park Plan Review 0.00 0.00 0.00 414.21 0.00 580.62 0.00 1,880.28 765.05 463.62 3,640.16 Inspections 15.00 45.00 60.00 45.00 60.00 60.00 105.00 255.00 45.00 390.0(J 1,000.00 Retainer 25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 250.00 TOTAL 40.00 70.00 85.00 484.21 85.00 665.62 130.00 2,160.28 835.05 878.62 5,433:78 No. Plan Reviews 0 0 0 1 0 2 0 4 3 4 14 No. Inspections 1 3 4 3 4 4 7 17 3 26 72 Minnetonka Beach Plan Review 7,206.05 2,133.30 2,493.88 170.46 308.10 0.00 193.50 2,956.68 0.00 308.43 15,770.40 Inspections 195.00 285.00 225.00 540.00 525.00 270.00 165.00 255.00 45.00 315.00 2,820.00 Retainer 25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 250.00 TOTAL 7,426.05 2,443.30 2,743.88 735.46 858.10 295.00 383.50 3,236.68 70.00 648.43 18,840.40 No. Plan Reviews 0 2 3 1 4 0 2 5 5 2 24 No. Inspections 13 19 15 36 35 18 11 17 3 21 188 7,466.05 2,513.30 2,828.88 1,219.67 943.10 960.62 513.50 5,396.96 905.05 1,527.05 24,274.18 REPORT NBR. DATE OF RUN BPRMTISS-1 11/02/98 PERMIT TYPE Building SQL FAMILY-NEW SP-ADD/REMODEL SF-ACC STRUCTURE DEMO/PRINCIPAL COM-ADD/REMODEL INST-ADD/REMODEL DEMO-ACCESSORY ACC/GARAGES Sub-total Mechanical HEATING SYSTEMS AIR CONDITIONING FIREPLACE VENTILATION GAS LINE INSPECT DUCT WORK ONLY REMOVE OIL TANK QTY 6 40 3 1 1 1 0 2 54* 8 0 9 1 0 3 2 WATER CONNECTION 0 NEW SEPTIC SYSTE 2 DRNFLD fit/OR TANK 0 S^C ONLY 13 SEWER fit WATER 0 UNDEFINED 0 Sub-total 25* User Defined LAND ALTERATION 2 TREE REMOVAL 0 RETAINING WALLS 1 LAWN SPRINKLER 1 Sub-total 4* Grand-total 119** PERMITS ISSUED/FEES COLLECTED (COUNCIL OCTOBER 1998 ***** PERMIT ISSUED REPORT ***** CITY OF ORONO -- CURRENT RANGE - 10/01/98 - 10/31/98 BASE FEE 14,338.50 12,177.00 294.25 50.00 1,267.25 74.75 0.00 449.50 28,651.25* 691.25 0.00 315 35 0 105 00 00 00 00 166.25 Sub-total 23*1,312.50* Plumbing FIXTURES 13 948.40 WATER METER 0 0.00 UNDEFINED 0 0.00 Sub-total 13*948.40* Sewer fit Water SEWER CONNECTION 10 350.00 0.00 200.00 0.00 13,000.00 0.00 0.00 13,550.00* 100.00 0.00 87.25 35.00 222.25* VALUATION 2,701,408.00 1,336,850.44 17,000.00 0.00 175,680.00 2,500.00 0.00 29,424.00 4,262,862.44* 51.017.00 0.00 14.050.00 810.00 0.00 1,700.00 11.500.00 79,077.00* 64,047.00 0.00 0.00 64,047.00* 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00* 0.00 0.00 4.000. 00 0.00 4.000. 00* 44,684.40** 4,409,986.44** PLAN REVIEW 9,320 4,981 22 0 822 0 0 146 01 60 59 00 71 00 00 09 15,294.00* 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00* 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00* 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00* 00 00 00 00 00* 15,294.00** wo V. 2 3.1998 PAGE: 1 REQUESTER: CAROLE PREVIOUS RANGE 8 31 3 2 1 0 1 4 50* 13 2 9 0 5 0 1 30* 22 1 2 25* 6 1 9 2 7 1 1 27* 3 1 0 1 5* 137*. 10/01/97 - 10/31/97 BASE FkE VALUATION L5,753.00 2,528,962.38 5,987.50 523,319.95 798.50 60,650.00 100.00 0.00 124.75 6,950.00 0.00 0.00 30.00 0.00 836.50 54,280.00 >3,630.25*3,174,162.33* 975.93 73,224.00 93.75 7,500.00 330.00 14,400.00 0.00 0.00 175.00 2,885..00 0.00 0.00 35.00 500.00 1,609.68*98,509.00* 1,726.97 119,203.99 247.00 0.00 71.25 5,250.00 2,045.22*124,453.99* 210.00 0.00 35.00 0.00 900.00 0.00 150.00 0.00 4,750.00 0.00 70.00 0.00 35.00 0.00 6,150.00*0.00* 150.00 0.00 30.