Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-27-1988 - Agenda Packet City Council - regular meetingAGENDA FOR COUNCIL MEETING SET FOR MONDAY, JUNE 27, 1984, 7:96 P.M. (*) Asterisk itJ& are considered to be routine items to ue enactPd upon by one motion my the City Council under the Consent Item* on the agenda. Discussion will be held upon request. Memos regarding each of the Agenda items are available in the Public Packet which may be obtained upon request from the Recorder. ROLL CALL 0-14.01 M-I i LNG 1. CONSENT AGENDA* ,1U11 27 19�41 APPROVAL OF MINUTRS * 2. Regular Meting of June 13, 1988 Of OF ohion"O PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS PUBLIC COMMENTS - (Limit 5 Minutes Per Person) ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT 3. #1025 Ed Henrich, 4115 Highwood Road - Variance - Conceptual Resolution * 4. #1171 Landmark Construction, Inc., 3820/3830 Bayside - Final Subdivision - Resolution * 5. #1257 Catharine A. Cram, 3760 Watertown Road - Final Subdivision - Resolution 6. #1268 Don Peterson, 3048 North Shore Drive - Variance - Resolution 7. #1276 David Bell, 3800 Wayzata - Conditional Use Permit - Resolution 8. #1277 Big Island Board of Governors A.) Record Lot 1 - Conditional Use Permit - Resolution B.) Joint Use Dock License 1988 - Resolution 9. #1281 Dennis Meyer, 4731 North Shore Drive - Variance 10. #1283 Gary and Beth Escher, 3556 Livingston Avenue - After the Fact Variance 11. #1284 Douglas Kirchner, 1520 Bohns Point Road - After the Fact Variance - Resolution *12. #1288 Ward Edwards, 2474 Carman Street - Renewal Variance - Resolution 13. #1297 Washington Scientific Industries, Inc. - Commercial Site Plan Review 14. Highway 12 Zoning ordinance MAYOR'S REPORT CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT 15. Receipt of Auditor's Report - 19B7 Financial Report 16. 1988-89 Strategic Goal Setting 17. Water Conservation Advisory 18. Woodhill Avenue * 19. 3508 Ivy Place - Water Meter 20. Request of Ordinance Amendment - Solicitor's Ordinance 21. Ordinance Amendment - Fence lieight and Non-F.nchroachments 22. Ordinance Amendment - Private Improvem,nts on Right -of -Way 23. Employment - City Recorder * 24. Resolution of Recognition * 25. 1988 Attorney F-es * 26. Police Intern - "lark Meyer AGENDA FOR COUNCIL MEETING SET FOR MONDAY, JUNE 27, 1988, 7:66 P.M. (*) 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. Discussion will be held upon request. Memos regarding each of the Agenda items are available in the Public Packet which may be obtained upon request from the Recorder. ROLL CALL 014101 Mt -I ONG 1. CONSENT AGENDA* „UI! 27 I� APPROVAL OF MINUTES * 2. Regular Meetir. i of June 13, 1988 Uly V 0000 PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS PUBLIC COMMENTS - (Limit 5 Minutes Per Person) ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT 3. #1025 Ed Henrich, 4115 Iiighwood Road -- Variance - Conceptual Resolution * 4. #1171 Landmark Construction, Inc., 3820/3830 Bayside - Final Subdivision - Resolution * 5. #1257 Catharine A. Cram, 3760 Watertown Road - Final Subdivision - Resolution 6. #1268 Don Peterson, 3048 North Shore Drive - Variance - Resolution 7. #1276 David Bell, 3800 Wayzata - Conditional Use Permit - Resolution 8. #1277 Big Island Board of Governors A.) Record Lot 1 - Conditional Use Permit - Resolution B.) Joint Use Dock License 1988 - Resolution 9. #1281 Dennis Meyer, 4731 North Shore Drive - Variance 10. #1283 Vary and Beth Escher, 3556 Livingston Avenue - After the Fact Variance 11. #1284 Douglas Kirchner, 1520 Bohns Point Road - Aft . the Fact Variance - Resolution *12. #1268 Ward Edwards, 2474 Carman Street - Renewal Variance - Resolution 13. #1297 Washington Scientific Industries, Inc. - Commercial Site Plan Review 14. Highway 12 Zoning Ordinance MAYOR'S REPORT CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT 15. Receipt of Auditor's Report - 1987 Financial Report 16. 1988-89 Strategic Goal Setting 17. Water Conservation Advisory 18. Woodhill Avenue * 19. 3508 Ivy Place - Water Meter 20. Request of Ordinance Amendment - Solicitor's Ordinance 21. Ordinance Amendment - Fence Height and Non-F.nchroachments 22. Ordinance Amendment - Private Improvements on Right -of -Way 23. Employment - City Recorder * 24. Resolution of Recognition * 25. 1988 Attorney Fees * 26. Police Intern - Mark Meyer AGENDA FOR COUNCIL MEETING SET FOR MONDAi', JUNE 27, 1988, 7:06 P.M. CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT Continued * 27. Compensation Adjustment - Charlotte Knutson * 28. Administrator's Information 1950 Shoreline Traffic Accident old Long Lake Road/Highway 12 3536 Lyric Avenue City Administrator's Vacation CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT LICENSES (29*) BILLS (30*) ADJOURNMENT r0t4krING „U11 27 lq`.., MINUTES OF THE RBGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD JUNE 13, 1988 ATTENDANCE 7:01 P.M. The Council met on the above date with the following members present: Acting Mayor Callahan, Councilmembers Goetten, Sime, and Peterson. The following represented the City staff: City Administrator Bernhardson, Public Works Director Gerhacdson, Building & Zoning Administrator Mabusth, Assistant Planning & Zoning Administrator Gaffron, and City Recorder Peterson. City Attorney Barrett and City Engineer Cook were also present. CONSENT AGENDA* It was moved by Councilmember Sime, seconded by Councilmember Goetten, to approve the. Consent Agenda subject to removal of the following item: #28 - Employment -Summer Septic Inspector - requested by Councilmember Peterson Motion, Ayes 4, Nays 0. MOODBILL AVENUE STREET IMPROVEMENT PUBLIC HEARING 7:02-7:06 WOODHILL AVENUE - AWARD OF BIDS RESOLUTION The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. City Administrator Beinhardson explained the purpose of the public hearing to determine if the public street improvement for Woodhill Avenue should be undertaken. The proposed improvement is a result of a recent subdivision in the vicinity which is served by a private road but is served through Woodhill Avenue. The developer of this subdivision, John McDowell, has agreed to pay 75% of the street improvement costs. The city received bids for the improvement on May 20, 1988. He noted that a 4/5's vote would be required if the Council chooses to assess the abutting three property owners and to order the project in; and a 3/5's vote would be required to order the project in if the Council chooses not to assess the abutting property owners. Council also has the options to table the matter for two weeks or reject the bid-, and have it rebid, or choose not to do the project. John McDowell was present for this matter and had no comments. David Lindstrom, 1315 Woodhill Avenue, stated he understood the safety aspect concerns related to the proposed improvement, however, he felt that this improvement never would have been proposed without the subdivision. He stated he lived 20' off of Orono MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD JUNE 13, 1988 NOODHILL AVENUE CONTINUED Orchard Road and felt the road improvement would be of no benefit to him and should not have to share in the costs for the improvement. There were no other comments from the public and the public hearing was closed. It was moved by Acting Mayor Callahan, seconded by Councilmember Sime, that the Council approved the project for Woodhill Avenue to be undertaken; and accept the bid. Motion, Ayes 2, Nays 2. Councilmembers Goetten and Peterson voted nay. Motion tied. it was movt,,' by Acting Mayor Callahan, seconded by Councilmember Sime, to table the matter until the July 11, 1988 Council meeting. Motion, Ayes 3, Nays 1. Councilmember Peterson voted nay. Motion carried. Councilmember Sime noted the improbability of getting a 4/5's vote on this issue at the July llth meeting. r7herefore, he recommended that the matter be held in abeyance until the July 25th meeting. Council felt that tabling the matter further would not necessarily guarantee obtaining a 4/5's vote. City Administrator Bernhardson also noted that the bids would expire by the July 25th meeting. Councilmember Goetten noted the history of two nay votes throughout this issue and felt this outcome should have been anticipated. City Administrator Bernhardson stated it was his understanding that the opposition was mainly on the assessment to the abutting property owners and not necessarily against the project being undertaken. Councilmember Peterson asked how -ide Woodhill Avenue currently is and technically what width should the road be? City Engineer Cook stated that the road is currently 16' or 18' wide. The road should be at least 20' wide. but it is recommended to build roads 24' wide because of the tendancy for the side of the pavement breaking up. 2 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD JUNE 13, 1988 APPROVAL OF MINUTES* It was moved by Councilmember Sime, seconded by Councilmember Goetten, to approve the Minutes of the May 23, 1988 Regular Council meeting as submitted. Motion, Ayes 4, Nays 0. It was moved by Councilmember Sime, seconded by Councilmember Goetten, to approve the Minutes of the May 18, 1988 Reconvened Board of Review meeting as submitted. Motion, Ayes 4, Nays 0. PAW COMMISSION COMM NTS PAM USAGE SURVEY City Administrator Bernnardson explained the request to authorize conducting a survey to determine the Parks and Recreation needs for the City of Orono. Councilmember Peterson asked why the cost for the survey would comp from the general fund rather than the Park fund? Public Works Director Gerhardson stated that the Park Dedication Fund states very clearly the uses for the fund monies, and a survey is not among those uses. Councilmember Sime felt that $2,500 to conduct the survey was excessive. Public Works Director Gerhardson explained that the $2,500 cost includes copying, ►nailing, and return mail to approximately 2,700 households. it was moved by Councilmember Sime, to deny the request. No second, motion failed. Councilmembers Goetten and Peterson had no problem with conducting the survey, but felt it could be done at a lower cost. It was moved by Councilmember Peterson, seconded by Councilmember Goetten, to table the request penCing alternative ideas. Motion, Ayes 4, Nays 0. LAKE MINNETONKA CONSRRVATION DISTRICT -LMCD Representative JoEllen Hurr was present. She stated that Eugene Strcman hay een hired as the new LMCD Executive Di recto �- of fe. r July 1, 1988. Mr. Stroman comes from the St. Pa. �. `urban Chamber of Commerce and has worked i the Minneapolis Aquatennia 1 and St. Paul Winter � l iva 1 . He is strong in public relations and communicat,ons which is needed within the LMCD. Mr. Ctroman will be visiting the area City Councils in Septemb�•r or October. i NINJTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD JUNE 13, 1988 LNCD CONTINUED -Hurr stated that the boat tour for elected officials will be held on August 6, 1988. -Hurr noted that the Mc ..ro Waste Control Commission is having a budget breakfast on June 29, 1988 at 7:30 A.M. at the Lafayette Club, of which the Council will be invited. They are working on reducing the budget to 110 million and looking at capital improvements of 45 million. To accomplish the reductions, they propose cutting the small projects, including not doing the Orono project, however, she felt there was great support for the premise that the Lake Minnetonka regional resource must no longer be polluted. They hope to reduce the sewer fees in Orono approximately 5%. They will be meeting with the Navarre Chamber of Commerce and marina owners regarding the interceptor project, and after Labor Day, the landing at Maxwell Bay will be closed for 30-40 days. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS Planning Commissioners Chairman Kelley and Bellows were present. Chairman Kelley stated that they would like to postpone the discussion regarding the accessory structure ordinance until the July llth meeting when Mayor Grabek is present. PUBLIC COMMENTS Attorney Jim Lord was present representing Stephen Wilson of 3508 Ivy Place. Referring to his letter dated June 8, 1988 submitted to the Council this evening, he explained the problem of Mr. Wilson being billed for 991,000 gallon, of water used last quarter. He stated that Mr. Wilson has tried to worx with staff to clear up this problem to no avail. He stated they had the water meter tested but the test proved inconclusive to this problem. He reviewed their proposal to solve the problem as outlined in his memo. He rioted that he has advised his client not to pay water bill, but pay an amount based on the higher.-t normal usage for this property. City Administrator Bernhardson stated that staff has not had the opportunity to research Mr. Lord`s letter which was received today and have no recommendation on the matter at this time. Acting Mayor Callahan stated that the Council will not take action on this matter until staff makes a recommendation, however, advised that this matter be solved as soon as possible. 4 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD JUNE 13, 1988 ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT: #1214 RICHARD i 1CAREN ZIMINSRI* 1095 BROWN ROAD NORTH FINAL SUBDIVISION RESOLUTION #2441 It was moved by Councilmember Sime, seconded by Councilmember Goetten, to adopt Resolution #2441 Approving the Plat of Evergreen Ridge. Motion, Ayes 4, Nays 0. #1263 JAMES RIVERS/WINDWARD MARINA 1444 SHORELINE DRIVE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT/VARIANCE RESOLUTION #2442 City Administrator Bernhardson explained the commercial site plan review and request for multiple variances for Windward Marina. Because this is proposed as a 3 year phase plan, he noted that the City Attorney has advised that instead of granting a variance for 3 years, the variance should be granted for one year providing construction is started within that year, the three year phase may be continued. James Rivers was present for this matter and showed the Council the proposed site plan. Councilmember Goetten stated she was impressed with the proposal and reduction of hardcover. She voiced concern with controlling the access and asked if there would be a crosswalk? In regard to controlling the access, Mr. Rivers stated that they plan curbing (which currently does not exist) which should help control the access. Mr. Rivers stated that he has also met with Hennepin County to request a crosswalk to serve Windward Marina as well as Minnetonka Boat Works. It was moved by Councilmember Goetten, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to adopt Resolution #2442 granting variances to Windward Marina per staff recommendation, subject to amending it to allow the 3 year phase to be continued if construction is commenced within one year. Motion, Ayes 4, Nays 0. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD JUNE 13, 1968 i1267 JAMS LEVERING 1585 SIXTH AVENUE WORTH FINAL SUBDIVISION RESOLUTION #2443 City Administrator Bernhardson explained the proposed 2 lot subdivision at the corner of Sixth Avenue North and Long Lake Blvd. Each lot satisfies the current zoning standards of 2 acres and the minimum width standards. Lot 1 will access via Lcng Lake Blvd. and Lot 2 will access via Sixth Avenue North. Zoning Administrator Mabusth noted that the property may be purchased by one owner and then there would be no need to change the existing access or address and the property may then be re -combined. Tom Haislet was present for this matter and stateu ,at the proposed buyer of Let 1 has not yet decided to buy Lot 2. Councilmember Goetten asked if the existing garage workshop contained any Plumbing? Zoning Administrator Mabusth stated that there was no plumbing in the workshop to her knowledge. Councilmember Goetten suggested that the resolution be amended to state that no plumbing will be allowed in the accessory structure, nor will it be allowed to be used for residential habitation. It was moved by Councilmember Goetten, seconded by Councilmember Sime, to adopt Resolution #2443 approving the subdivsion subject to the previous stated amendment. Motion, Ayes 4, Nays 0. #1269 RICHARD NOLAND 1395 ORONO LANE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION #2444 Jane Noland was present for this matter. City Administrator Bernhardson explained the request for a conditional use permit to allow the use of an apartment area on the second floor of the existing detached garage for the use of a relative during the months of April through November. This request. involves a substantial 'ot area variance to allow this use under the standards of a guest house. This property has a history regarding the sewer and a covenant that allow, the opportunity to reinst:ate the use of the quest apartment. h MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD JUNE 13, 1988 #1269 NOLAND CONTINUED Councilmember Goetten noted the non -conforming boat house structure near the lake, and felt this structure should not be used as a guest house. It was moved by Councilmember Sime, seconded by Councilmember Goetten, to adopt Resolution 12444 approving a conditional use permit to allow the guest house use per staff recommendation, subject to no use of the boat house as a guest house. Motion, Ayes 4, Nays 0. #1272 RICHARD J. BRIT 1153 ELMWOOD AVENUE VARIANCE RBSOLU?ION 12445 City Administrator Bernhardson explained the request for side setback and hardcover variances to construct a second story addition to the existing house. Assistant 'Zoning Administrator Gaffron explained the cantilevered design of the proposal and its impact on hardcover. Richard Heit was present for this matter ar.d stated that the addition was to provide bedroom space for his elderly parents. He noted the small deck to be constructed from proposed second story which is located over existing hardcover. It was moved by Councilmember Sime, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to adopt Resolution i2445 approving the variances per staff rec--,mmendation. Trot ion, Ayes 4, Nays 0. 11285 ERIC PAULSON 2605 MAPLZRIDGE J.ANE CONDTIONAL USE FERMI? RESOLUTION 1240,6 City Administrator Bernhardson explained the request for a conditional use permit to allow a permanent dock 40' in length to be conr.tructed on the shoreline of Lafayette Bay. Zoning Administrator Mabusth noted that de-icing is no longer allowed to pr.tect permanent docks during the winter time. Clifford Reep was present representing the applicant and stated they are aware of the no de-icing regulation. I �! MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING. HELD JUNE 13, 1988 #1285 PAULSON CONTINUEC It was moved by Acting Mayor Callahan, seconded by Councilmember Sime, to adopt Resolution #2446 mpproving the conditional use permit for a permanent dock per staff recommendation. Motion, Ayes 4, Nays 0. #1287 JAMBS F. BROOKS 3785 WATERTONN ROAD VARIANCE RESOLUTION # 2 4 4 7 Applicant was not present for this matter. City Administrator Bernhardson explained the request for a side setback variance to construct a room addition. Planning Commission recommend approval as proposed. It was moved by Councilmember Sime, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to adopt Resolution #2447 approving the variance as proposed. Motion, Ayes 4, Nays 0. #1294 DOUG ILINT/T. BRRNIER/G. BA"* 3535 a 3545 IVY PLACE AND 3034 CASCO POINT ROAD FINAL SUBDIVISION OF A LOT LINE REARRANGEMENT RESOLUTION i2448 It was moved by Councilmember Sime, seconded by Councilmember Goetten, to adopt Resolution #2448 Approving the Plat of Casco Cove. Motion, Ayes 4, Nays 0. SIGN ORDINANCE AMENDMENT City Administrator Bernhardson explained the issue of determining whether the Council wants to refer the draft language submitted to the Planning Commission for consideration and changes in the sign ordinance. The proposed changes in the sign ordinance relate to signs in the right-of-way and temporary sign regulations. It was moved by Acting Mayor Callahan to refer the proposed ordinance amendment applicable to signs to the Planning Commission for their review and recommendation. Motion, Ayes 4, Nays 0. ENGINEER'S REPORT: ANA" OF BIDS - NOODHILL AVENUE (Refer to woodhill Avenue Street Improvement Public Nearing at beginning of minutes for this issue). [. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD JUNE 13, 1988 HORNS POINT FEASIBILITY STUDY RBSOLUTION City Administrator Bernhardson explained the issue to determine if the Council desires to undertake a feasibility study based on a petition received regarding widening Bohn: Point Road. In add'Lion, to determine what interest the Council has, if any, on the public takeover of Bohns Point Circle, which is currently privately owned but publicly maintained. Should the City choose to do any public work on the Circle portion of the road, the City would by necessity have to take it over. lie noted that the petition represents 51% of the street frontage prop-rty owners. Councilmember Goetten voiced concern with the City dealing with private/public- roads in future planning and arbitrarily taking over the private roads. Acting Mayor Callahan stated he had no desire to `ake over Bohns Point Circle. In addition, he was not sure the road needed to be widened. Therefore, he felt Council should reject the request for the feasibility study. Councilmember Goetten asked if the Ulrich project was responsible in part for upgrading the road if needed when the project was completed? City Administrator Bernhardson stated that Ulrich had agreed to repair damage done to the roads from the project construction. Public Works Director Gerhardson stateu that the Ulrich project caused very minor damage to the .-oad. It was moved by Acting Mayor Callahan, seconded by Councilmember Sime, that the City Council chooses not to undertake the feasibility study. Motion, Ayes 4, Nays 0. MAYOR'S RSORT: COUNCILMEMBER SELECTION PROCESS Acting Mayor Callahan explained the issue of selecting a Councilmember to replace the resigning Councilmember Sime. Staff has drafted a letter to send to the interested applicants. City Administrator Bernhardson recommended July 1, 1988 be the deadline for applications. 4 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD JUNE 13, 1988 COUNCIIJCDIBER SELECTION PROCESS CONTINUED It was moved by Acting Mayor Callahan, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, that the Orono Council acknowledge the informa'.ion regarding the selection process, set 1 July as the dead l ine date, and that Council concur with the drRft letter to be sent to all applicants in advance of the interview on 11 July 1988. Motion, Ayes 4, Nays 0. CITY ADMINISTRATJR'S REPORT: RMQOEBT FOR ORDINANCE AMENDMENT -SOLICITOR'S ORDINANCE City Administrator Bernhardson explained the request from Paul Larson to amend the solicitor's ordinance as it relates to requiring to place solicitation on commercially zoned property. Staff recommends that the current language and ordinance be retained. He noted that Mr. Larson was advised that this issue would by on this agenda, but Mr. Larson -as not present. It was moved by Councilmember Sime, seconder'. by Acting Mayor Callahan, to table this matter for staff to contact Mr. Larson requesting his presence. Motion, Ayes 4, Nays 0. RMQOMST FOR ORDINANCE AMZNDMENT -ANIMAL CONTROL -FENCE HEI:.HT John Ho Lander was present for this matter and stated that the animal control matter has been resolved. City Administrator Bernhardson explained the request from Mr. Hol.lander to review the current 3-1/2' high fence limitations in relation to the setback areas. Mr. Hollander has noted other split rail fences that have been constrLeted in his neighborhood in which the posts are generally 4-1/2'-5' in height and cross bars are 4'- 5' in height. Mr. Hollander has requested to be allowed to construct a similar fence and staff has indicated to him that City code does not allow such construction. Mr. Hollander stated that almost every split rail fence in the City is in violation of the ordinance. He suggested, rather than going after all these fence violations, that the Council amend the ordinance to al low split rail fences to be at 4-1 /2' in height; and allow him to construct a split rail fence the same as his neighbors'. He stated that depending on what the city does regarding the enforcement of the fence height violation, and by not allow him to have the same height fence as his neighbors, he may have a discriminatory action against the City. 10 JTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD JUNE 13, 1988 REQUEST FOR ORDINANCE AMIENDMIENT-FENCE HEIGHT CONTINUED Zoning Administrator Mabusth clarified that the code currently does not allow the post height of fences to exceed 3-1/2'. Planning Commissioner Bellows felt that the openess of a fence should be considered in conjunction with the allowable fence height. She felt that the post height for a split rail fence would almost have to exceed 3- 1/2' in height, but the cross rails could be limited to 3-1/2' in height. Acting Mayor Callahan felt that Mr. Hollander's comments regarding the height of split rail fences is a legitimate complaint. Council directed staff to draft language to amend the fence height ordinance for Council to review and pass on to the Planning Commission to review and make a recommendation on amending the ordinance. STOBBS BAY - FEASIBILITIY UPDATE City Administrator Bernhardson explained the issue of determining whether the Council wants to undertake an updating of the feasibility report for the inclusion of areas not previously included in the 1964 study. The cost for the feasibility report would be $4,500.00. Councilmember Sime felt strongly that Council should first determine the affected resident interest in having this feasibility study done prior to authorizing the study. Assistant Zoning Administrator Gaffron stated there would likely be a mixture of support and opposition from the affected residents to the issue of installing municipal sewer. Acting Mayor Callahan agreed with Gaffron, and stated that the Council must ultimately decide if the study is necessary. He also voiced concern with the City being nickled and dimed for different types of feasibility studies. Councilmember Sime stated he did not believe the City should spend more money until the probability of doing the project is determined. He voiced concern with the City handling this study in a better way than the Crystal Bay sewer project was handled. City Administrator Bernhardson stated that knowing the cost of the project may have an impact on the support and opposition of the project. 11 i MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD JUNE 13, 1988 STUBBS BAY FEASIBILITY UPDATE CONTINUED Councilmembers Goetten and Sime were concerned with the cos+; being outdated after the long process of the study has ueen completed. City Engineer Cook explained the cost index guide which helps to estimate changes in costs without substantial effort. Councilmember Sime recommended that the residents be involved in the study. Based on Council's comments, City Administrator Bernhardson acknowledged two items of information that would be important in deciding to go ahead would be: 1) The interest of the residents, what properties would be included in the project, and the cost is volved. Staff •ild recommend ttfe feasibility study be undertaken to .termine the costs. 2) Outlining the process to avoid the Crystal Bay situation. It was moved by Acting Mayor Callahan, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, that the Council authorize the City Engineer to undertake the update of the Stubbs Bay feasibility study as outlined April 28, 1988 to be completed and submitted for Council review at the July 11, 1988 meeting. Motion, Ayes 3, Nays 1. Councilmember Sime voted nay based on his previous statements and felt that City Engineer Cook could make a reasonable estimate of the project cost without the neccessity of the feasibility study; and in his opinion, the costs will be prohibitive. Motion carried. In response to Councilmember Sime's nay comment, City Engineer Cook concurred that he did not feel the costs would greatly change from the other unit costs, but there is a lot of information he does not know yet. He predicts the unit costs will be somewhere between $10- 15,000. BUILDING CODE BOARD OF APPEALS - APPOINTMENTS RESOLUTION #2449 City Administrator Bernhardson recommended the appointment of five persons to the Building Code Board of Appeals only to be used when an appeal has been submitted to the City. It was moved by Councilmember Sime, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, that the Council appoint the following persons by adoption of Resolution #2449 as members of the Building Code Board of Appeals: 12 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD JUNE 13, 1988 BUILDING CODE BOARD OF APPEALS - APPOINTMENTS CONTINUED Steve Anderson, Minnetonka Fire Inspector Tom Anderson, Hopkins Building Official Maureen Bellows, A-n Architect Jim Hanson, Builder Theodore Paulfranz, Edina Fire Chief Additionally, staff is directed to annually include appointments to this Board in the annual resolution of appointments. Motion, Ayes 4, Nays 0. MARINA LICENSING - REVIEW It was moved by Councilmember Goetten, seconded by Acting Mayor Callahan, the Orono Council accepts the information provided by staff regarding the 1988 marina licensing process. Motion, Ayes '1, Nays 0. SEWER HOOKUP STATUS - CRYSTAL BAY Staff presented information regarding properties not presently hooked up to sewer in the Crystal Bay neighborhood. Public Works Director Gerhardson noted that the property at 1145 Willow Drive has been hooked up to sewer. It was moved by Councilmember Goetten, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, that the Council direct staff *o provide the people with outstanding easement questions with the City's current offer and that the staff be directed in July to advise Council as to recommended courses of action on any outstanding hook ups. Motion, Ayes 4, Nays 0. DRIVEWAY PERMITS ORDINANCE AMENDMENT* It was moved by Councilmember Sime, seconded by Councilmember Goetten, to accept the draft Driveway Permit Ordinance at this time and to table the matter for final approval at the June 27, 1988 Council meeting. Motion, Ayes 4, Nays 0. CLOSE OUT G.O. STATE AID 1979* ROAD BOND DEBT SERVICE FUND - RESOLUTION i2450 It was moved by Councilmember Sime, seconded by Councilmember Goetten, to adopt Resolution #2450 closing the G.O. State Aid 1979 Road Bond Dept Service Fund to the P.I.R. Fund Account for Road and Bridge Construction, Maintenance and Repair Projects. Motion, Ayes 4, Nays 0. 13 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL HEFTING HELD JUNE 13, 1988 EMPLOYMENT - SUMMER SEPTIC INSPECTOR Councilmember Peterson questioned why staff is requesting employment of a summer septic inspector for 15 weeks this year rather than the 11 weeks for the 1987 summer? Zoning Administrator Mabusth stated that 15 weeks are budgeted for this year and noted that last year's inspector also worked with lane ;rse applications so a few more weeks are needed to make up for lost inspection time last summer. It was moved by Councilmember Peterson, seconded by Councilmember Goetten, to approve the hiring of Pam Farr, a temporary full-time aide for the Septic On -Site Program for the period beginning June 15, 1988 through September 23, 1988 at an hourly wage of $7.00. Motion, Ayes 4, Nays 0. 4731/4725 NORTH SHORE DRIVE* It was moved by Councilmember Sime, seconded by Councilmember Goet�.nn, that the Council accept the information given by staff and the staff will continue to work with the property owners to resolve the issues. Motion, Ayes 4, Nays 0. FINAL PAYMENT - HACKBERRY PARK WELL* It was moved by Council- r Sime, seconded by Councilmember Goetten, to . ze final payment for the Hackberry Park Well, Fum-. Pressure System to E. H. Renner 6 Sons, Inc. ir• amount of $595.58. Motion, Ayes 4, Nays 0. PUBLIC WORKS EMPLOYMENT* It was moved by Councilmember Sime, seconded by Councilmember Goetten, to employ Barry Rathbun as a Public Works utility maintenance worker at an hourly rate of $10.28 per hoar effective upon a favorable physical examination and stress test; and to employ Randy O'Brien as a Public works utility maintenance worker at an hourly rate of $10.00 per hour effective upon a favorable physical examination and stress test. Motion, Ayes 4, Nays 0. SALARY ADJUSTMENT - DAN FISCHENICH* It was moved by Councilmember Sime, seconded by Councilmember Goetten, the Orono City Council approves the increase for Officer Dan Fischenich from $13.645 to $15.161 per hour based on the 1987 labor agreement. This increase has no effect on any subsequent longevity which is mea=lied from time in service with the City of Orono. Moticn, Ayes 4, Nays 0. 14 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD JUNE 13, 1988 RESIGNATION - CITY RECORDER* PATI PETERSON It was moved by Councilmember Councilmember Goetten, to accept Peterson's resignation with sincere job well done. Motion, Ayes 4, Nays Sime, seconded by City Recorder Pati appreciation for a 0. ANIMAL CONTROL OFFICER EMPLOYMENT* It was moved by Councilmember Sime, seconded by Councilmember Goetten, the Orono City Council approves the temporary hiring of Kevin Walsh as a Community Service Officer at $3.10 per hour commencing June 14, 1988. Motion, Ayes 4, Nays 0. MESTONICA INTERVENTION - C.D.H.G.* RESOLUTION #2451 It was moved by Councilmember Sime, seconded by Councilmember Goetten, to approve the agreement between the City of Orono, Hennepin County Planning and Development, and Westonka Intervention; and to approve Resolution #2451 authorizing the Mayor and City Administrator to sign the agreement. Motion, Ayes 4, Nays 0. NO PARKING FIRE LANE - DICKSON AVENUE EXTENSION* RESOLUTION i2452 It was moved by Councilmember Sime, seconded by Councilmember Goetten, to adopt Resolution 12452 authorizing the Public Works Department to post "No Parking Fire Lane" signs on Dickson Avenue Extension. Motion, Ayes 4, Nays 0. ADMINISTRATOR'S INFORMATION* It was moved by Councilmember Sime, seconded by Councilmember Goetten, to accept City Administrator Bernhardson's Information regarding: North Ferndale, 3536 Lyric Avenue, Crystal Bay/Shadywood - Swimmer's Itch, and Goal Setting Status. Motion, Ayes 4, Nays 0. CITY ATTONRY'S REPORT: City Attorney Barrett submitted a pr'-iileged memo regarding the Art Center for Council j review and discuss at the June 27, 1988 Council meeting. LICENSES* It was moved by Councilmember Sime, seconded by Councilmember Goetten, to approve the following License: Garbage Haulers - Baldy Sanitation Motion, Ayes 4, Nays 0. 15 BILLS* MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD JUNK 13, 1988 It was moved by Councilmember Sime, sec—ded by Councilmember Goetten, to approve payment o. he All Funds Accounts. Motion, Ayes 4, Nays 0. ADJOURNMENT 8s52 P.M. It was moved by Councilmember Sime, seconded by Councilmember Goetten, to adjourn the regular Council meeting at 8:52 P.M. Motion, Ayes 4, Nays 0. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk W. Edward J. Callahan, Jr., Acting Mayor To: From: Date: Subject: Mayor Grabek Orono Council Members City Administrator Bernhardson Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator June 23, 1988 #1025 Edward R. Henrich 4115 Highwood Road - Variance Application - Variances to lot area and lot width to declare lot as buildable. Zoning District - LR-1B, 1-acre minumum lot size. List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Notice of Planning Commission Action 6/8/88 Exhibit B - Letter from Affected Neighboring Property Owner 5/24/88 Exhibit C - Memo and Exhibits of 5/26/88 Exhibit D - Conceptual Resolution Listing Justifications if Council Wishes to Deny Application Discussion The applicant owns a 0.19 acre vacant lot next to his existing house. He would like to build a new house on Lhat lot. He is requesting the following variances: 1. Lot area (1.0 acre zone). 2. Lot width (43.5' existing, 140' required). 3. Average lakeshor_e setback encroachment of 18'. 4. Hardcover in 75-2501: based on the 960 s.f. house proposed, addition of driveway/garage/sidewalks will likely put hardcover over the 1,134 s.f. limit. In the staff memo of May 26, 1988, staff has outlined the applicants stated reasons and hardships that he feels support his request. In that same memo, staff provides a detailed analysis of why the variances are recommended for denial. I would ask that you carefully read the memo of. May 26, 1988, referring to the exhibits provided by staff, the applicant, and the applicant's attorney, in order to make a final judgment on this request. The Planning Commission reviewed this application at their June 6, 1988 meeting and voted 4 to 0 to deny the variances, based on the Findings and reasons presented by staff in the memo of 5/26/88. Staff Recommendation Please refer to page 5 of the memo of 5/26/38 and review the hardship requirements. Staff is recommending denial of the variances based on the following justification: 1. Adding another douse to this densely developed neighborhood will not be in keeping with the spirit and -ntent of the LR-1B zoning district. Zoning File 11025 Page 2 of 2 2. The granting of the lot area and lot width variances will ultimately lead to requests for variances to average lakeshore setback and hardcover requirements. 3. Granting of the variances will ultimately have a negative impact on the character of the neighborhood as well as have a negative impact on the quality of water in Lake Minnetonka. 4. The applicant has a reasonable use of the property as a side yard area which he has maintained as part of his principal residence for more than 10 years, hence denial of the variances cannot be considered as a taking. Staff would request Council direction to bring back a resolution for approval or denial to your next meeting. A conceptual denial resolution is presented for Council to review and make any appropriate revisions if Council determines that denial is in order. ZONING FILE NO. 1025 CITY OF ORONO NOTICE OF PLAKr'rNG COMMISSION ACTION P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 473-7357 Date of Notice: 6/8/88 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- TO: Edward R. Henrich COPIES TO: 4115 Highwood Road Mound, MN 55364 TYPE OF APPLICATION: Variance ----------------------------------------------------------- DATE OF MEETING: 6/6/88 VOTE: 4 For 0 Against Planning Commission recoamends the following: Planning Commission recommended denial of the requested lot area/lot width/average lakeshore setback variances based on the findings and reasons as presented by staff in the memo of 5-26-88. This item will be presented to the City Council along with a proposed resolution for denial at their June 27, 1988 meeting (meeting starts at 7:00 p.m.). Any additional information you wish to present to the Cour, _il should be in this office by June 17, 1988. 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. GEORGE APPLEBAUM 4109 HIGHWOOD ROAD MOUND, MN 55364 May 24, 19o8 Members of Planning Commission Jrono, MN Dear Planning Commisiion Members: W3 140 .i U My neighbor, Ed Henrich, has spoken to me about his desire to build a house on his lot 10 between my house and his present home. I have seen the stakes on the proposed new building site and I have no objections to the building being constructed in line with the rest of the homes; my house is set back further than the rest of the houses on the lake shore. It will not o¢struct my view of the lake. --,"1 rge WAebajm 1< To: Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson From: Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator Date: May 26, 1988 Subjects #1025 Edward R. Henrich, 4115 Highwood Road •• Variance Zoning District - LR-1B, 1-acre minimun lot size. Application - Variances to lot area and iut width to declare lot 3s buildable. List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Planning Commission Minutes/Notice of 5/19/86 Tabling Exhibit B - Henrich Letter of Request Dated 5/30/86 Exhibit C - Staff Response to Request Dated 9/23/86 Exhibit D - Staff Survey Notes from Site Inspection 5/11/88 Exhibit E - Expanded Plat Map Showing Neighboring Lot Sizes Exhibit F - Packet of Materials from Applicant, Received 5/11/88 1. Two Letters from Martinson Clinic 2. Lists of Variances Granted in Orono 1976-77-78 3. Statutes Section 394.36 4. Memo (Applicant's Attorney) 5/18/87 f 5. Memo and Letter to Henrich from His Attorney 5/10/88 6. Excerpts from Various Staff Memos Exhibit G - Updated List of Contemporary LR-lB Variances Exhibit H - Listing of Developed Lots in LR-lB Zone that are Smaller than 0.20 Acre. Exhibit I - Memo and Exhibits of 5/15/86 Synopsis Mr. Henrich owns a 0.19 acre vacant lot next to his existinq house. He would like to build a new house on the lot. He requires the following variances: 1. Lot area tl.0 acre zone) 2. Lot width (43.5' existing, *40' required) 3. Average lakeshore setback er.croachment of 18. 4. Hardcover 75-250': based on the 960 s.f. house proposed, addition of driveway/garage/sidewalks will likely put hardcover over the 1,134 s.f. limit. He feels the variances should be granted for the following reasons: 1. A residence (rental house) existed on the lot until 1975 when it was razed. 2. He was assessed for and has paid for a full sewer unit for this lot. Assessments and interest over the leriod of 1971-85 amounted to about $ 3, 500. 3. He would not have removed the pre-existing house if he had known he could not rebuild. 4. The lot has always been kpEt as a sc arate tax 1.arcel. 5. Fie was never given the oportunity to aptly for a "Non-Ccnforming Zoning File #1025 Page 2 Conditional Use Permit" in 1975 when the current zoning code was adopted. 6. This lot is similar to many others in the neighborhood. y 7. The affected neighbor does not object to the average setback a encroachment. 8. The lot has steadily increased in value over the years. 9. This will not be precedent -setting because few small vacant lots in the LR-lB district have been assessed for a full sewer unit. 10. Denial of variances to build will constitute a "taking". 11. The City has approved similar variances for even smaller lots in the LR-lC half acre zoning district, in contemporary tintes. 12. Applicants health problems limit their capability to maintain their existing residence. Staff recommends denial of the variances for the following reasons: 1. The property was initially zoned for single family residential use under the Township of Orono Toning Ordinance adopted November 20, 1950, requiring 75' minimum frontage and 15,000 s.f. area for a building lot. Minimum building lot size throughout the City was established at 140' width, 1.0 acre area per City Ordinance #22 adopted 10/12/59. The property was zoned R-IC, 1 acre/140' width in the 1967 zoning code, and LR-lB 1 acre/140' width in the currently effective 1975 zoning code. Clearly, at the time Henrich bought the property in August 1953, he would have needed a variance to rebuild on the property, and would have needed a variance at any time since his purchase. The statement that he would never have torn the house down if he had kncwn he could not rebuild may be true, but there is no evidence to suggest he ever attempted to determine his rights in 1975. The fact is, Henrich was assessed a sewer unit for a piece of property that contained a substantial structure at the time the sewer was assessed, which structure Henrich elected to remove wil-h no apparent intent to establish a future right to rebuild. 2. Applicants attorney's unjustified position that applicant was denied the opportunity to be granted a "Non -Conforming Conditional Use Permit" upon adoption of the 1975 zoning code, is based on his misinterpretation of the zoning code. Sections 10.03, Subdivision 5 (A through J) and Section 10.09, Subdivision 10 apply only to non- confcrming uses, not to non -conforming structures. Henrich's sinqle family use of the property prior to razing of the house was a conforming use in a single family zone, hence was never considered ;Is being subject to the non -conforming use sections noted, and the property was never eligible for a "Non-Conforminq Use Conditional Use Permit". 3. Assessment for and payment of sewer assessments has not been a sole determining factor in the City's Fast denial or approval of lot buildability in cases where sewer had been assessed and installed. 4. Although the applicant has maintained the lot as a separate tax parcel during his entire ownership, since 1975 he has maintained the Zoning File #1025 Page 3 lot as yard area adjacent to his existing residence. To any casual observer, the lot appears as an integral yard area and not as a separate lot. Denial of variances to build a house would not deny applicant reasonable use of his property. 5. The tax history of the lot suggests that it has been assessed at a value reflecting its use merely as yard area and not as a buildable lakeshore lot. 6. The lot is smaller than any other developed lots in the Highwood neighborhood and is smaller than 634 of the 657 developed lots U984 data) in the LR-lB zoning district. 7. The City has denied bui ldabi 1 ity for two lots of 0.25 acres and 0.22 acres respectively in the LR-lB district in contemporary times; the smallest LR-lB lot granted variances in contemporary times was 0.23 acres in area in 1983, and was not a lakeshore lot, hence was not subject to the more restrictive 0-75' and 75-250' hardcover limitations. That lot was 20% larger than the Henrich lot. 8. Granting of the lot width and area variances would create a property that is, in and of itself, not out of character with the neighborhood, but which would alter the essential character of the neighborhood by increasing the physical and visual density of the area. 9. Granting of the variances would not be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the LR-lB zoning district, and the provisions of the Orono Comprehensive Land Use Plan's Urban Land Use policies 110, 11, 12 (CMP 4-18), since such a granting would decrease light, air, and open space for neighboring properties, and would result in increased urban impact on Lake Minnetonka. 10. Individual health concerns do not constitute a hardship to the property in the context of granting or denying variances to land use controls. 11. This property is so small that the likelihood of developing a principal residence structure and the concomitant accessory items such as garages, sidewalks, drivewavc- decks, etc. is not reasonably feasible within the hardcover r,gulationt; of the City. Pertinent Facts (Please review carefully the memo _:nd exhihits of May 15, 1986.) significant Additional Facts. 1. During the summer of 1916, Mr. Henrich requested that staff do specific research regarding the similar situations n,)ted by staff in the 1486 memo. In the I.R-1B distric�, staff located 66 E ten.tial substandard vacant buildirg lots or lot com,.inations which would he 0.19 acre or greater and currently are taxed':Se�arate parcels. of these 66 lots, 20 have been assessed for sewer, either individually or as groups for a total of 10 sewer units. Zoning File #1025 Page 4 The most similar situation staff can find in the T -1B district occurs at 4175 Highwood Road, where the homestead lot contains a principal residence, and the secondary separate tax parcel contains an older building, yet a full sewer unit was paid for each lot. Significantly, if based on the fact that a full sewer unit has been assessed to the adjacent vacant lot, (not just a fractional sewer unit), then it appears that the only LR-lB lot in a distinctly similar situation to Henricha is at 4175 Hi.4hwood Road, hence the setting of a precedent in the LR-lB zone might be construed to ne minimal. The significant precedent setting would however, come into play if lots which were granted a fractional sewer unit as part of a group, were allowed to be split. An illustrative case is as follows: The property at 4340 North Shore Drive contains three separate tax parcels owned in common, each of which is about a third of an acre, each of which is now vacant, and each of which wAs assessed one third of a sewer unit for a total of one unit for the entire one acre property. A building once existed on one of the three lots but was removed in 1.975. It would be inappropriate to base a splitting of those three lots on the fact that they were assessed for sewer, because each one was assessed only one-third of a unit. In HF•nrich's case a fill sewer unit was assessed and paid for, costing Henrich approximately $3,000 to $4,000 In special assessments for that property over the time period 1971-1985. 2. Since 1980, the City has only approved two existing lots smaller than Henrich's for building sites, both occurring in the LR-iC, half -acre district. In both cases, sewer had been assessed on the property. Only one of those cases was a lakeshore lot, that one being 1932 Fagerness Point Road, where an existing residence was razed and A new house constructed in its place, only 28' from the shoreline of Lake Minnetonka, but with no more hardcover than had been pre-existing, and setback no closer to the lake than had been pre-existing. That lot was 6,327 s.f. or 0.15 acre, requiring a lot area variance of 61%. Henrich is requesting a lot area variance: of 80.6%. Discussion This is a complex variance request, from the standpoint that what may to perceived as being fair to Mr. Henrich does nc.t fit within the spirit and intent of the Comprehensive Plan and the LP-lB Zoning District. Mr. Henrich has paid a full sewer unit for a piece of property that is so substandard in area that it is highly unlikely that the hardcover limitations of the City can be satisfied if that lot is developed. Furthermore, out of more than 650 developed lots in the LP-1B districts in the City, only 19 of 657 developed lots or under 3% are sirrilar in size or smaller than this proposed huilding site. The majority of those existing developed lots were developed prior to adoption of zoninq codes in the r•<ty, Atj.roval of the Henrich request on the basis that a sewer unit has been assessed tc the 1.t(jerty and chat there was a Ire -existing structure on the property, would be consistent with contemEorary City practice only if Zoning File 01025 Page 5 subject to the requirement that "all other standards of the zoning district must be met." In this case, development of the property as the applicant wishes will certainly require an average lakeshore setback variance, and in staff's opinion will also ultimately necessitate a significant hardcover variance. In this unique case, staff must refer back to the requirements for granting a variance which require that an applicant "must demonstrate that strict enforcement of the literal provisions of the code will cause undue hardship because of circumstances unique to the individual property under consideration". Such variances may be granted only when it is demonstrated that such actions will be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the zoning code. Undue hardship as used in connection with the granting of a variance means: 1. The property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under conditions allowed by official controls. Planning Commission and Council must decide whether continued use of this property as a side yard to Henrich's existing house constitutes a reasonable use. 2. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his property not created by the landowner. Certainly, the property was created at its existing size prior to the applicant's purchase of the property, but he technically gave up the established right to maintain a non -conforming structure when he removed the structure. 