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 35.00 q.oo 215.00*0.00* 33,650.15** 3,397,125.32** PLAN REVIEW 10,239.43 2,956.53 519.03 0.00 81.09 0.00 0.00 543.73 14,339.81* 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 0 00 00 00 OG* 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00* 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00* 0 0 0 0 0 00 00 00 00 00* 14,339.81** r PERMITS ISSUE/FEES COLLECTED OCTOBER 1998REPORT NBR. BFEERPTl-1 DATE OF RUN 11/02/98 ***** PERMIT FEE CITY OF FROM 10/01/98 REPORT ***** ORONO TO 10/31/98 R] BUILDING MECHANICAL PLUMBING SEWER U V/ATER USER SIGN BASE FEE 28,651.25 1,312.50 948.40 13,550.00 1 222.^25 0.00 PLAN REVIEW 15,294.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 SURCHARGE 2,082.80 40.29 32.54 6.00 2.50 0.00 Lie. SEARCH FEE 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 SAC 1,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 INVESTIGATION 6,387.25 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 DEPOSIT 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 SEWER CONNECTION MAIL IN 1,440.00 16.50 4.50 1.50 ESCROW 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 • PERMIT TOTAL 54,855.30 1,369.29 985.44 13,557.50 224.75 o:oo REPORT NBR. BFEERPTl-1 DATE OF RUN 11/02/98 * t t t t PERI-lIT FEE REPORT CITY OF ORONO FROM 10/01/98 TO 10/31/98 REPORT TOTAL BASE FEE PLAN REVIEW SURCHARGE Lie. SEARCH FEE SAC INVESTIGATION DEPOSIT 44,684.40 15,294.00 2,164.13 0.00 1,000.00 6,387.25 0.00 SEWER CONNECTION MAIL IN 1,440.00 22.50 ESCROW PERMIT TOTAL 0.00 70,992.28 PAGU PAGE' REQUESTER: C NOV. 2, 1998, . 5:31 PM PAGE 1 PERMITS ISSUED FOR THE MONTH OF OCTOBER 1998 PERMIT WORK ADDR NBR STREET ISSUED PERMIT NBR ID NUMBER CCMPAIJY OWNER LAST NM VALUATION 1 01 01 01 01 01// 01 01 02 02 02 02 02 03 04 06 06 06 06 06 06 06 09 09 10 10 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 15 15 16 19 20 21 24 24 29 29 29 29 29 29 29 33 1300 2697 3400 3865 3235 135 170 3440 2874 2610 3580 3410 45 1422 2700 2776 190 2900 2184 4099 1640 1889 525 3393 4520 594 3895 884 1480 3315 860 1400 2510 3155 2470 900 4174 1420 980 1225 2C30 2350 2565 1336 60 3200 1749 3444 3442 3287 2009 1491 1495 2643 SHORELINE DR KELLY AVE FOX ST SHORELINE DR CRYSTAL BAY RD CRYSTAL CREEK RD CRYSTAL CREEK RD BAYSIDE RD CASCO POINT RD MAPLERIDGE LA BAYSIDE RD NORTH SHORE DR MYRTLEWOOD RD PARK DR KELLY AVE CASCO POINT RD WILLOW DR N WEAR CIR SHADYWOOD RD HIGHWOOD RD SHADYWOOD RD WEST FARM RD HUNTER PASS CRYSTAL BAY RD WEST BRATJCH RD PARK LA SHORELINE DR RD W DAKOTA AVE LONG LAKE BLVD CRYSTAL BAY RD NORTH ARM DR pari: dr CASCO POINT RD CASCO CIR CARMAN ST WILLOW DR N HIGHWOOD RD BALDUR PARK FERNDALE RD SHORELINE DR WEST LAFAYETTE RD WAYZATA BLVD W NORTH SHORE DR REST PT CIR MYRTLEWOOD RD BAYSIDE RD ' NORTH FARM RD NORTH SHORE DR NORTH SHORE DR CASCO CIR SUGARWOOD DR SHORELINE DR GREEN TREES RD THOROUGHBRED LA 98/10/06 98/10/27 98/10/02 98/10/12 98/10/13 98/10/20 98/10/22 98/10/07 98/10/07 98/10/15 98/10/21 98/10/28 98/10/09 98/10/02 98/10/26 % 98/10/07 98/10/05 98/10/07 98/10/09 98/10/16 98/10/30 98/10/06 98/10/13 98/10/09 98/10/29 98/10/05 98/10/07 98/10/08 98/10/08 98/10/12 98/10/12 98/10/12 98/10/13 98/10/13 98/10/14 98/10/16 98/10/28 98/10/30 98/10/13 98/10/27 98/10/21 98/10/19 98/10/19 98/10/21 98/10/05 98/10/23 98/10/05 98/10/05 98/10/07 98/10/08 98/10/08 98/10/15 98/10/20 98/10/30 