3. The variance if granted will not alter the essential character of the locality. It is a fact that this neighborhood is already more densely developed than the current zoning codes would allow, yet for the most part that development occurred before those codes were in effect. Granting a variance to Henrich to build on this substandard size lot will create a property that in itself is not "out of character" with the neighboring properties, but which will increase the visual and physical density of the area. 4. Economic considerations alone shall not constitute an undue hardship if reasonable use for the property exists under the terms of this chapter. It can be argued that the fact that Henrich paid a sewer assessment for the property is merely an ecomonic consideration, and that his reasonable use for the property is merely as a side yard area. For a number of years, the property has been assessed and taxed as a side yard to the Henrich's existing house, not as a buildable lakeshore lot. 5. The special conditions applying to the structure or land in question are peculiar to the property or immediately adjoining property. na conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which said land is located. Staff would agree that there are few other properties in the LR-lB zoning district which are vacant lakeshore lots of extremely small size which have been assessed for a full sewer unit. 6. The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant. The Planning Commission and Council must decide whether the unique history of this Eroperty has established any substantial property right of the applicant to have a residence on the property. Zoning File #1025 Page 6 7. The granting of the proposed variance will not in any way impair health, safety, comfort, morals, or in any other respect be contrary to the intent of the zoning code. Development on extremely substandard lots which have other reasonable uses is not in keeping with the intent of the Zoning Code. 8. The granting of such variance will not merely serve as conlrevience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty. Has a hardship been demonstrated? Staff Recommendation Staid feels there are persuasive arguements on both sides of t 4sue. Taking what can only be considered as a very conservative viewpc staff would recommend denial of the variances on the basis that adding another house to this densely developed neighborhood will not be in keeping witb the spirit and intent of the LR-18 zoning district,and the granting of the lot area and lot width variances will ultimately lead to requests for variances to average lakeshore setback and hardcover requireseents, and will ultimately have a negative impact on the character of the neighborhood as well as have a negative impact on the quality of water in Lake Minnetonka. The applicant has a reasonable use of the property as a side yard area which he has maintained as part of his principal residence for more than 10 years. 6;4­ 1 1 = MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMXSSION MELTING NNW MAY 19, 1966 i1022 SCBALL continued It was moved by Callahan, zeconded by McDonald, to recommend approval of the proposed plan with the back-up apron hardcover to remain. Motion, Ayes 4, Nays 2. Bellows and Kelley voted nay. Bellows stated that she recognizes the hardship but felt the applicant bought in to the situation and that the area is already very such overbuilt. 61023 ROLLA A. MARTIN 2675 SSADYMUOD ROAD VARIANCE-9 PUBLIC ■RARING 10:15 - 10:19 The Affidavit was noted. of Publication and Certificate of Mailing Rolla and Nancy Martin were present for this matter'. Assistant Zoning Administrator Gaffron explained the the request for a hardcover variance to construct a bedroom, addition in the 75-250' area which would increase the hardcover from 26.8 i to 27.1 •, no hardcover trade-off is proposed. No one was present from the public regarding this matter and the public hearing was closed. It was moved by Chairman Kelley, seconded by McDonald, to recommend approval as prcposed. Motion, Ayes 6, Niys 0. 11025 P. swarCs sIGm100D ROAD VARI UKM PUBLIC HEARING 7:41 - 7:42 • The Affidavit was noted. No one was present from the public regarding this matter and the public hearing was closed. Edward and Phyllis Henrich were present and requested that this application be tabled. It was moved by Chairman Kelley, seconded by McDonald to table this matter at this time. Motion, Ayes 6, Nays 0. #1027 PHILLIP pILLSSUkY of Publication and Certificate of Milling 1200 BRACXBTTs POINT ROAD VARIANCES PUBLIC HEARING 10:20 - 10:35 The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing was noted. 7 ZONING PTIB M 1025 CITY OP ORONO NOTICE OF PLYING CO MISSION ACTIOY P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 473-7357 Date of ]Motion: 5/23/86 -------------------------------------------------------------------------- T0: COPIES TOs Edward R. Henrich 4125 Highwood Road Mound, MN 55364 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- TYPE OF APPLICATION: Variance --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date of Meeting: 5-.11 36 Votes 6 For 0 Against Planning Commission recommends the following: Tabled: For reasons noted below NOTES AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS: Tabled at applicant's request. Please contact Mike Gaffron at least 10 days prior to the June 16 meeting to discuss how you wish to proceed. - -- - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - -- -- ---- - -- ----- ---- Applicant's next scheduled meeting is dependent upon receipt of additional information. Deadline for the June 16 meeting is June 6 or July 11 for the July 21 meeting. If the applicant has trouble obtaining additional information, please contact the Zoning Department (473-7357). If you desire certified copies of the official Planning Cosmission minutes, they are available from the City Recorder after review and approval by the Planning Commission. �. Ac .bdw� MR. AND MRS. EDWARD R. HENRICH 4123 HIGHWOOD ROAD rim MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364 JUN - 2 W6 U.� MAY 30, 1986 MIKE P. GAFFRON, ASSISTANT PLANNING & ZONING ADMINISTRATOR SUBJECTt 01023 EDWARD R. HENRICH, 412n HIGHWOOD ROAD - VARIANCE ZONING DISTRICT - LR-1B, 1-ACRE REFERRING TO YOUR LETTER OF MAY 15, 19a6, WE WOULD LIKE A FEW QUESTIONS ANSWERED: 1. PAGE 4 - HOW MANY OF THE 46 POTENTIAL SUBSTANDARD BUILDING SITES WERE SEWERED AND CHARGED A SEWERED UNIT? MAY WE HAVE A LIST OF THESE? 2. PAGE 4 - OF THIS NUMBER, HOW MANY HAD PREVIOUSLY HAD A HOUSE ON THEM? MAY WE HAVE A LIST OF THESE? 3. PAGE 1 - WHAT CONSTITUTES A "SMALL CABIP"'? TO OUR WAY OF THINKING A HOUSE WITH FULL BASEMENT AND FULL BATH IS MORE THAN A "SMALL CABIN". PLEASE NOTE THAT OUR CORRECT ADDRESS IS 4125 HIGHWOOD ROAD. SINLLKELY, 46. 1 ,� • . 1 �A1y `4�y. CITYof ORONO Pust Office Boa 660Crya:a! Bay. manneema W230Muniapw Oak. •.�>>G On the North Shore of Lake Minnetonka September 23, 1986 Mr. 6 Mrs. Edward R. Henrich 4125 Highwood Road Mound, MN 55364 Re: Information Request of 5/30/86 Dear Mr. i Mrs. Henrich: In response to your request noted a5ove, I have researched City files to compile the following information regarding your variance application: Q1. How many of the 46 potential substandard building sites were sewered and charged a sewer unit? Al. A more thorough search actually located 66 potential sub— standard vacant building lots or lot co-a—binations which would be 0.19 acre or greater and currently are taxed separately. Of these 66 lots, 20 have been assessed for sewer either individually or as groups for a total of 10 sewer units. These are as follows: I. (#1) 4340 North Shore Drive 3 potential 2. (14) 4175 North Shore Drive 3 potential 3. (17) 425 Tonkawa Road 2 potential 4. (115) 4765 Tonkaview Lane 1 potential 5. (i20) 475 Linden Lane 2 potential 6. (122) S. of 525 Tonkawa Road 2 potential 7. (124) Tonkawa/Park Avenue 2 potential S. (125) 4055 Elm Street 2 potential 9. (#33) 4130 No Shore Drive 2 potential 10. (134) 4175 Highiood Road 1 potential 10 Sewer Units 20 Lots Of the remaining 46 Lots: lots 0.19 ac. or greater lots 0.19 arc. or greater lots 0.19 ac. or greater lots 0.19 so. or greater lots 0.19 ac. or greater lots 0.19 ac. or greater lots 0.19 ac- or greater lots 0.19 so. or greater lots 0.19 ac. or greater lots 0.19 ac. or greater -15 were charged a partial sewer unit as part of a group of properties with a main house (i.e. 1/3, 1/3, 1/3), signifying these lots were considered as part of a single developed building site at the time of assessment. •LILUING A L" NG — 473.7137 • AUM1NWTIIATION A FINANCE — 47}7U • FtWX Wwp — 473-71" ASSESSING Mr. 6 Mrs. Henrich September 23, 1986 Page 2 of 2 -31 were not charged a sewer unit at al:, signifying these were not contemplated as building sites at the time of the sewer assessment. Q2. How many of these 10 charged a sewer unit has previously had a house on them? A2. Only 2 - 4340 North Shore Drive and 4175 Highwood Road. The -emaining 8 of 10 have always been va.:ant according to our records. Q3. What constitutes a "small cabin"? A3. In the context of my memo, "small cabin' refers to a secondary structure cn a property or group of properties, this structure impressing one as being subordinate to an existing principal structure on the property or group of properties. The cabin size or the fact that the cabin had or didn't have a basement is perhaps less relevant than flu prior use of that structure, "c+ibin" suggesting a seasonal use rather than use as a permanent residence. The fact that your vacant lot is assessed for sewer may or may not have an impact on the Planning Commission and Council's view of the property. The fact that the City assessment records indicate the structure was a "remodeled cottage for year-round living, in need of physical repair, presently rented, originally a part of (Lot 20 and 21), heat and water obtained from adjoining property," indicaltes some question as to whether this property was ever a bona -fide principal residence. Note that City files will continue to use 41.15 Highwood Road in referring to the vacant lot in question, in order to differentiate between it and your homestead property at 4125. I apologize that this review took so long, however, your request hit at the busiest part of the year for City staff. Please contact me if you have further questions and to discuss how you want to proceed with your application. Sincerely, Michael P. Gaffron, MPG/tln Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator Enclosure Certificate of Survey for Edward R. lienrich of Lot 19, Highwood Lake Minnetonka i i R, i, 00 �---- 14- 0 rr It.7J i v MiN� S AICE � �, � 'lFa =. I . I hereby certify that this is a true and correct representation of a survey of the "HIGHWOOD LAKE MINNETONKA", the location of existing hardcover, and the proposed to building. It does not purport to show other improvements or encroachments. COFFIN a GRONBERG, IP 011f 2.11 o c Qtr��s� A� � 1p Cyr Co awli 1.01 1011 Rook on ZE Law 04 C.2 R On efo MIN S AKA 'V f11P I hereby certify that this is a true and correct representation of a survey of the "HIGHWOOD LAKE MINNETONKA", the location of existing hardcover, and the proposed to building. It does not purport to show other improvements or encroachments. COFFIN & GRONBERG, Mark S. Gronbery Date : 4-9-86 EngJneers & Land 5 Scale: I" x 20' Lon; Lake, MinnesG 0 Iron marker # _ 1-1IH AHON31H ac �3t HIHON ' ao wad O t � � ' ✓ .. It mot,-_-,_ � a'CD 21 • � O } HIHON 9hLAJ •O oe >- oS i 9 60I > > Z Ip' N �O W 90 G``�-� .o i • a 141 P. Iv � SZ 00 Zev to-� � N ��\ m iQ • � � !gyp N „I . ,r `M. ` — S i 17 N •T N L O dm v tool - PO/ Ito r s vavN�ao 0 9.r . o 4 S%1 oy v v a v` �0 Q in 0 61 L� 0 �r " 1 ELMER J. MARTINSON, M D SURGERY ROLLAND A OLSON. M D. INTERNAL MEDICINE f ? KENNETN L DEDEKER, M D INTERNAL MEDICINE EDWARD L PIERCE M D INTERNAL MEDKJNE I " i To Whom It May Concern: RE: Edward Henrich MARTINSON CLINIC, LTD. 317 EAST WAYZATA BOULEVARD WAYZATA, MINNESOTA 55N1 PHONE 473-EN13 April 24, 1987 Mr. Henrich has developed osteoporosis and, in.spite of his vigorous appearance, has been told he should not lift over 25 pounds because of increased risk of collapse of his vertebrae. Sincerely, 1-.'Pi erce , M. D. ELP:sd MARTINSON CLINIC, LTD. 317 EAST WAYZATA BOULEVARD WAYZATA. MINNESOTA 55391 PHONE 413-5883 ELMER J MARTINSON, M D SURGERY ROLLAND A Off. M D. INTERNAL MEOCINE KENNETM L DEDEKER, M D INTERNAL MEDICINE EDWARD L PIERCE, M D. INTERNAL MEW-P* Phyllis Henrich j 4125 Highwood Road Mound, Minnesota 55364 RE: Physical exam of 4/10/87 Dear Mrs. Henrich: May 13, 1987 This is a review of the findings of your physical in April of this year. j As you will recall, we were concerned about your mitral valve prolapse, your history of atrial fibrillation, and congestive heart failure. I also noted the varicosities again, some minor skin changes, and, of course, the fibrocystic changes in your breasts. Basically, no new findings were noted on the exam. We discussed con- tinuing the Coumadin and a diuretic and also the possibility of putting you on estrogen supplements. Your sigmoidoscopy was normal. Your blood work, including a blood count and a chemistry profile, was mostly normal. Hemoglobin was 11.9. The sedi- mentation rate, which has chronically been elevated, was actually a little I lower than it has been at 33. Your urine was clear. The cholesterol was ' normal at 203. Your HDL cholesterol was normal at 64. giving you a below average risk based on the cholesterol. One of the liver function tests was slightly elevated at 68 with a normal range of 0-45. However, we have seen a number of those elevated and elevated alone, particularly in somebody who has had heart failure and I choose, usually, to ignore it. Your thyroid function was normal. Basically this is a good report. If you have any questions, please feel I free to contact me. Sincerely, fE,�Pierce, M.D. ELP:sd i EXHIBIT 6 1' ItG d h C f Orono• �� L.a-_ ter artances rante to t e t_y o Case Date Number Address Variance(s) Cranter; 1/12/76 3245 Carman Road Side setback 1/12/76 1055 west Ferndale Road 1) Lot area 2) Lot width ') Front setback 1/26/76 650 Morth Arm Drive 1) Lot area 2) Street setback 1/26/76 2975 Casco Point Road Side setback 1/26/76 4025 Iiatertown Roac 1) Lot wroth 2) Side setback 3/22/76 1200 Wildhurst Trail 1) Lot area 2) Lot width I/12/76 3755 Bayside Road 1) Lake��.o�e sEtbac:� 2) Front satbLck 4/12/76 7045 North Arm Drive 1) Lot area 2) Lot widtn 5/10/76 601 Minnetonka Hign- Lot area lands Lane 5/10/76 235 Crestview Avenue 1) Lot area 2) Front setback 3) Side setback5/10; 76 1430 Cher:! Place 1) front setbzc': 2) Side satoack 5,,110/76 1462 Park Drive Setback 5/10/76 584 Dakota Avenue Lot area 5/10/76 951 Springhill Road Lot setbac% E/14/76 1045 Brown Road South 1) Lot area 4l.�t wtatn 3) s ce setback 9, - 2 3,17 6 2530 Casco Point Road Lot width s: 7/2 6/7 6 7/26/76 8/9/76 8/9/76 8/9/76 8/9/76 8/9/76 8/9/76 8/9/76 8/9/76 8/9/76 6/23/76 8/23/76 8/23/76 9/13/76 168 171 9/27/76 114 9/27/76 178 Big lslano 1) Lot area 2) Lakeshore setback 3) L)trcet sutuack 4) bard cover 1020 Tonkawa Road Lot wiutI 1359 Park Drive Side setback 4200 North Shore Drive Lot width 1345 North Arm Drive Setback between structure .1945 Fagerness Point Rear setback Road 1360 Vine Place Lot area 840 Old Long Lake Roaa 1) Lot area 2) koau setback 2711 Kelly Avenue 1) Lot width 2) Lot area 3243 Casco Circle 1) Lot area 2) Lot wiutn 1940 Concordia Street Setback 1440 Laldur Park Roao 1) Sida setback 2) Street right-of- way setback 1380 RE3L Puir,t Road Unspecified 4500 ldort:ishore Drive Lot area 1179 :lmwood Avenue 1) Front setback 2) Side setback 630 Park Lane Unspecifie:; 2700 Casco Point Roee 1) Lot area 2) Lot width 3) Sidi' setback 4099 Highwood Road 1) Sioe setback 2) Strce t setback 3640 Bayside P.oad Right-of-way setbacK 1085 Drown Ro:,u South Side setback ' 10/12/76 179 4445 North Shore Drive 1) Lot area 2) Lot width 10/25/76 184 2425 Scotch Pine Lane 1) Lot area 2) Lot width 3) Side setback 4) Street setback 10/25/76 185 1442 Shoreline Drive 1) Lot area 2) Lot width 3) Side setback 4) Lakeshore setback 10/25/76 188 1304 Eln:-+ood Avenue 1) Lot area 2) Side setback 10/25/76 191 2285 Webber Hills Road 1) Lot area ' 2) Lot width 3) Front setback 11/8/76 177 2925 Casco Point Road S- setback 11/8/76 187 1342 Crest Point Circle 1) street setback 2) Side setback 11/8/76 189 2447 Carman Street 1) Lot area 2) Lot width � , 11/22/76 194 4685 Northshore Drive 1) Lot area 2) Lot width 11/22/76 196 2314 Shadywood Drive 1) Lot area 2) Lot width 3) Side setback 4) Rear setback 11/22/76 197 2700 Ethel Avenue 1) Side setback 2) Additional structure allowed on lot which is too small an area 11/22/76 198 1965 Country Club Road 1) Lot area 2) Lot width 12/13/76 203 1085 Herritage Lane 1) Lot area 2) Lot width 3) Side setback 4) wetlands setback I 12/13/76 208 585 Old Crystal Bay Rd. Got area 1/10/77 164 1121 Elmwood Avenue 1) Lot area 2) Lot width 3. s t. . 1/10/77 195 2799 Casco Point Road Lot width 1/10/77 206 4200 Watertown Road 1) Lot area 2) Lot width 1/10/77 207 1.040 Townline Road Lot width 1/10/77 214 116 West Ferndale Road 1) Lot area 2) Lot width 3) Side yard setback 4) Lakeshore setback i 5) Secona story addition over existing garage 1/10/77 215 780 Tonkawa Road 1) Lot area 2? Lot width 3) Side setback 1/10/77 216 1199 Elmwood Avenue 1) Lot area 2) Lot width 3) Right-of-way setback for existing garage 2/14/77 224 3560 Ivy Plate 1) Lot area 2) Lot width 3) Siae setback 4) Lakes setback 2/14/77 228 469 Tonkawa Road 1) Lot area 2) Lot width 2/14/77 21 100 Orono Orchard Road 1) Lot area 2) Lut width 2/28/77 226 3779 Casco Avenue Lot area 2/28/77 231 190 Cygnet Place 1) Lot area 2) Lot width 3/28/77 240 4496 Northshore Drive Lot area • 4/25/77 237 3450 Northshore Drive Setback 5/9/77 251 2100 Webber Hills Road 1) Lot area 2) Lot width 5/9/77 252 2605 Lydiard Circle 1) Lot area 2) Lot width 5/23/77 249 4199 Tonka View Lane Lot area 4. 