OR- OR- OR- OR OR- OR OR- OR- OR- OR- OR- OR OR- OR- OR- OR- OR- OR- OR- OR- OR- OR- OR' OR OR- OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR CR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR 010798 010799 010822 010860 010868 010889 010900 010830 010833 010873 010878 010879 010849 010629 010631 010794 010826 010834 010848 010880 010931 010829 010856 010850 010924 010823 010835 010837 010841 010853 010855 010857 010863 010867 010870 010877 010921 010937 010859 010916 010898 010882 010888 010648 010828 010911 010824 010825 03 0836 010839 010840 010872 010881 010932 15409404 00000000 13710231 14712216 00000000 14040600 14754902 OOOOOOCO 00000000 00000000 18782223 15330352 14791393 19208888 00000000 00000000 19352200 14759515 14717006 00000000 00000000 19332255 19332255 14432300 14254737 00000000 14721321 14726539 15465939 14344313 19329311 00000000 15410304 15212766 14726539 14723216 00000000 00000000 00000000 14723055 14753101 14202323 00000000 15590102 19222507 00000000 14732221 19552456 00000000 13771500 14457646 18376267 14752097 34718548 FLAG BUILDERS INC HOWARD EMERALD BUILDERS LARSON HOMES MTKA INC OLSON LARSON SCHIBILLA JYLAND DEVELOPMENT PILLAR HOMES KALWAY CONSTRUCTION SAWHORSE D B RASKOB CONSTRUCTION WESTERN CONSTRUCTION CO TIMOTHY SNYDER CCNSTRUCTIO A U 7 DEVELOPMENT SHEP'S CONSTRUCTION CUSTOM POOLS INC CUSTOM POOLS INC SPECIAL TOUCH EXTERIORS TWIN CITY EXTERIORS HINCK MIKE SMITH WF ROOFING A«1 ROOFING LOYAL MILLER MASTER REMODELING^ INC. WESTURN CEDAR SUPPLY HUNTERS CONSTRUCTION CO SMITH WF ROOFING STEFFENSON CARPENTRY SCHULZ JOHN DALE'S CONTRACTING, INC. NORTHERN SPECIALTIES INC VAUGHAN SAIKI SMITH OLSEN REGAN LIEBSCHER STAFFANSON RICE noWP WILLIAMSON ALDRICH HACKNEY SERAN FINN WHITTEN STROEBEL HAMMER EASTMAN BURGER RASMUSEN GASNER LINDSTROM KEERNAN DAVIDSON NORUM MORRIS ROBERTACCIO LIND WOLF THACKER MCDONNELL BROOKS TUTTLE LOWE FINNAiMORE BLDG CORP MOHLER CHIMNEY REPAIR STONEHOUSE DESIGNS METRO WEST BUILDERS LONDON CHIMNEY TRU-QUALITY CONSTRUOITCN STONEWOOD DEVELOPMENT CORP BOYER k SONS INC MINNESOTA FIREPLACE MARTINEAU DEMATTEO PROFT REZABEK * QUIRAiM ROBINSON RAY HALMRAST KILEEN KIERNAN BRASS CHAMPLIN 230, 159, Ij500, 155, 2, 320, 336, 20, 70, 150, 300, 22, 29, 14, 5, 1, 3, 35, 1, 1, 2, 15, 15, 5, 6, 2, 2, 4, 17, 4, 5, 000.00 114.00 000.00 594.00 00 00 00 00 500 000 700 000 000.00 000.00 000.00 000.00 000.00 424.00 500 254 600 000 400 200 700 000 000 100 000 000 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 000.00 975.00 244.44 950.00 200 700 9, 6, 2, 1, 1, 1, 3, 877 000 950 500 500 000 000 000 175, 30, 10, 6, 37, 5, 1, 1, 80, 300, 150, 1, 680 000 000 000 100 000 000 900 200 000 000 000 000 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 CO 00 00 00 00 00 00 r.ON, NOV 2, 1998, .*5:31 PM PERMITS ISSUED FOR THE MONTH OF PERMIT WORK ADDR NBR STREET PAGE 2 OCTOBER 1998 ISSUED PERMIT NBR ID NUMBER COMPANY OWNER LAST NM VALUATIOrJ JOHNSON 1,000.00 1,350.0C CORNELL 1,905.00 BONANDER 1,000.00 SMILEY 2,500.00 MACMILLIAN 600.00 OLSTEN 22,000.00 1,500.00 HILLSTROM 1,402.00 CUMMINGS 1.000. 00 800.00 6.000. 