4 5/23/77 256 1350 Vine Place 1) Lot area 2) Lot width 6/13/77 259 2967 Casco Point Road 1) Garage setback from house 2) Front setback 3) Side setback 6/13/77 263 1442 Park Drive 1) Lot area 2) Lot width 3) Front setback 6/13/77 268 185 Hederwood 1) Lot area 2) Lot width 3) Front setback 4780 North Arm Drive W. 1) Side setback 2) Lot area 3) Lot width 4) Rear setback 6/27/77 271 700 North Arm Drive 1) Lot area 2) Lot width 6/27/77 272 1179 North Arm Drive 1) Lot area 2) Lot width 3) Street setback, 6/27/77 274 537 Park Lane 1) Lot area 2) Lot width 7/11/77 250 920 Forest Ar.ns Lane 1) Lot area 2) Lot width 7/11/77 276 1) Lot area 2) Lot width 7/11/77 277 473 Tonkawa Road Lot area 7/11/77 279 9404 Forest Arms Lane Lot area 7/11/77 280 2175 Shevlin Drive 1) Lot area 2) Front setback 7/11/77 283 1325 Vine Place 1) Lot area 2) L•ot width 3? Front setback 9/26/77 298 1065 North Arm Lane 1) Lot area 2) Lot width 9/26/77 301 1015 Linden Lane 1) Lot area 2) Lot width 5. 9/26/77 302 3185 Northshore Drive 1) Lot area 2) Front setback 9/26/77 305 1180 Lyman Avenue Lot area 9/26/77 314 2425 Scotch Point Lane Front setback 10/24/77 321 341 Westlake Street 1) Lot area 2) Lot width 3) Side setback 4) Requirea distance between structures 10/24/77 315 960 Forest Arms Lane 1) Lot area 2) Lot widtn 10/24/77 316 4766 North Shore Drive 1) Lot area 2) Lot width 10/24/77 328 3965 Watertown Road 1) Lot area 2) Street setback 3) Side setback 11/14/77 327 1428 Baldur Park Road 1) Lot area 2) Lot width 3) Lake setback 4) Side +� :setback 11/28/77 335 280 Tonka Avenue 1) Lot area 2) Lot width 3) Street setback 12/12/77 339 2414 and 2416 Carman 1) Street setback Street 2) Rear setback 3) Lot area 3/16/78 349 4460 North Shore Drive 1) Lot area 2) Lot width 3) Lakeshore setba-4 4) Hard cover 3/16/78 353 3765 Togo Road 1) Lot area 2) Lot width- 3) Rear setback 4) Side setback 4/13/78 361 1225 Shoreline Drive 1) Lot area 2) Lot width 3) Setbacks 7/15/78 374 1265 Elmwood Avenue 1) Lot area 2) Lot width 3) Street setback 4) Siam setback 6. 7/15/78 382 7/11/78 396 7/25/78 401 11/14/78 430 4685 North Shore Drive 1) Lot area 2) Front setback 1790 Shad7wood Road 1) Lot area 2) Lot width 3) Side setback, it. required 4) Hard cover 4055 Elm Street 1) Lot area 2) Lot width 1121 Elmwood Avenue 1) Lot area 2) Lot width 3) Front setback . . V ft 7. § 394-33 Note 1 as residential and agricultural, in view of hkeli. hex►d of success of plaintiffs and rtlative hard. ships to the parties. Berggren V. Town of Du. luth, 1981, 304 N.W.2d 24. If valid county ordinance toned sites as resi. dential and agricultural, town ordinance could not designate the same -sites as light industrial. Id. Under this section authorising governing body of any town to continue to exercise authunty to plan and zone after adoption of official controls for county by board of county commissioners, but providing that no town shall enact controls inconsistent with or less reatnctive than stern. dards prescribed in board's controis, zoning reg- ula60114 of towns are subject to, and are effec. tive only insofar as they are out inconsistent with, county regulations and standards must be consistently applied to same sites and not used merely as definitions for pamicular categories. Id. Any town with the power to zone may exercise that power for the purposes of shureland management and town shoreline zoning ordi- nances must be at least as restrictive as county ordinances thus effecuvely insuring tmplemenw- tion of the county aWndards and ubwating the need w adnantnter a -A eu(urce cuunty ordr 394.34. Interim zoning -Note* of Decisions 1. In general In abbence of exp lint expreasrun of cortrary purpose by legislature, munrctpallues, under gerwral principles cunfernng broud police pow• ern, have suthonty to adopt muratoriurn zoning ordinances of a limited duration provided they E PLANNING nances within towns. Op Atty.Gen., 441-11. the extent of 50 perten April 26, 1977. or prenuxs shall be a 2. Enforcement County board is required to enforce town ton- ing ordinances only where the town has contract. ed with the county board for planning and on. foreemenl. Scirotca v. St. Louis County Bd. of Com'rs, 1f179, 281 N.W.Zd 60. 3. County controls Although building permit issued by township was in violation of j 394.33 prohibiting township from enforcing land use controls leas restrictive than county controls, where owner acted in good faith in attempung to obtain the permit, made a substantial investment in the property, and com- pleted repairs before he was informed of their impropriety, county board of stilustment could nevertheless grunt a v,ruucce for renovation of a nonconforming taathouse depending upon whether nature of property was resi- denual/recreational or commercial, whether there were other similar structures on lake, and whether minimum benefits to county were out- weighed by detriment owner would stiffer if forced to remuve bunthouse. Appeal of Kenney, App.1984, 351E N.W.2d 12u, affirmed 374 N.W.2d 27 are enacted in good faith and without discrimma- tion. Aimquist v. Town of Marshan, 1976, 3ud Minn. 52, 245 N.W.2d 819. Where sufficient data is not available w cstab• lish a comprehensive plan for ahoreland areao of a county, the county board may establish rntenm zoning controls. Op.Atty.Gen., 983-S, July 28, 1970. 394.35. Filing with county recorder Upon the adoption of any ordinance or other official control including any maps or charm supplemented to or as part thereof, the county auditor shall file a certified copy thereof with the county recorder for record. Ordinances, resolutions, maps or regulations filed with the register of deeds or registrar of utlea pursuant to sections 394.21 to 394.37 do not constitute encumbrances on real property. Amended by taws 1974, e. 571, 11 40; Laws 1976, c. 181. 1 2. 1914 Amendment. Added the second sen. 1976 Amendment. Changed the title of reg- ister of deeds to county recorder. \ 394.36. Nonconforenitles Subdivision 1. Any nonconformity including the lawful use or occupation of land or premises existing at the time of Ule adoption of an official control hereuadt:- may be continued, except as regulated, terminated or acquired by the board as provided in subdivisions 2 or 3, although such use or occupation does not conform to the provisions thereof, but if such nonconformity or occupancy is discontinued for a period of more than one year, or any nonconforming building or structure is destroyed by fire or other peril to 108 Subd. 2. The board deems desirable or n extent of and provide including requiring not terminate within a reau ordinance impose up, signs, lighting, hours ing but not limited u. Subd. 3. A noncon achievement of the gc the board by purchase Amended by Laws 1974, 1974 Amendment. i fornuty including" rasa inserted "or any nooa structure u destroyed b 394.361. Official nicer Subdivision l L.u; sites for other necemi uses which could have the owners. When tit later only at prohibitiv the land. ldentificatii both the public and V. conveniently before 4i accomplish, Subd. 2. The platy board official maps a i rated area of the con thereto shall be held i and amended by ordit All official maps at future acquisition lie,. survey shall have bee The accuracy of the f by Ure county survc: accordance with sect, town clerk of each of Subd. 3. After an permits by the count street or highway is lands for otter pubip proceedings to pay fot conditions of a permit building line that maj thus identified for pi county any right, title adoptwn of a map de compensation for but violauun of the condil to buildings or struct / , , -41 1 •� PLANNING Op.Atty.Gen., 441-1f, required to enforce town zon- e where the town has contract. Y board for planning and en. ca v. St. Louts County fad. of N. W.2d 659. ig permit issued by township 6 394.33 prohibiting township d use controls leas restrictive Is, where owner acted in good to obtain the permit, made a tent to the property, and com- ire he was informed of their Y board of adjustment could a variance for renovation of a nathouse depending upon Of property was rest - or commercial, whether milar structures on lake, and benefits to county were out. tent owner would suffer if tathouse. Appeal of Kenney 2d 120, affirmed 374 N.W.2d faith and without discrimina- own of Marshan, 1976, 308 !d 819. lata is not available to eatyb plan for shoreland area& of board may establish interim ).Atty Gen., 993-S, July 28. ;)I including any maps or Ighall file a certified copy Itions, maps or regulations ` sections 394.21 to 394.37 . Changed the tide of reg. inty recorder. or occupation of In td or introl hereunder may be he hoard as provided in •nnform to the provisions for it perind of more than d by fire or other peril te PLANNING § 394.361 the extent of 50 percent of its market value, any subsequent use or occupancy of the land or premises she" be a conforming use or occupancy. Subd. 2. Th )card may by ordinance adopt such regulations not contrary to law as it deems desirable or necessary to classify, regulate and control, reduce the number or extent of and provide for the gradual elirnination of nonconfurmities and occupancies, including requiring noncon form i ties to conform with the official controls of the county or terminate within a reasonable time as specified in the official controls. The board may by ordinance impose upon nonconformities additional regulations relating to appearance, signs, lighting, hours of operation and other esthe_ic performance characteristics includ- ing but not limited to noise, heat, glare, vibrations and smoke. Subd. 3. A nonconformity that is determined by the board to be detrimental to the achievement of the goals and objectives of the comprehensive plan may be acquired by the board by purchase. Amended by LAwe 1974, c. 571, 44 41 to 43. 1974 Amendment. Insert.d "any noncon- formity including" inserted the exception and inserted "or any nonconforming building or structure is destroyed by fire or other peril to 394.361. Offlclal map the extent of 60 percent of its market value," in subd. 1; rewrote subd. 2; and added subd. 3. For former text see main volume. Subdivision 1. Land that is needed for future street and highway purposes and as sites for other necessary public facilities and services is frequently diverted to nonpublic uses which could have been located on other lands without hardship or inconvenience to the owners. Wnen this happens, public uses of land may be denied or may be obtained later only at prohibitive cost or at the expense of dislocating the owners and occupants of the land. Identification on official maps of land needed for future public uses permits both the public and private property owners to adjust their building plans equitab!y and conveniently before investments are made which will make such adjustments difficult to accomplish. Subd. 2. The planning commission may develop and recommend for adoption by the board official maps and amendments thereto covering all or any portion of the unincorpo- rated area of the county. Public hearings on proposed official maps and amendments thereto shall be held in accordance with section 394.26. The official map may be adopted and amended by ordinance by the board. All official maps shall be prepared in sufficient detail to permit the establishment of future acquisition litres on the ground. In unplatted areas a minimum of a centerline survey shall have been made prior to the preparation of the final draft of the official map. The accuracy of die future acquisition lines shown on the official map shall be attested to by the county surveyor. Copts of official maps and amendments shall be filed in accordance with section 394.35. One copy of the official map shall be furnished to the town clerk of each affected town. Subd. 3. After an official map has been adopted and filed, the issuance of building permits by the county shall be subject to the provisions of this section. Whenever any street or highway is widened or improved or any new street is opened, or interests in lands for other public purposes are acquired by the county, it is not required in such proceedings to pay for any building or structure placed without a permit or in violaUon cf conditions of a permit within the limits of the mapped street or highway or outside of any building line that may have been established upon the existing street or within any area thus identified for public purposes. The adoption of official maps does not give the county any nght, title or interest in areas identified for public purposes thereon, but the adoption of a map does authorize the county to acquire such interests without paying compensation for buildings or structures erected in such areas without a permit or to violation of the conditions of a permit. The provisions of this subdivision shall not apply to buildings or structures in existence prior to the filing of the official map. 109 t; xN • F. y M E M 0 TO: George FROM: John DATE: 5/18/87 RE: Ed Henrich/zoning problem have just had the opportunity to make a final review and evaluation regarding the possibility of obtaining a variance for Lot 19, Highwood Lake Minnetonka. After extensive review of the City Code of the City of Orono, Minnesota, it is my conclusion that as a matter of right, the City must grant a variance and allow building on Lot 19. Under section 10.02 of the City Code entitled "Definitions," the o:.d house fell under the categories of subdivision 47 "Non- conforming Structures," and subdivision 48 "Non -conforming Use." Subdivision 47 defined a non -conforming structure as "any structure which is legally existing on January 1, 1975, which would not conform to the applicable regulations if this structure were to be erected under the provisions of the zoning chapter_." Subdivision 48 defined non -conforming use as "use of land, buildings or structures legally existing on January 1, 1975, , which does not comply with all the regulations of the zoning chapter or any amendments to t governing the zoning district in which such use is located." Under these definitions, if the building existed on January 1, 1975, the use of that building constituted a lawful, non -conforming use. In section 10.03 of the code, "General Provisions", subdivision 5 states that "any land or buildings which were actually and legally devoted to a non -conforming use or. January 1, 1915, may be continued in said non -conforming use pursuant to conditional use permit granted as hereinafter specified." Subsections h and i stated respectively "normal maintenance of a building or other structure dontaining or related to a lawful, non -conforming use is permitted, including necessary nonstrucural repairs and incidental alterations which do not extend. or intensify the non -conforming use," and "alterations may be made •.o a building containing lawful, non -conforming residentit units when they will improve the liveability thereof, provided they will not increase the number of dwelling units or bulk of the building." Subsection j, which applies to uses only, states that "the non -conforming use provision of the zoning chapter applies only to the use of which land and buildings are put, and do not apply .ti to situations where height and location of structures, lot size or other factors not involved in the use of the premises, prevents strict conformance with the requirements of the zoning chapter. Where, however, such a situation existed legally under the prior applicable law, the council will not unreasonably require strict compliance and will generally look with favor on 1 granting of a variance under section 10.08." Several arguments can be made by utilizing the language of this subdivision and its subsections. One is the existing structure would have been maintained if razing the building would result in a non -buildable lot. A more direct argument can be made from subsection i, in that significant alterations could have been made to the building, provided they did not increase the number of dwelling units or bulk of the building, thus making the existing structure more adequately maintained to insure its permanence. The general premise of either argument is that had it been known that no rebuilding would be permitted, the original building would not have been destroyed. Section 10.09, subdivision 10, of the code, regarding conditional use permits for non -conforming uses, states "all non- conforming uses actually and legally existing on December 1, 1974, shall be issued a conditional use permit upon application therefor not later than January 1, 1976. Such conditional use permit shall allow the continuation of the non -conforming use of the same extent and degree as then existing on December 1, 1974. Such permit shall be granted without application fee and the council shall be limited to such permits to the full and accurate statements of the conditions pertaining to the existing uses. Such permit shall not be subject to periodic review." The key argument under this subdivision relies )n the fact that no notice regarding applying for the conditional use permit was given. Absent such notice, a violation of due process rights occurs since the City would have been required by statute tc issue you a conditional usn permit upon proper application. The strongest argument in favor of granting a variance for Lot 19 is in regard to the separate sewer and water hook-up for which an assessment was paid. The City itself economically benefited by requiring payment of this special assessment. By forcing payment of an assessment, it can be argued that the City had recognized Lot 19 as a .separate and self-sufficient lot, which must receive a variance as a non -conforming use. Section 10.0A, subdivision 3, of the code, states that one of the powers of the board of appeals and adjustments is to "hear requests for variances from the literal provision of the zoning chapter in instances where strict enforcement would cause undue hardship because of circumstances unique to the individual property under consideration, to grant such variances only when it is demonstrated that such actions will be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the zoning chapter. Undue hardship as used in connection with the granting ofvariance means: "(2) the plight of the land owner is due to circumstances unique to his property not created by the land owner; (3) variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality." The undue hardship in this case can be based on the factors of sewer and water hook-up, for which an assessment was paid and from which the City benefited economically. It can also be based upon a due process violation when the City failed to notify of the statutory right to a conditional use permit. in the planning commission report prepared by Michael P. Gaffron on May 15, 1986, certain elements and/or facts must be emphasized. First of all, on page 3, there is no evidence that there has ever been a denial of any application for a lot area/width variance for those lots under common ownership. The only applications for variances which were denied involve single separate ownership lots. Unlike Lot 19, these lots which were denied buildability lacked the availability of a sewer, and water hook-up. In conclusion, the fp:cts surrounding any application for a variance for Lot 19 in the LR/lB zone, support the granting of the variance request. HENRICH ZONING PROBLEM May 10, 1988 From: JOHN I. SYNOPSIS OF LR-lB VARIANCE REQUESTS LR-lB, 1 acre zoning district. (43,560 square feet) The following are evidence of applications a-eroved and denied in the LR-lB zoning district, together with the characteristics or primary reasons that the application was approved or denied. A. Applications Approved. 