00 2,000.00 10,500.00 810.00 WITTIG 13,300.00 LINDGREN 2,050.00 KLOHN 1,200.001 SHAUGNESSY •1,000.00 DAYTON 300.00* EASTMAN 2, 000.OOJ BERNARD 2,000.00 KAHLER 2,700.00^ 1 SMITH 1,600.00! ALDRICH 1,500.00 KILEEN 19,500.00 8,000.00 ERNHART 1,000.00 RESSLER 5,200.00 NARTINEAU 9,800.00 HILL 180.00 MATTSON 10,972.00 WAGENER 1,650.00 BESTERFELD 1,345.00 WEIST 800.00' BERRY 2,500.00 GRONWALL .00 GRONWALL .00 LANE .00 CARPENTER .00 LANE .00 CARPENTER .00 MCFADDEN .00 STIERNA .00 MARVIN .00 ENGMAN .00 STIERNA % •.00 COWARD .00 54C ME 23C PL 13C .S'W 54C 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 05 19 19 24 24 24 29 29 29 29 29 29 23C 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 24 24 30 13C 01 01 Cl 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 1 3850 079 2145 3200 2730 2010 525 1250 1160 150 2009 525 725 1955 3525 4445 3020 4455 25 300 4520 3470 2280 2610 2900 525 2009 22 3683 2565 2015 150 1420 450 1920 3515 1586 1506 * 915 2850 915 2050 1170 1930 1535 1590 1930 1950 BAYSIDE RD BROWN RD N WATERTOWN RD NORTH SHORE DR PHEASANT RD COLIN DR HUNTER PASS FRENCH CREEK DR WILLOW DR N NORTH SHORE DR 1 SUGARWOOD DR HUNTER PASS 6TH AVE N SHORELINE DR IVY PL NORTH SHORE DR CASCO POINT RD NORT’ SHORE DR CYGNET PL 6TH AVE N WEST BRANCH RD BIRCH LA FOX ST MAPLERIDGE LA WEAR CIR HUNTER PASS SUGARWOOD DR HACKBERRY HILL NORTH SHORE DR NORTH SHORE DR DEER RUN TR NORTH SHORE DR BOHNS PT RD DEBORAH DR CONCORDIA ST 6TH AVE N LONG LAKE BLVD LONG LAKE BLVD BROWN RD N MAIN ST I BROWN RD N MAIN ST LYMAN AVE SHORELINE DR LONG LAKE BLVD LONG LAKE BLVD SHORELINE DR HERITAGE DR 98/10/08 98/10/12 98/10/12 98/10/15 90/10/20 98/10/20 98/10/30 98/10/30 90/10/30 90/10/30 98/10/30 98/10/30 98/10/22 98/10/16 90/10/22 98/10/27 90/10/30 98/10/13 98/10/16 98/10/16 98/10/26 98/10/27 98/10/30 OR-010838 OR-010852 OR-010858 OR-010874 OR-010891 OR-010894 OR-010929 OR-010933 OR-010934 OR-010935 OR-010936 OR-010928 OR-010875 OR-010876 OR-010904 OR-010919 OR-010927 OR-010865 OR-010084 OR-010806 OR-010913 OR-010917 OR-010930 90/10/01 98/10/02 90/10/05 98/10/13 90/10/13 98/10/16 90/10/20 90/10/21 98/10/21 98/10/29 98/10/15 90/10/16 98/10/02 OR-010819 OR-010821 OR-010827 OR-010864 OR-010866 OR-010803 OR-010890 OR-010897 CR-010899 OR-010923 OR-010871 OR-010085 OR-010820 98/10/09 90/10/09 98/10/09 98/10/12 98/10/13 98/10/13 90/10/14 90/10/20 90/10/20 OR 98/10/20 OR 90/10/22 OR 98/10/22 OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR 010842 010847 010051 010054 010061 010862 010069 010892 010093 010895 010901 010903 35712525 34282826 39726362 35350194 00000000 34987883 39414211 39351555 37575040 35453797 34451900 35453797 35531445 34820444 24724959 35616340 34748366 34282826 35453797 39296767 34477185 34477185 39414211 29261639 24796436 29337717 24725306 00000000 24521565 24248455 28050416 25334357 24791942 24490147 28274033 22748913 54775649 54775649 00000000 00000000 54722316 24706027 54425855 00000000 00000000 00000000 54734300 00000000 AUTOMATIC GARAGE DOOR CO PRACTICAL SYSTEMS 3-D HTG CO DEAN'S TATJK OIL MASTER HTG & COOLING KLEVE HTG U AC CLIMATE ENGINEERING DEPENDABLE HTG U AC FIREPLACE CENTER ADVANTAGE AIR FIREPLACE CENTER GUYERS BUILDERS EXPRESS GRIGGS CONTRACTING WESTONKA MECH CONTRACTORS BROOKLYN AIR HTG fit A.C. ABEL/B fit C INC PRACTICAL SYSTEMS FIREPLACE CENTER VOGT FRED fit CO STATEWIDE GAS SERVICES INC STATE’VIDL* GAS SERVICES INC KLEVE HTG U ARNOLD BING PLUMBING PARK PLUMBING INC THOMPSON PLBG SUPERIOR PLUMBING s WENZEL PLUMBING fit HEATING MACK PLUMBING DAVE WAGNER PLBG PLYMOUTH PLUMBING DOLDER