1. 802 Munsel - variance granted - .23 acres/778 variance required - lot assessed for sewer. - no other land available - lot platted before current zoning ordinances went into effect. - cabin existed on property for over 30 years. - 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 hazard or danger to other neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the owner, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right to the owner; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the zoning code and comprehensive plan of the City. 2. 833 Brockopp - varianci;n�d g�wateir., - assessed fog full sewer /''0 - building can meet requirept for lot width and area. - no additional land available to the owner. - applicant acquired lot prior to rezoning. - existing conditions peculiar to the property and not applicable to other property in the district. - granting would not adversely affect the traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other hazard or other danger to other neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the owner, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right to the owner; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the zoning code and comprehensive plan of the City. 3. 858 Howel, - variance granted - no other land is available to be combined with the property. - the existing cabin is a legal non -conforming structure and is subject to pertinent ordinances. - the property has been assessed for single sewer unit. - the conditions existinq on this property are peculiar to it, do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; -1- that granting tc►c variance would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, aii, etc. 4. 1188 Kaplan - v T-&T nted - lot asstsed and rov�de for both sew • a•.d water - lot had been retained as an indepen ent pircel and has never been legally combined for tax purposes with the adjacent lot owned by the applicant. - the lot was created prior to the City"s adopting of ordinances that would have provided standards for the development of the lots. - the applicants have owned the lots for approximately 30 years. - lots were consistent in size with the neighborhood - no affect on health, safety or welfare reasons to deny the variance - the two sub -standard lots currently existed and were not being created. - mayor stated "he felt the City confirmed the buildability of the lot by the assessment of sewer and water prior to the zoning change" - although the neighbors were against the approval, the variance was ultimately granted. 5. 820 Fisk - variance decried - the property had been assessed one. --half of a sewer unit. - existing house/cabin has never been hooked to sewer. - applicant created the hardship by purchasing tax forfeited land which as explained at the time of sale, was subject to local zoning laws and building ordinances, which could not guarantee buildability. The variance, if granted, coupled with other sub- standard lots, would drastically alt(--,r the essential character of the locality. The property could be put to reasonable allowed use, it could be combined with adjacent property, and there was an outstanding offer to purchase by the adjacent property owner. - at the council meeting held October 29, 1984 it was found that a one-half sewer unit was charged indicating question on the part of someone that the lot is sub -standard. - no unique hardship in this case, any hardship existing beincr "self-imposed" II. SYNOPSIS OF LR-1C VARIANCE REQUESTS 1. 1357 Swanson - variance granted - ing house meets all original 50 foot lakeshore setback standards, existing before 75 foot lakeshore setback requirement was imposed. - pie shaped lot had placed severe restrictions on the building envelope making one-half of the lot area unbuildable. - the special conditions applying to the structure or land in question are peculiar to such property or immediately surrounding property and do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which said land is located. - the granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of a -2- substantial night of the applicant. - the granting of the proposed variance will notin any way impair the public health, safety, comfort, morals or general welfare. - the granting of the proposed variance will not be con'- to the intent of the comprehensive land use, planning or code. - the granting of such variance will not merely serve as convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to to alleviate demonstrable hardships or difficulties. 2. 827 Williams - variance granted - existing sewer and water connections. - no additional land available to be combined with the property. - applicant revised original hardcover proposal. J.; �' — 1a2 � 6iv cep c � s be �+ ► e� � . 3. 912 Hedlund - vari.anc granted .22 acre lot (lot half i LR1B) municipal sewer serves the property, but no water. Applicant had been forewarned that the lot may be unbuildable prior to its purchase in 1981 as tax -forfeited lands - property could be combined with adjacent properties to the east or south, both of which are substandard in the area. 4.� 2014 Beldon/Moline - variance denied - ttie uilding which was removed was required to be removed because it was dilapidated and hazardous and was not removed merely to appease the planning commission, and because the building was vacant for a great many years, there are no "grandfather" rights to build on the property and this is not a "taking" of property. - variances of the number and magnitude requested have not been previously granted for any property in the LR-IC zoning district in contemporary times. The coun:il finds that denial of the variances is consistent with previous council action and does not deny applicant equal treatment and protection under the law. - the property does not conform to the current development pattern of the neighborhood. - the granting of the variance for the proposed development would set and adverse precedent in the city. - the intent of applicant is contrary to the letter and intent of the Orono Comprehensive Plan. - the amount of light and air in the neighborhood would be diminished by adding the structure on this substandard lot - the values of surrounding properties will be adversely affected - the proposed variance would have an adverse affect upon the health, safety and welfare of the community for the reasons outlined herein III. STATUTES,'ORDINANCES/COURT CASES Minnesota Statutes Annotated Section 394.36 ent4tled "Non - Conformities" states subdivision 1. Any ncir rr,nf.-, - • - including L the lawful use or o.;cupation of land or premises existing at the time of the adoption of an cfficial control hereunder may be c:ontinu except as regulated, terminated or acquired by the board a. L�rovided in Subdivisions 2 or 3, although such use or occupation does not conform to the provisions thereof, but if such non -conformity or occupancy is discontinued for period of more than one year, or any non -conforming building or structure is destroyed by fire or other peril to the extent of 50% of its market value, any _ubsequent use or occupancy of the land or premises shall be a conforming use or occupancy. (Remainder of statute attached hereto.) Gection 10.09, Subdivision 10, of the City Code of Orono regarding Conditional Use Permits for Non -Conforming Uses, states: "All non -conforming uses actually and legally existing on December 1, 1974, shall be issued a Conditional Use Permit upon application therefore not later than January 1, 1976. Such Conditional Use Permit shall allow the continuation of the non- conforming use tc the same extent and degree as then existing on December 1, 1974. Such Permit shall be granted without application fee and the council shall be limited to such permits to the full and accurate statements of the conditions pertaining to the existing uses. Such permits shall not be subject to periodic review" The key argument to this Subdivision rests on whether or not Ed received notice that he needed to apply for the Conditional Use Permit. There is a strong due process argument should it be found that Ed received no such notice; the arguirpnt being, had he known that such a Conditional Use Permit was required tQ be issued, he would have applied for it. On June 9, 1987 the U.S. Supreme Court decided the case of First English Evanqelical Lutheran Church of Glendale, v. County of Los Angeles, California, 482 US , 96 1, Ed 2d 250, 107 S Ct The Court s deci was essential y that regulation depriving an owner of all se of propert- was held to entitle tine owner to compensation the period bef)re determination that the regulation effected a "taking" under the Fifth Amendment. In that case, the Court stated that the gr.neral rule at least is, that while property may be regulated to a certain extent, if regulation goes too far, it will be recognized as a taking." Id., at 265. The Court further stated that "there is no dispute about the proposition that a regulation which goes "too far" must be deemed a taking. When that happenes, the gov, rnment has a choice: it may abandon the regulation or it may continue i;~d compensate those whose property it takes." Id., at 272. An argument based on First Erll i' h ►.- gat Sectiur. 10.09, Subdivision 10, of the City C' of !. �rding Conditional Use Permits for non -conforming u._ sti".utes a taking since Ed was entitled to a Conditional U5� eermit but was not iotified that he could apply for one, nor that the razing of the existing house would result in his waiver of the right to -4- rebuild. V. FACTUAL SYNOPSIS AND CONCLUSION The attached memo dated 3-23-87 provides a detailed analysis of the City Code of Orono and provisions relating to zoning, along with specific reasons why the lot should be granted a variance by utilizing the word of the statute. However, the reality of the situation also dictates the granting of the variance for this lot. The reality of the situation essentially breaks down as follows: The topography of the lots situated on Highwood Road is such that Lots 19 and 20 essentially are on a penisula. As such, Lot 18"s shoreline and lakeview are angled slightly to `he left. The house itself on Lot 18 is angled to the left. As a.--h, the building of a house on Lot 19 would not impair the vision, air nor light of Lot 18. In addition, Lots 18 and 19 ere separated by bushes approximately 10 feet high which have existed for over 20 years. Finally, the owner of Lot 18 is not opposed to the building of a permanent residence on Lot 19 since such a building would have a very limited, if any, effect on the 'light, ai:, or lake view from his property. The City Code of Orono was adopted in 1974. Ed Henrich has been the owner of Lots 19, 20 and 21 for approximately 30 years. Lot 19 previously had a dwelling on it which was used as a full year residence, said dwelling being razed in 1975. At the time of its demolition, that dwelling consituted a legal non- conforming use under the City Code. The renters who utilized the dwelling as a full year residence can still be located to testify that they used the building on Lot 19 as a full year residence. " Lot 19 has been assessed for a separate sewer stub. Since � 'variances have been denied on the basis that a half sewer stub assessed to a lot indicate evidence of its sub -standard existence, then arguably, the corollory argument would be: that assessment of a full sewed- stub would indicate that the lot is buildable. Lot 19 was not created by Ed Henrich; it existed prior to the enactment c.1 the City Code. It has been taxes as an independent parcel, never being combined with Lots 20 and 21. In addition, the lan9 valuation of the property has increased steadily over the last 15 years. The: property involv,,:H depicts a demonstrable hardshi;. in that it is a small lot, with no other land available to build upon. Because of developing health problems, Ed will have to sell they property and move from tht location which has been his home for most of his adult life if he is not permitted to build on this lot. Whilu a building could be constructed to meet the lakeshore -5- setback requirements of 75 feet, Lot 19 is p,culiar in that the building on Lot 18 has an Extreme lakeshore setback, irconsi.stMt with other homes in the neighborhood. The property ow^--,-s in Lhe house with the extreme setback, h:)wever, are not opl, the building variance requester]. Upon review of the pecul*'ar conditions and unique hardship affecting Ed"s property, it seems only too clear that by taking away his right. to build a residercc on Lot 19, the Ci:-, is diminishing his right as a property owner. Upon review of the City"s ordinances and as outlined in the memo, Ed Henrich had a right Lo maintain the building that existed on Lot 19 and prior to its removal in 1975 as a legal non -conforming use. If Ed would have been on notice that removal of the existing building would terminate: his rights to build on the property, he would not have removed tre building. Pursuant to Section 10.09, Subdivisicn 10, of Code, Ed would have applied for a Cond:.tional Use Per -it, dnd one "would have" been issued. In thL: alternative and jursuant to the Code, Ed could have made renovations to the property to repair and maintain the structure. He could h&ve renovates: the struct,.ire, part by part, as long as he did not increase the area then existing. The nec effect of these actions today is that Ed Henrich could have had a permanent residence on Lot 19 existing as a legal non -conforming use. -6- JOHNSON, MACDONALD, WEST & TIERNEY CHARTERED WALTER S. JOHNSON ATTORNEYS AT LAW GECRGE C. MACDONALD 116 NORTH CENTRAL AVENUE RICHARD H. WEST BUFFALO, WiNNESOTA 55313 KEVIN J. TIERNEY M12166? 1343 662.2594 JAN C. LARSON METRO: 1612) 475.2103 477.5660 May 10, 1988 Mr. Ed Henrich 4125 Highwood Rd. Moui.J, MN 55364 c:ear Ed: As we have discussed, I have reviewed your proposal to,,split ,off, -one of the three lots which you presently own as a separate building site and construct a dwelling on it. It i.s my understanding that the lot and parcel in question is the lot adjacent to your present home on the east, being the lot th;It the "re n al house" was located on before you removed it. It is further my understanding that this lot was created at the time the subdivision was platted near the turn of the century, that the "rental house" was constructed rior to your ownership, and that the house was in existence perhaps fifty years ago or more, and.-tbatyoyuu have been assessed and pa-1 a full charge for sewer 14nd waterlat the time the services wer•Y made available by the City. /VC Based on the above factual data, I have had my staff obtain and review each of the variance applications within the LR-lb building d�•-ict of the Cit,, of Orono. I have attached to this let­r a be synopsis of each of these actions. Please note r.' r1r is stated for grantii,g the variances in the M^uns`l, How�il, and Kaplal applications seem to fit your .n.