PLBG fit HTG CUSTOM PLUMBING, INC. NORBLOM PLUMBING CO HOWARDS PLUMBING HEATING RITTER EXCAVATING RITTER EXCAVATING COPPIN PLBG RIDGEDALE PLUMBING SWEDLUND SEPTIC SERVICES SULLIVAN'S UTILITY SERVICE B3Q MON, NOV 2, 1998, 5:31 PM 0 PERMLTS ISSUED FOR THE MONTH OF PERMIT WORK ADDR NBR STREET OCTOBER 1993 ISSUED PERMIT NBR ID NUMBER COMPANY OWNER LAST NM PAGE 3 VALUATION DALE .00 BOUCHARD .00 WENDT .00 WENDT .00 COWARD .00 BOUCHARD .00 .00 CARLSON .00 CARLSON .00 NELSON .00 MARVIN .00 NELSON .00 MERNIK .00 HILLIER .00 HILL .00 SCHUETT .00 LANGHANS 4,000.00 sw 01 261 CYGNET PL 98/10/22 OR-010905 00000000 01 1860 SHORELINE DR 98/10/22 OR-010906 00000^.00 01 1525 LC/G LAKE BLVD 98/10/23 OR-010907 54734300 SULLIVAir S UTILITY SERVICE 01 1525 LONG LAKE BLVD 98/10/23 OR-010908 54734300 SULLIVAN * S UTILITY SERVICE 01 1950 HERITAGE DR 98/10/23 OR-010909 54734300 SULLIVAN'S UTILITY SERVICE 01 1860 SHORELINE DR 98/10/23 OR-010910 54734300 SULLIV.UTILITY SERVICE 01 170 CRYSTAL CREEK RD 98/10/26 OR-010912 54791762 HAYES EXCAVATING 01 1580 LONG LAKE BLVD 98/10/27 OR-010914 00000000 01 1580 LONG LAKE BLVD 98/10/27 OR-010915 24720895 ALS MASTER PLUMBING 01 1900 SHORELINE DR 98/10/27 OR-010918 00000000 01 1535 LONG LAKE BLVD 98/10/28 OR-010920 24461495 WIDMER INC 01 1900 SHORELINE DR 98/10/28 OR-010922 54775649 RITTER EXCAVATING 01 1840 LAKEVIEW TER 98/10/30 OR-010925 00000000 25C 25C UD 01 1120 COX FARM RD 98/10/06 OR-010832 00000000 % 01 2815 DEER RUN TR 98/10/21 OR-010896 87862106 NORTHWAY 22 115 CHEVY CHASE DR 98/10/19 OR-C10887 00000000 32 1366 REST PT RD 98/10/06 OR-010814 14724118 CONCEPT LANDSCAPING, INC. 4C 4C 119C 4,409,986.44* 4 MOII, NOV 2, 1998, .5:30 PM NUMERICAL LISTING PAGE 1 OCTOliER 1998 PERMIT NBR ISSUED CATJCEL ADDR NER STREET V;ORK ID NUMBER CCMPAi\*Y OWNER LAST NM VALUATION . .. . . . . . . . . . . . .i STAFFANSON 14,424.00 , RICE 6,500.00 DEMATTEO • 10,000.00 ' BOWE 1,254.00 HOWARD 230,000.00 159,114.00 LANGHANS 4,000.00 SMITH 1,600.00 BERRY 2,500.00 ALDRICH 1,500.00 OLSON 1,500,000 90 BURGER 2,000.uO QUIRAM 37,000.00 ROBINSON 5,000.00 WlLLIA!4SON 3,600.00 19,500.00 PROFT 6,000.00 WHITTEN 15,000.00 ■/AUGHAN 20,000.00 HILLIER .00 SAIKI 70,000.00 ALDRICH 35,000.00 RASMUSBN 2,000.00 - RAY 1,900.00 < GASNER 4,975.00 1,000.00 HALMRAST 1,200.00 ' KILEEN 80,000.00 LINDSTROM 17,244.44 GRONWALL .00 GRONWALL .00 HACKNEY 1,400.00 LIEBSCHER 29,000.00 HAiMMER 5,100.00 LANE .00 JOHNSON 1,350.00 , KEERNAN 4,950.00 1 CARPENTER .00 < DAVIDSON 5,200.00 STROEBEL 15,000.00 NORUM 700.00 CORNELL 1,985.00 BROOKS 1,000.00 LARSON 155,594.00 LANE .00 ^ CARPENTER .00 MORPIS 9,877.00 KILEEN 8,000.00 KLOHN 1,200.00 ERNHART 1,000.00 RODERTACCIO 6,000.00 , SCHIBILLA . •2,500.00 MCFADDEN .00 LINJ 2,950.00 P OR-010629 OR-010631 OR-0106^8 OR-010794 OR-010798 OR-010799 OR-010814 OR-010819 OR-010820 OR-010821 OR-010822 OR-010823 OR-010824 OR-010825 OR-010826 OR-010827 OR-010828 OR-010829 OR-010830 OR-010832 OR-010833 OR-0jl0834 OR-010635 OR-010836 OR-010037 OR-010038 OR-010839 OR-010840 OR-010841 OR-010842 OR-010847 OR-010848 OR-010849 OR-010850 OR-010851 OR-010852 OK-010853 OR-010854 OR-010855 OR-01085G OR-010857 OR-010858 OR-010859 OR-010860 OR-010861 OR-U108G2 OR-0108C3 OR-O1O0G4 OR-0108G5 OR-0108GG OR-0108G7 OR-i>10^G8 OR-0108G9 OR-010870 98/10/02 N 98/10/26 N 98/10/12 98/10/13 90/10/12 