�,,,chof th se cases, there was a full assessment e the land was owned h,� the applicant prior to imp.,:,nentaa zoning code; there was no any additional laced available which could Lave been combined with the parcels to increase the lot size:; and denial of thr right to build and/or rebuild created a hardship the owner of the property. Of particular importance is the �stat.emcnt ride in the Kaplan matte,_ that the City, by r-quiring a full assessment for sewer and water in effect confirmQd the buildability of a lot. I have also noted in the list, a previo,s application in which a variance request was denied. :his was in reference to the Fisk application (number 82n the City files.) In that instance the City had recogn.. the non -buildable nature of the lot and required only a half er and water assessment, thus indicating that future buil would not be permitted at that si to,. Mr. Ed Henrich May 10, 1988 Page Two We have also reviewed the applications for variances and the LR-1C zoning district. Although this district has slightly different conditions and requirements than the LR-1B district, I feel these lots are significant in that these properties are also lakesho re properties on Lake Minnetonka, with the same type of problems, and with similar rationales for the zoning restrictions. I note in reviewing these applications that again the existence of sewer and water seems to be the key element in the decisions. Indeed, of all the cases we looked at, only the Belden-Meline lot (number 2014) was denied a variance when a sewer hook-up existed. That particular case seems to be quite unique, in that the total size of the lot was only 5,000 square feet, and that variances would be necessary for •virtually all set -backs -- front, back, side and lakeshore. In addition, the applicant in that case was not a long-time owner of the property, but rather a person who had purchased the property with full knowledge of the existing building restrictions. The City apparently was of the opinion that the circumstances were so extraordinary that even with the existence of sewer and water, this lot could not reasonably be built on, nor could the applicant otherwise meet the requirements for variance. In addition to the strong history of the previol,� valiance approval on similar lots, a second factor needs to be pointed out. The request to build on your lot is totally consistent with the other properties along Highwood Road. Virtually none of the lcts in this neighborhood conform to the present zoning ordinances. They are all substandard with regard to size, set- backs, and many instances with regard to hardcover. Although there is a defineable average set -back, even in that regard the neighborhood provides some uniqu,� circumstances. An example of this is the parcel immediately adjacent to the east where the house has an extreme set -back from the lake and most probably does not come close to meeting the road set -back requirements. A third element we reviewed was the recent court interpretations of zoning laws. Of jarticular interest was the court case dealing with restrictions in Los Angeles County, California. Along with the outline of previous variance requests, a brief synopsis of this case is included in the attached memo. You may wish to review this, but in summary it appears that the City, having established a pattern of variances in similar situations in the past, could strictly enforce zoning rules against you only if it compensate' t u for the taking of your property, i.e. denying you any use :,ich was permitted to others. That compensation would be payable even if such restrictions were only temporary in nature. The final item touched on in the attached memo is a synopsis of -he factual background surrounding your property. It is my a Mr. Ed Henrich May 10, 1988 Page 3 opinion that the request for variance should be given fair consideration by the City of Orono, and that the City has established a pattern of approving similar variances in the past. Your pr-aVerty is a unique parcel, in that it has existing sewer to" 'and water which has been fully assessed, and because it was a building site of long standing prior to the existence of the present zoning restrictions. Apparently, the City Zoning Administrator has some concern because the parcel in question is small and he does not wish to create "precedents" for other lots with areas of less than one quarter acre. Although this concern is understandable, I feel that there are extremely few, if any, lots of similar size and similar factual background. It seems unlikely that there will be wholesale applications for variances by owners of lots with identical fact situations if your variance is approved. Although you did not specifically request that the situation be reviewed with a eye toward litigation, I feel one additional comment may be in older. I believe it is in the best interest to all involved, the City, the City staff, and yourself to try and reach an agreement with appropriate restrictions on the parcel in question. A blanket denial by the City is, in my opinion, :•-bitrary and capricious. Should you be unable to work out an ai,ceptable solution with the City, I believe you would be justified in pursuing this to litigation,and I wish to assure you that this firm would not hesitate to represent you in that matter. Thank you for your confidence in asking us to review this situation. Sincerely, L C•�orge C. MacDonald GCM:djs enc. is ON Awl. A File No #802 1820 #658 1780 #873 #833 1731 #607 #679 1669 #658 **Denied Q;� F— (continued) Exhibit /I_ B. 1-Acre Zone - 43,560 square feet required Lot Area 8 Variance Name Approved Status Approved Munsell 10,000 of Vacant Lot 77% (Previous Cabin) Fisk (**10,762 sf) Vacant Lot (**75%) (Previous Structure) Coddon 16,908 of Vacant Lot 61% (Single Ownership) Bloms 16,960 of Vacant Lot 61% (Single Ownership) Clifford 17,030 of Vacant Lot 61% (Single Ownership) Brockopp 17,400 sf Vacant Lot 608 (Single Ownership) Hommeyer 22,525 of Vacant Lot (Previous Structure) 48% Bredeson 23,000 sf Rebuild/Remodel 47% (Existing House) Smiley 26,343 of Vacant Lot 40% (Common Ownership) Langhans 27,271 sf Vacant Lot 37• (Single Ownership) Howells 31,200 sf Vacant Lot 28% (Small Storage Cabin) Review of Land use application referenced in attorney's memo 607 - Bredeson - existing permanent residence on peninsula at end of Rest Point peninsula - to rebuild. Council approved a special building envelope from lakeshore on all three sides - property is sewered. 621 - Balgaard - existing house on Eastlake Street - request to install inside plumbing &holding tank for s^Tt.ic wastes. Conditional approval based on wait and see if it would work if it became an endangerment to the public, health, safety ani welfare, the City would have to review again. The property is located in the unsewered c.rea of Stubbs Bay. 645 - :orcier, Dorothy - existing residence, to rebuild requires multiple variances - house has beer destroyed by fire - unsewered area on corner of North Arm Drive and County Road 19. 658 - Coddon - tax forfeit lot on Dahl Road - appeared cnsistent with pattern of surrounding neighborhood - sewer available. 664 - Posneck - third renewal variance applica*ion on this one on Laldur Park - consistent with neighborhood development - property is sewered. F J - Lonic Fisk y 3, 1984 ,age 2 679 - Smiley - consistent with surrounding neighborhood development - sewer available. 689 - Langhans - non -riparian lot on Rest Point - assessed-foir sewer - consistent with pattern of neighborhood development. 721 - Lorge - courts reversed City's denial of area and width variances - property is sewered. 731 - Hommeyer - renewal variance - old year-round cabin served by septic �• system replaced with new structure to be served by sewer - Minnetonka Summitj' Park - same neighborhood as Lonie Fisk site. it 761 - Smith - first of our common ownership lots approved for building permit based on sewer and proposal consistent with pattern of neighborhood development. Casco Circle area. 780 - Blcns - lot consistent with surrounding developed l-)ts - property assessed and sewered. Forest Arms Country Club Estates. j 789 -'Howell - rural lot in Edge.400d Hills neighborhooe - consistent witil surrounding development - suitable area for septic exp.n!zion. 799 - Clark - rural lot on Lyman Avenue - consistent with surrounding rr-ral development - suitable area for septic expansion. 800 - Burnevik - Northern Avenue property included in recent sewer project - consistent with surroundinq neighborhood. 802 - Munsell - property included in limited sewer project of seven homes � on North Shore Drive - owner consistently informed lot is unbuildable until served by sewer. 808 - Nunnaly - renewal variance - Cherry Avenue - property assessed and sewer available - cabin existed on property for over 40 years and was hooked to sewer. a •paaoMos ST/C4jadozd - -4uowdoTaAag'poa ogiogt4BTt1 t(_4TM -4Ua_4STS'10Z) - )(Jed inplpq uo auO ST41 uo UOTIeoTTdd>j a0UeTJUA JUMaua.i PITgJ - xoausod - 699 j •OTgrJTene J as - poogaogybTau LuTpunoains ;o usalled yITm 4ua4sTsuoo pazeadde ;,-icod Tye] Uo Jo( 4Ta;30; xel - uoPPoJ - 8S9 '61 PeOH AqunoD J aATJO WJV 41JON ;0 jaujoo uo raze paioM3sun - OJTJ Aq p04031sUp Uaaq jeLi asnoq - saoUUTJUA } ajdTITnw sOITnb07 p(TngUj o-4 'OOUOpTSOI bUTISTX O - A440- i'llQ '33T0JC_j - Sb9 •Avg sggngS ;o eaip paaamasun aqa uT p974eoo1 ST A-41alnsd aqy 'UTebv i r►aTna.c 01 anr4 PTnoM 41t3 atlq 'ale;Tar► pue A4a;es 'yaTr aq 'oTTgnd ayj ,....... F.r.nnna Ito nlift, -1 r I T v tent nT nnM -IT T T n:rC nIIT 1TLIM u0 na,;vey 1827 Williams Page 3 `August 2, 19U4 Fed .4(,t,uW,N(� �JiG �►N(� C2S rE-FT 6F j ACE'5WP-C REQUIRED PROPOSED VARIANCE Lot Area 21,780 6,327 Lot Width 15,453 or 61% 100' 99 1' or 11 Lake Setback 751 28' 471 or G3. Front (street) Setback 301 -• Left Side 14' 16' or 53% 10' 10' 0 Right Side 10' ..151 0 Hardcover 1,681 or 27% 1,902 04 .exist;ng proposed EXHIBIT B�/ v e t a LOT AREA VARIANCE TABLE variance Variance Required Required Rank: by a of (In Square Feet) (In Percent) Variance Requireo; 1. #808 (#613) 10,484 sq. ft. 48% 7 i 2. 802 33,560 sq. ft. 77% 3 1 3. 800 14,280 sq. ft. 66% 4 I 4. 799 18,949 sq. ft. 22% 15 f 5. 789 21,780 sq. ft. 25% 13 6. 780 26,600 sq. ft. 61% 5 7. 761 5,032 sq. ft. 23% 14 j 8. 731 21,035 sq. ft. 48% 9. 721 (a) 2,139 sq. ft. 10% j 16 ' (b) 1,578 sq. ft. 78 17 10. 689 16,28) sq. ft. 37% 12 11. 679 17,217 sq. ft. 40% 11 12. 664 8,910 sq. ft. 41% 10 13. 658 26,652 sq. ft. 61% 5 14. 645 69,260 sq. ft. 7 9 t 2 15. 621 82,020 sq. ft. 9� 1 t 16. 607 20,560 sq. ft. 470 9 EXHIBIT C F-60 LOT WIDTH VARIANCE TABLE j Feet Variance 8 Variance Rank: By 8 of ;required Required Variance Requirea 1. #808/613 50 50 4 2. #802 90 64 3 3. #800 50 50 4 4. #799 - - - 5. #789 20 40 8 6. #780 _ _ - ¢ 7. #761 45 45 7 8. #731 40 29 12 9. # 7 2 1 (a) 40 40 8 (b) 40 40 8 10. #689 11.1 8 14 a 11. # -/ 9 - - - 12. #664 50 50 4 13. #658 12 8.5 1a 14. #645 80 40 8 15. # 6 2 1 150 75 2 16. #607 115 82 1 LR-1B LOT AREA VARIANCES 1982 - 1987 A. Granted: 1G-87 Kaplan 9-87 Kost 3-87 Lange 9-86/11-87 Maxfield 6-86 Glesne 4-86/9-84 Clifford 8-84 Howells 4-84 Smiley 4-84 Brockopp 4-84/10-81 Iaapala 9-83 �aples 9-83 Blom 3-83 Hommayer 6-82/3-87 Langhans 4-85 Hedlund 2-84 Fisk 2695 Kelly Ave. 4760 Tonkaview 4160 Forest Lake Dr. 4175 North Shore Dr. 1475 Cherry Place 4760 North Shore Dr. 1448 Park Dr. 2720 Pheasant Rd. 993 Wildhurst 4015 Dahl Rd. 4798 North Shore Dr. 4195 Forest Lake Dr. 477 Park Lane 1374 Rest Point Rd. 3990 North Shore Dr. 493 Park Lane C. Granted, but never used (Expired): 11-83 Munsell 4100 North Shore Dr. 1. Qv I L? J 0.39 acre 0.58 acre 0.45 acre 0.46 acre 0.64 acre 0.39 acre 0.60 acre 0.60 acre 0.40 acre 0.39 acre 0.42 acre 0.39 acre 0.52 acre 0.63 acre YES No NV Aiv No NC ND YE 5 YES No '} O NO Yes NC, 0.22 acre 0.25 acre tip_ 0.23 acre ^1U 4 w�o�P n /N ,�.�— g ZoN+� rA*r Bwl&. S 1 2sM�t E �*' L.�: VAe ste. s+<`' sysiir_ 2 yY ro eLr Loy Rio NM 19St O r' S /��O S s 3 7(0 •. �yZo Oro Pi 0 6 Y�C 14� y ►s 0, (y NO 1-5 9 yzro it 110 D , I S N� 3i 7 -�3 /r . / y? 3 ► �.� s z l'7 - - s-y, 1-3/3P•r� �AR� l7K . o^ D,1 1 N0 l5w► �1 Yf. _�...7 - w, Ali.�. uv R►1. s�ry ( '7) Z y fit- rM -7 .�' a To: Planning Commission Members Prom: Michael P. Gaffron, Assistant Planning 6 Zoning Administr.., .v.- Date: May 15, 1986 Subject: #1025 Edward R. Henrich, 4115 Highwood Road - Variance Zoning District - LR-lB, 1-acre Application - Variances to lot area and lot width to declare lot as ba::lddble 0-75' Lot Area - 3,900 s.f. 75-250' Lot Area - 4,536 s.f. Total Lot Area - 8,436 s.f. - 0.1.94 Acre Required Area - 43,560 s.f. - 1.0 Acre Variance - 35,124 s.f. - 80.6% Variance Lot Width (Average) m 43.5' Required Lot Width - 140' Variance - 96.5' - 69% Variance List of Eshibits Exhibit A - Application Exhibit B - Plat Map Exhibit C - Property Owners List Exl)ibit D - Survey With Existing Improvements Exhibit E - Plat Map With Neighboring Property .'.zes The applicants are requesting variances to construct a residence on this commonly -owned substandard lot. The Henrich's live at 4125 Highwood Road, in their existi,.y home on Lots 20 and 21 (combined). They purchased Lot 19 (4115 Highwood) with a small cabin it in 1953, but never combined it with their homestead. The cabin eventually fell into disrepair, and was razed in .375. Applicants state that they have always planned to built: on this lot. This is a common ownership sit,.ation, and City policy since 1994 allows us to accept applications for separation of commonly owned lots, and review them on their own merits. However, we must also look at the historical usage of the property and how a separation will affect the adaceni commonly ownAd property, and how the property fit - into the neighborhood. in ' his case, the• applicants own Lots 20 and 21 totaling 0.46 acres, ant, it 19 of 0.15 icrws, for a total of 0.65 acres commo-ly owned in this 1-acre zoning district. Separation would take 1 substan It commonly owned property and create 2 even more substandard l of t .. %)m i t , clearly r:At the intent of t►ie Comprehensive Plan. Additional tarts which may help you in for. .lating .a rccurturlrndation to the city Council include: Zoning File 01025 May 15, 1986 Page 2 of 4 1. Lot 19 has a sewer stub availabl-a and has been fully asessed for 1 sewer unit. 2. The tax valuat'_or. of Lot 19 and the land value for 4125 Highwood (Lots 20 i 21) is as follows: A. 4115 Highwood Road B. �i2:, Highwood Road Tax (value of land only) (Relative (value of land only) Year (.19 acre) --------------------------------------- Factor A:B) (.46 acre) 1986 $20,000 .21 $85,000 1985 20,000 85, L;00 1984 18,000 .�, 73,200 1983 18,000 .25 73,200 1982 16,400 .25 66,600 1981 15,000 .27 55,OCO 1980 13,200 .38 3A,900 1979 9, 1 .46 21,400 1978 8,7u0 .53 16,330 1977 7,623 .66 1 1976 7,030 - ,495 - (not br,.ken 1975 9,800 (w/cabin) 1974 9,765 (w/cabin) This demonstrates that Lot 19 Zot been taxed as a buildable lot since 1980 +/-• but has been t based on 4t3 value as Wxtra lard for the house ... '125 [tighwood F,., J. 3. The values and Ei 2es of all orher developed lakeshore lots oA;+ Highwood Road (1986 valuations): *- 4051 Iighwood Road - 51 ac -1,78,700 4075 Highwood Road - .34 ac 3S.- 4079 dighwood Road - .24 ac - 501, 4091 Highwood Road - .24 ac - 50,4.. 4099 Highwor! Road - .25 ac - 50,0 )r. 410i ..:yhwaod Road - .22 ac - 50,000 4105 Highwt,.,d Road - .22 ac 50,000 1100 Highwood Aoad - .45 ac 60,000 4149 Highwood Roa.i - .25 ac - 50,000 4156 Highwood Road - .25 a•7 - 5o" 000 4167 Highwooc. Road - .25 ac - 35,000 4175 11'ghwuod Road - .25 ac - 47,500 4195 !,,yhwoc('. Road - .83 ac - 95, 000 i:•IE that Lot 19 i e sma 1 1 ear .-n a. 1 other developed lakes: are lots on h i ghwooa Road. Zoning File 11025 May 15, 1986 Page 3 of 4 4. In the LR-lB Zoning District, as of 1984: - 657 existing developed single family residential units - 634 of 657 (or 96%) meet or exceed 0.20 acre - 508 of 657 (or 79%) meet or exceed 0.40 acre - 23 of 657 (or 4%) are less than 0.20 acre 5. Recent lot area/width varii -:s granted to common ownership lots: I•. Lot Vacant Lot District Application #813 Smith ac .38 ac LR-lB i830 Smiley ,c .59 ac LR-lB 4874 JohnstoneJ ac .35 ac LR-IC i988 Mertes .74 ac .38 ac LR-lC 0721 Lorge .48 ac .44 ac LR-1C 6. Single separate ownership lots granted buildability in recent history in LR-1B District: Application #607 Bredeson .53 ac 1981 #632 Hommeyer .52 ac 1981 #658 Coddon .44 ac 1981 1780 Bloms .39 ac 1983 #802 Munsell .23 ac 1983 (expired) #833 Brockopp .40 ac 1984 1858 Howells .60 ac 1984 #873 Clifford .39 ac 1?84 7. Single separate ownership lots denied huildability in LR-1B District in recent history: Application #820 Fisk .25 ac 1984 0912 Hedlund .22 ac 1985 8. Lot 19 is subject. to 10' side Lietbacks, 35' street setback, and 75' lakeshore setback; leaving a building envelope of about 23'x72' or about 1,650 s.f. This would be further reduced by an average setback limitation due to extreme setback of house at 4109 Highwood Road; leaving a building envelope of perhaps 23x55' or less. 9. Allowable maximum hardcover on Lot 19 would be 25% of 4,536 e.f., or 1,134 s.f. in the 75-250' zone. Eristing hardcover in the 0- 75' zone includes concrete waiks, retaining walls, and gravel beds with plastic, comprisinq perhaps 10% 0-75' hardcover. 10. Although hardcover data for Lots 20 an 21 has not been provided, t it is likely that without the Lot 19 acreage credit, Lots 20 and 21 would have hardcover exceeding 25% in the 75-250' zone, and already exceed the 0% limit in the 0-75' zone. t i Zoning Pile #1025 May 15, 1986 Page 4 of 4 Clearly, approval of this 0.19 acre lot as buildable will set a precedent in the LR-1H zone. As part of the 1984 common ownership study, staff identified as many as 46 situations with commonly owned vacant lots of size similar to that of the Henrichs in the LR-18 zone, i.e. a potential of 46 more applications for houses on extremely substandard lots ii this 0.19 acre lot is allowed. Your recommendation to approve or deny should identify the specific hardships, facts, and findings justifying your recommendation. • a r CITY or ORONO - VARIANCH APPLICATION Initial Application Fee $150.