90/10/12 98/10/23 98/10/12 98/10/13 90/10/13 90/10/13 98/10/13 98/10/13 90/10/13 98/10/13 98/10/13 98/10/14 98/10/14 M N N N N N 98/10/21 98/10/07 90/10/06 98/10/27 90/10/06 98/10/01 98/10/02 N 98/10/02 N 90/10/02 98/10/C5 98/10/05 98/1C/05 98/10/05 9f/10/05 9b/l0/05 98/10/06 98/10/07 90/10/06 98/10/07 98/10/07 98/10/07 98/10/07 90/10/08 98/10/00 90/10/08 98/10/08 98/10/08 98/10/C9 90/10/09 98/10/09 98/10/09 98/10/09 98/10/09 98/10/12 98/10/12 N N N N N N N N U N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N 90/10/12 N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N 1422 2700 1336 2776 1300 2697 1366 2610 3515 2900 3400 594 1749 3444 190 525 GO 1809 3440 1120 2874 2900 3895 3442 884 3050 3287 2009 1400 1506 1586 2184 45 3393 915 079 3315 2350 860 525 1400 2145 980 3865 915 2850 2510 2009 4455 22 3155 3235 1170 2470 PARK DR KELLY AVE REST PT CIR CASCO POINT RD SHORELINE DR ?vELLY AVE REST PT PD MAPLERIDGE LA 6TH AVE N WEAR CIR FOX ST PARK LA NORTH FARM RD NORTH SHORE DR WILLOW DR N HUNTER PASS MYRTLEWOOD RD WEST FARM RD BAYSIDE RD COX FARM RD CASCO POINT RD WEAR CIR SHORELINE DR NORTH SHORE DR DAKOTA AVE BAYSIDE RD CASCO CIR SUGARWOOD DR LONG LAKE BLVD LONG LAKE BLVD LONG LAKE BLVD SHADYWOOr RD MYRTLEWOOD RD CRYSTAL BAY RD FROWN RD N BROWN RD N CRYSTAL BAY RD MAIN ST NORTH ARM DR HUNTER PASS PARK DR WATERTOWN RD FERNDALE RD W SHORELINE DR BROWN RD N MAIN ST CASCO POINT RD SUGARWOOD DR NORTH SHORE DR HACKBERRY HILL CASCO CIR CRYSTAL BAY RD LYMAN AVD CARMAN ST 04 06 21 06 01 01 32 01 30 01 01 11 29 29 06 01 24 09 02 01 02 06 11 29 11 01 29 09 11 01 01 06 03 10 01 01 11 01 11 09 11 01 15 01 01 01 II 01 29 01 11 01 01 11 19208808 00000000 15590102 00000000 15409404 00000000 14724118 29261639 22740913 24796436 13710231 00000000 14732221 19552456 19352200 29337717 19222507 19332255 00000000 00000000 00000000 14759515 14721321 OOOOOOCO 14726539 35712525 13771500 14457646 15465939 54775649 54775649 14717006 14791393 14432300 00000000 34282826 14344313 00000000 19329311 19332255 00000000 39726362 00000000 14712216 5472231C 24706027 15410304 24725306 34282826 00000000 15212766 00000000 r WESTERN CONSTRUCTION CO FINNAMORE BLDG CORP FLAG BUILDERS INC CONCEPT LA1:DSCAPING, INC. ARNOLD BING PLUMBING HOWARDS PLUMBING HEATING PARK PLUMBING INC EMERALD BUILDERS STONEHO..SE DESIGNS METRO WEST BUILDERS TIMOTHY SNYDER CONSTRUCTIO THOMPSON PLBG MOHLER CHIMNEY REPAIR CUSTOM POOLS INC A £c T DEVELOPMENT HINCK MIKE SMITH WF ROOFING AUTOMATIC GARAGE DOOR CO LONDON CHIMNEY TRU-QUALITY CONSTRUCITON A«1 ROOFING RITTER EXCAVATING RITTER EXCAVATING. SHEP’S CONSTRUCTION D B RASKOB CONSTRUCTION SPECIAL TOUCH EXTERIORS PRACTICAL SYSTEMS LOYAL MILLER MASTER REMODELING, INC CUSTOM POOLS INC 3-D HTG CO LARSON HOMES MTKA INC COPPIN PLB5 RIDGEDALE PLUMBING WESTURN CEDAR SUPPLY SUPERIOR PLUMBING PRACTICAL SYSTEMS HUNTERS CONSTRUCTION CO 5442585:. 14726539 SWEDLUND SEPTIC SERVICES SMITH W^ ROOFING Mori, IJCV ,2, 19D8, , 5:20 PM NUMERICAL LISTING OCTOBER 1998 PERMIT NBR ISSUED CA!JCEL ADDR NBR STREET WORK ID NUMBER COMPANY OWNER LAST NM PAGE 2 VALUATION 4 BESTERFELD 1,345.0 • KIERNAN 300,000.0 SMITH 150,000.0 BONANDER 1,000.0 2,000.0 10,500.0 WOLF 1,500.01 OLSEN 300, 00C.0( REGAN 22,OOO.od SERAN 1,200.0(1 BRASS 150,000.od 175,680.Od RESSLER 5,200.0d SHAUGNESSY 1,OOO.OG WE I ST 800.OQ DAYTON 300.0(1 SCHUETT .00 MARTINEAU 30,000.00 320,000.00 MARTINEAU 9,800.00 SMILEY 2,500.00 STIERNA .oq MARVIN .oq MACMILLIAN 600.00 ENGMAN .00 HILL .00 HILL 180.00 LOWE .00 MATTSON 10,972.00 336,700.00 STIERNA .00 COWARD . 00 CUMMINGS 810.00 DALE .CJ BOUCHARD .00 WENDT .00 WENDT .00 COWARD .00' BOUCHARD .00 REZABEK 100.CO . ou EASTMAN 2,000.00 CARLSON .00 CARLSON .00 TUTTLE 3,000.00 BERNARD 2,000.00 NELSON .00 WITTIG 13,300.00 MARVIN .00 THACKER 500.00 NELSON . 00 WAGENER 1,650.00 eastma:^6,000.00 MERNIK .00 OR-010871 OR-010072 OR-010873 OR-010874 OR-010875 OR-01087G OR-010877 OR-010878 OR-010879 OR-010080 OR-010881 OR-010882 OR-010883 OR-010884 OR-010885 OR-010886 OR-010887 OR-010888 OR-010889 OR-010890 OR-010891 OR-010092 OR 10893 OR .0894 OR-010895 OR-0T0896 OR-010897 OR-010898 OK-010899 OR-010900 OR-010901 OR-010903 OR-010904 OR-010905 OR-010906 OR-010907 OR-010908 OR-010909 OR-010910 OR-010911 OR-010912 OR-010913 OR-010914 OK-Ol0915 OR -010916 OR-010917 OR-010918 OR-010919 OR-010920 OR-010921 OR-010922 OR-010923 CR-010924 OR-010925 98/10/15 N 98/10/15* N 98/10/15 N 98/10/15 N 98/10/22 N 98/10/16 N 98/10/16 N 98/10/21 N 98/10/28 N 98/10/16 N 98/10/20 N 98/10/19 N 98/10/16 N 98/10/16 N 98/10/16 N 98/10/16 N 98/10/19 N 98/10/19 N 98/10/20 N 98/10/20 N 98/10/20 N 98/10/20 98/10/20 98/10/20 98/10/20 98/10/21 98/10/21 98/10/21 98/10/21 98/10/22 98/10/22 98/10/22 98/10/22 98/10/22 98/10/22 98/10/23 98/10/23 98/10/23 N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N M 98/10/23 N 98/10/23 N 98/10/26 N 98/10/26 N 98/10/27 N 98/10/27 N 98/10/27 N 98/10/27 N 98/10/27 N 98/10/27 N 98/10/28 N 98/10/28 N 98/10/28 N 98/10/29 N 98/10/29 N 98/10/30 N 4 50 141.. 2610 3200 725 1955 900 3580 3410 4099 1495 2350 3683 25 1920 300 115 2565 135 2565 2730 1930 1535 2010 1590 2815 2815 2630 150 170 1930 1950 3525 261 1860 1525 1525 1950 1860 3200 170 4520 1580 1580 1225 3470 1900 4445 1535 4174 1900 1420 4520 1840 DEBORAH DR SHORELINE DR MAPLERIDGE LA NORTH SHORE DR 6TH AVE N SHORELINE DR WILLOW DR N BAYSIDE RD NORTH SHORE DR HIGHWOOD RD GREEN TREES RD WAYZATA BLVD W NORTH SHORE DR CYGNET PL CONCORDIA ST 6TH AVE N CHEVY CHASE DR NORTH SHORE DR CRYSTAL CREEK RD NORTH SHORE DR PHEASANT RD SHORELINE DR LONG LAKE BLVD COLIN DR LONG LAKE BLVD DEER RUN TR 'DEER RUN TR WEST LAFAYETTE RD NORTH SHORE DR W CRYSTAL CREEK RD SHORELINE DR HERITAGE DR IVY PL CYGNET PL SHORELINE DR LONG LAKE BLVD LONG LAKE BLVD HERITAGE DR SHORELINE DR BAYSIDE RD CRYSTAL CREEK RD WEST BRATJCH RD LONG LAKE BLVD LONG LAKE BLVD SHORELINE DR BIRCH LA SHORELINE DR NORTH SHORE DR LONG LAKE BLVD HIGHWOOD RD SHORELINE DR BOHNS PT RD WEST BRAiNCH RD LAKEVIEW TER 24 24490147 29 18376267 02 00000000 01 35350194 19 35531445 19 34820444 11 14723216 02 18782223 02 15330352 06 00000000 29 14752097 19 14202323 01 24521565 29 35453797 24 28274033 29 39296767 22 00000000 20 00000000 01 14J4060C 01 24248455 01 00000000 01 ooooooor 01 00000000 01 34987883 01 00000000 01 87862106 01 28050416 16 14753101 01 25334357 01 14754902 01 54734300 01 00000000 24 24724959 01 00000000 01 00000000 01 54734300 01 54734300 01 54724300 01 54734300 24 00000000 01 54791762 29 34477185 01 00000000 01 24720805 15 14723055 29 34477185 01 00000000 24 35616340 01 24461495 11 00000000 01 54775649 01 24791942 10 14254737 01 00000000 CUSTOM PLUMBING, INC. STONEWOOD DEVELOPMENT C3RP DEAN»S TANK OIL GUYERS BUILDERS EXPRESS GRIGGS CONTRACTING STEFFENSON CARPENTRY KALWAY CONSTRUCTION SAWHORSE BOYER fic SONS INC NORTHERN SPECIALTIES INC WENZEL PLUMBING k HEATING FIREPLACE CENTER NORBLOM PLUMBING CO VOGT FRED & CO JYLAND DEVELOPMENT MACK PLUMBir.’G MASTER HTG k COOLING NORTHWAY DAVE WAGNER PLBG DALE'S CONTRACTING, INC. PLYMOUTH PLUMBING PILLAR HOMES SULLIVAN'S UTILITY SERVICE WESTONKA MECH CONTRACTO*vS SULLIVAN'S UTILITY SERVICE SULLIVAN'S UTILITY SERVICE SULLIVAN'S UTILITY SERVICE SULLIVAN'S UTILITY SERVICE HAYES EXCAVATING STATEWIDE GAS SERVICES INC ALS MASTER PLUMBING SCHULZ JOHN STATEWIDE GAS SERVICES INC BROOKLYN AIR HTG & A.C. WIDMER INC RITTER EXCAVATING . DOLDER PLBG k HTG TWIN CITY EXTERIORS MON, NOV 2, 199V. 5:30 PMNUMERICAL LISTING PAGE 3OCTOBER 1998PERMIT NBR ISSUED CANCEL ADDR NBR STREET WOPK ID NUMBER COMPANY OWNER LAST NM VALUATIONOR-010927 98/10/30 N 3020 CASCO POINT RD 24 34748366 ABEL/B & C INC LINDGREN 2,050.00OR-010928 98/10/30 N 525 HUNTER PASS 05 35453797 FIREPLACE CENTER 6,000.00OR-010929 98/10/30 N 525 HUNTER PASS 01 39414211 KLEVE HTG fit AC 1 22,000.00OR-010930 98/10/30 N 2280 t JX ST 29 39414211 KLEVE HTG fit AC KAHLER 2,700.00OR-010931 98/10/30 N 1640 SHADYWOOD RD 06 00000000 FINN 2,700.00OR-010932 98/10/30 N 2643 THOROUGHBRED LA 33 34718548 MINNESOTA FIPFPLACE CHAMPLIN 1,000.00OR-010933 98/10/30 N 1250 FRENCH CREEK DR 01 39351555 CLIMATE ENGINEERING OLSTEN 1,500.00 OR-010934 98/10/30 N 1160 WILLOW DR N 01 37575040 DEPENDAli:,.? ittg fit AC HILLSTROM 1,482.00 OR-010935 98/10/30 N 150 NORTH SHORE DR W 01 35453797 FIREPLA'.*^: * flNTER 1,000.00 OR-010936 98/10/30 N 2009 SUGARWOCO DR 01 34451900 ADVANT>.:r <800.00 OR-010937 98/10/30 N 1420 BALDUR PARK RD 11 00000000 MCDONNELL 1,000.00 119C 01 Residence 2^02 Addition 2503Garage/Attached 2604Garage/Detached 27 05 Porch 2806Deck2907Fence3008Gazebo31 09 Pool 3210Re-sido 33 11 Re-roof 3412Tennis Court 13 Sign 14 Dock 15 Shed 16 Demo-Principal Structure 17 Demo-Accessory Structure 18 Move 19 Commercial 20 Institutional 21 Storm Damage Repair221-100 Cubic Yards 23 101 Cubic Yards or More 99 Undefined LOCAL DSE CODES Replacing Existing Lifting Principal Residence Well Abandonment Foundation Only Temporary Trailer Renovate/Remodel Accessory Structure Stairway to Lake Retaining Wall Entrance Monuments Tree Removal 1 9999 Undefined REPORT NBR. BPRMTISS-1 I'ATE OF RUN 11/02/98 REPORT NBR. BFEERPT2-1 DATE OF RUN 11/02/98 4 OCTOBER 1998 PERMIT ISSUED REPORT CITY OF ORONO « t * t «PAGE: REQUESTER: CAROLE -- CURRENT RANGE - 10/01/98 - 10/31/98 -- PREVIOUS RANGE - 10/01/97 - 10/31/97 « PERMIT TYPE QTY BASE FEE VALUATION PLAN REVIEW QTY BASE FEE VALUATION PLAN REVIEW • User Defined SUBDIVISION 2 600.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 VARIANCE 4 900.00 0.00 0.00 3 660.00 0.00 0.00 CUP 1 550.00 0.00 0.00 1 550.00 0.00 0.00 Sub-total 7*2.05C.00^0.00*0.00*4 *1,210.00*0.00*0.00* Grand-total 7t t 2,050.00**0.00* •0.00**4 • *1,210.00**0.00**oo•o•• * • * •PERMIT FEE REPORT CITY OF ORONO FROM 10/01/98 TO 10/31/98 USER REPORT TOTAL BASE PEE 2,050.00 2,050.00 PLAN REVIEW 0.00 0.00 SURCHARGE 0.00 0.00 Lie. SEARCH FEE 0.00 0.00 SAC 0.00 0.00 INVESTIGATION 0.00 0.00 DEPOSIT 0.00 0.00 ESCROW 0.00 0.00 PERMIT TOTAL 2,050.00 2,050.00 PAGE: < REQUESTER: CAROLE j:1