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $75.00 (no change from original application) After-tho-Fact Fees (Double application feel ------------------------------------- ------------------------------------ FROPERTY LOCATION Site Address 'Y/ / S- / l) Property Identif ication Number (P. I . D.) 0 7 - 1 i 7- .2 � q� OG IL i Please check one -- Is the property X abstract or torrens7 Please attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. ------------------ ----------------------------------- --------------------- APPLICAWT Name F DNII? � 1 � H f ty 1? / c N Phone `172 - .3 1 2 7 Mailing Address I !z/ 2 ;- 'Al /0-1*7 !4/0v0 n 1) 1)," J)y!' 1}'1'11� 34v Name F U o R t4 rnr rZ , G I f Phone N 72 - .3 / `1 7 Nailing Address y 1,A ti fy) .SS• 3 L Date Property Acquired A 9.S 3 (month/year) I (do) WW-vmt) also own the ad j t --------- L ° rs- PRESEIT USE OF PROPERTY Present Zoning Distriot ce I Present Use of Property ,�� Residential Other (specify) --------------------------------- ---------------------------------------- DRSCEIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $ Describe request in detail:e/ rN -------------------------------------------------------------------------- VARIANCRS RSQUIRED Lot Area Lot width Hardcover :et Lack Variances ( Front Side Rear) ,`t her (OVER) ' WiDSBI P Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty resulting from strict enforcement of zoning regulations: -L:.. ,� .. % ` ~ a:/' jO.-V.` /�iT / i1 pit,, AAA •' v •a'a' h/01,00 /'1i0/0 J &'V'/ rAA�l �x_1 cti -------------------------- )ESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code Requirements: /J /d �rl�,v�, Y i _1-.1-7'd. w.,t LJ,:n,i.aa/ o _ -------------------------------------------------------------------------- U QUIM SUMITTALS I. Completed Application Form. 2. Certified Property Owners List of cwners within 150' (you can obtain this list froe Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603Government Center 346-3271) 3. • Stamped, legal sized envelopes (I10) pre -addressed to each of the names on the above list with no return address. , Certificate of survey including hardcover calculations as required. Plat Nap. -------- rhe Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember :hat your variance application is not complete if the above information has not Seen included. --- 'tPPLICJIR' S 8IGN71?pRs- - - — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — , .. � . - ..• ^he applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required orwrequeeted;br. he Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay all f ees and/or unusual expenses incurred :n review of this application, and certi f ies that the information supplied is true ind correct to the best of his/her knowledge. 'applicant's signature_ ,,•m_ G �(..�� Date Z P• -- �i ln= SIGNATURE 'he owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further luthorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, -.gents, commission members, and Council members for purposes of investigation :nd verification of th_s request. '•wner's signature �c%%: �� / �' \ )�-yam., o� Data .2 ------------------------------••------------------------------------------- '+pplicant must have all submittals into the City cffic-I 25 days before the Iinr►inq Commission M :!t inq. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third :)nday of each month, m c.+! OAYE 04;-03/66 EATCH 015 30 07-117-23 64 0014 . FTUF ADM 04105 NIGH DOO 00 C'tER NAME CHAOLES E CA MART 7A%PAIER WILLIAM 6 SPICKLEY ►:e!a.'ADJR 4105 MIGIIW= . MOl)O MN SS364 38 07-117-23 44 0017 • -POP A" 041: 5 H I GH16r00 RD M*ZEN NA'[ E R 114E7IPICH ETAI TAxPA/ER IDWAPO R HENRICH NAP1I/ADDR 41ZS HIGHM030 60 . M=ID MN 55364 38 07-117-23 44 0026 VTOP ADD* 04167 HIGHWDDD RD 0(: TV NAME ►%VLIN L HALVERSu.: TAXPATER MERLIN L HALVERSON HAM /A306 4175 HIGH O00 RD MDLIPID MN SS364 38 07-117-23 44 0029 DROP ADCR 04148 H I GTnw000 PD 0-2CR NAME JEFFREY A MARTENS TJ"PAYER JFIFREY A MARTENS NAME/AW6 41" HIGHWOtJO RD MOIM MH SS344 38 07-117-23 44 0032 PROP AOOR 04116 HIGHWOOD RD 0 WR NAME BV%JCE J MDIu'f1T TAXPATER SRUCE J MDLLOzY IWM/AOGR 4116 HIEiMO00 ROAD MOJO MN 55364 HE1OA<PIN COURY PROPERTY I►FORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNERS LIST 38 07-117-23 44 0015 04109 HIGHW000 NO ROBERT F NELSON ETAL CRKDLET H A PENNY JO SLOSS SS23 VILLAGE OR EDINA MN S543S 38 07-117-23 44 0018 04149 HIGHW000 RD TARRY W KARKELA LARRY N KAR►(:LA 4149 HIGHWOOO RD ► "a MN SS364 38 07XHAPSM 021 04175DMERLINMERLIN4175 H►TOU ID i 38 07-117-23 44 0030 C4140 HIGHWOOD RD R A 3 SHEERAN RAT A SYLVIA SHEERAN 4140 HI6HW000 RO 1-UM MN SS364 TOTAL BATCH 0l5 00013 REPORT NO. PI435401 PAGE 39 38 0�117 3 N 0016 38 07-117-23 44 0019 04156 HIGHWOOD RD FRANCES 11 WILSON FRANCES W TESiR 4156 HIGHWOOD RD MOl11D MN SS364 04115 � M HHDOp RD E R HENR ETAI EDWtRO HEINRICH 4125 � RD MOUE 1!1 ` 5536• 38 07-117-23 44 0028 04150 NIGHWC= RD J A STEIIIINGER A S J MAGRAW JOHN A STEIPUNGER 41SO 14IGIlWOM RD MOIRD MN SS364 38 07-117-23 44 0031 04132 HIGHN00D RD SCOTT 6 A CATHERINE ANDERSON SCOTT 6 A CATHERINE ANDERSON 4132 HIGIN0100 POLO Moues MN 55364 1 fvH . N/O•e'LA.VQ 4� tJ 1� i 'J.9'0M��f A e• - , r I hereby certify that this If a true and correct repres"tation Of a awvq of tft bad "N1GMw000 LAKE MINNETONKA*. the location of o■istinq hardcover, aid Ve WVpO N IWAUM Wilding. It does not purport•to show other Ia►proveiments or encroadwnta. CWFIN &tM• tIC.. :,its 4_9-86 Srale I" . ?,)M. A RESOLUTION DENYING VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 1.0.22, SUBDIVISIONS 1 AND 2 AND SECTION 10.24, SUBDIVISION 5 (B) FILE NO. 1025 WHEREAS, the City of Orono is a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, pursuant to State Statutes 412 et. seq. and 462 et. seq. the City Council of the City of Orono has adopted a Community Management Plan and Zoning Regulations for the protection of the public health, safety and general welfare; and WHEREAS, Edward R. Henrich (hereinafter "the applicant") is the owner of the property located at 4115 Highwood Road within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as fcllows: Lot 19, Highwood Lake Minnetonka, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City of Orono for variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.24, Subdivision 5 (B) to allow construction of a residence on a property o:: 0.19 acre in area and 43.5' in width where 1.0 acre and 140' in width are normally required to be considered as a building site, and for variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.k2, Subdivisions 1 and 2 to allow such proposed residence structure to encroach 18' into the defined average lakeshore setback where no encroachment is normally allowed, and to construct a residence and the necessary appurtenant improvements such as a driveway and sidewalks, which will in total exceed the 25% hardcover normally allowed in the 75-250' lakeshore setback zone; and WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed the application; the recommendations of the staff and Planning Commission; and the comments and written statements submitted by the applicant, his attorney and neighboring property owner, and has considered the effect of the proposed variances on the health, safety, and welfare of the community. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Orono hereby denies the requested lot area, lot width, hardcover, and average lakeshore setback variances requested, based on one or more of the following findings of fact concerning this property: 1. The lr.operty contains approximately 8,463 s.f. (0.194 acre) in land area. Page 1 of 6 2. Th-- property has a defined width of 40.5' as measured at the 35' street yard setback line. The property has an average width of 43.5' overall. 3. The property is located in the LR-lB Single Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District, which requires a minimum defined lot width of 140' and a miniimum area of 1.0 acre for construction of a single family residence per Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.24, Subdivision 5 (B). 4. The applicant has proposed to construct a residence on the property that will encroach 18' past the average lakeshore setback line where no such encroachment is allowed per Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivision 1 (B). 5. The area of the property within the 75-250' lakeshore setback zone is approximately 4,536 s.f., which would allow 25% or 1,134 s.f. of hardcover in the 75-250' setback zone. Based on the proposed house dimension of 24' by 401, or 960 s.f., the hardcover allowance remaining is 174 s.f., which would be insufficient to accomodate a driveway, garage, and sidewalks, which are normal and customary improvements to such a lakeshore property. 6. The property was created as part of the subdivision of "Highwood Lake Minnetonka", filed with Hennepin County on September 4, 1909. No minimum lot size requirements were in effect at that time. The property was initially zoned for Single Family Residential Use under the Township of Orono Zoning Ordinance adopted November 20, 1950, requiring a 75' minimum frontage and 15,000 s.f. land area for a building lot. The applicant purchased the property in August 1953. At the time of his purchase, the property contained a residential structure. At the time of his purchase, and at any time after that, in order for the applicant to remove that existing residence structure and construct a new one, would have required a variance. On October 12, 1959, City Ordinance #22 was adopted which established a minimum building lot size throughout the City of Orono of 140' width, and 1.0 acre area. These standards continued in effect when the property was zoned R-1(- per the 1967 Zoning Code, and again when the property was rezoned to LP-1B in the 1975 Zoning Code. The property is currently zoned LR-1B. 7. In approximately 1970, the property was served with Municipal sewer, and a full sewer unit was assessed against. the property. The applicant made the yearly assessment payments with his taxes until approximately 1985, when the E.ayoff period wa3 completed. Page 2 of 6 B. The applicant razed the house on the property in 1975. Although applicant s, ates that he would never have torn the house down if he had known that he could not rebuild, there is no evidence to suggest that he ever attempted to determine his property rights at that time, nor did he make any apparent attempt to establish a future right to rebuild. 9. The applicant's attorney has taken the position that the applicant was denied the opportunity to be granted a "Non -Conforming Conditional Use Permit" upon adoption of the 1975 Zoning Code. This position is unjustified because it is a misinterpretation of Zoning Code Section 10.03, Su'udivision 5 (A-J) and Section 10.09, Subdivi-ion 10, which apply only to non -conforming uses, not to non -conforming structures. The applicant's single family residential use of the property prior to razing of the house was a conforming use in a singl'l, family residential zone, hence was never considered as being subject to the non -conforming use sections noted, and the property was never eligible for a "Non -Conforming Use Conditional Use Permit". 10. Assessment for and payment of sewer assessments has not been a sole determining factor in the City's past denial or approval of lot buildability• in cases where sewer had been assessed and installed. 11. Although the applicant has maintained the lot as a separate tax parcel during his entire ownership, since 1975 he has maintained the lot as yard area adjacent to his existing residence at 4125 Highw.00d Road. To any casual observer, the lot appears as a integral yard area and nct as a separate lot. Denial of variances to build a new residence on the property would not deny applicant reasonable use of his property, because he has the use of that property as yard area. 12. The tax history of the lot suggests that it has been assessed at a value reflecting its use merely as yard area, and not as a buildable lakeshore lot. 13. The property is smaller than any other developed property in the Highwood neighborhood, and is smaller than 634 of the 657 developed lots (1984 data) in the LR-IB zoning distrirt. 14. The City of Orono has denied buildability for two lots of 0.25 acres and 0.22 acres respectively in the LR-lB zoning district in contemporary times; the smallest. LR-lB lot granted variances in contemporary times was 0.23 acres in area in 1983, and was not a lakeshore lot, hence it was not subject to the more restrictive 0-75' and 75-250' hardcover limitations. That lot was approximately 20% larger than the applicant's lot. Page 3 of 6 15. Granting of the lot width and area variances would allow development that, in and of itself, is not out of character with the neighborhood, but which would alter the essential character of the neighborhood by increasing the physical and visual density of the area. 16. Granting of the requested variances would decrease light, air, and open space for neighboring properties, and would result in increased urban impact on Lake Minnetonka, which would not be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the LR-1B zoning district and the provisions of the Orono Comprehensive Land Use Plan, Urban Land Use Policies *10, 11, and 12, which read as follows: 10. THE DESIGN AND DENSITY OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT WILL BE CONTROLLED TO ASSURE PROTECTION OF LIGHT, AIR, AND SOLAR ACCESS FOR NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES. Requirements for minimum lct 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. 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 widths will spaceout 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. 17. The applicant has stated that one of his hardships is the fact that he and his wife have health concerns which limit their ability to ..,,,''—ain their existing residence on the adjacent Property. However, indivi'ual health concerns do not constitute a hardship to the property in the context of granting or denying variances to land use controls. 18. The p-operty is of such a limited area that development of a principal residence structure and the appurtenant accessory improvements such as garages, sidewalks, driveways, decks, etc. is not feasible witiin the hardcover limitations imposed by Municipal ,oning Code Section 10.22, Subdivision 2. It has been a standard and consistent practice of the City of Orono that when lot area variances are granted for substandard vacant Lakeshore properties, no hardcover variances are normally allowed in conjunction with such lot area variances. Page 4 of 6 19. The property i7i yueation can he put to a reasonable use, by continuing its current use as a side yard maintained by the applicant adjacent, to his existing residence. 20. The p 1 ight of the land owner is due to circumstances created by the land owner, because the applicant technically gave up the established right to maintain an existing residence structure on a substandard property, when he removed that structure in 1975. 21. Variances if granted, will alter the essential character of the locality. Granting of the variances will increase the visual and physical density of the area. 22. The applicants ecomonic considerations alone do not constitute an undue hardship because a reasonable ube for the property exists. That use is as a side yard area for the applicant's existing residence which is located immediately adjacent to the property. 23. The special conditions applying to the structure or land in question are not peculiar to the property or to immediately joining property, but apply generally to other land and structures in the LR- 1B zoning district. Standards for lot area, lot width, average 1AXeshore setback, and hardcover are standards to which all neighboring properties are subject. 24. Granting of the requested variances is not necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the land owner. When the structure ireviously existing of the property was removed in 1975, the property owner gave uE. any rights he previously enjoyed which allowed him to maintain an existing residence structure on a substandard lot. 25. Granting of the proposed variances for development of a single family residence on an extremely substandard lot which has other reasonable uses, is not in keeling with the irtent of the Zoning Code. 26. The applicant has noted no substantial hardship or difficulty that justifies granting of the variances, and the granting of th,i variances will merely serve as a convenience to the applicant. 27. The Orono Planning Commission held a public hearing on June 6, 1988 to review this rpplication, and proper public notification was given so that all persons interested in the matter could be heard. The Planning Commission voted 4 to 0 to deny the requested variances based on one or more of the above noted f.irdings. Page 5 of 6 28. The Orono City Council finds no substantial justification for granting of the requested variances, but does find substantial justification for denial of the request. Adoj,ted by the City Council of the City of Orono this 27th day of June, 1988. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, C— t� y Clerk James R. Grabek, Mayor Page 6 of 0 �i%WYrSS !�)NE•r2 I T %JEAft Aaet, ♦ N ? S%4Qmc- !—O/VQf LkiYT^ ' C,D, 6,1:>00 YL- 3�ryo i ylAo N. �� ►MAN=fz� �3 /o Ono Na YL V c K u `i w, on �- k- 1 c 50e s P) 13o L s-- I c j'e `/e-S 3�u � PIA, Ao M y 21(go L �Z - I e y'�s YLrs 870 c K-- ► c `'ems YES l8�0 a~,u�,Nt g; ls,�oo G,e-ic Ye NO 37-10-� V►Sco ,K«r M ff7ts 87 /40,7ya 44-1 c ,"P L N0 9(j'- rey ;&v f k � ' t-ors S Lle ` I 'e, a N 8q I -�, ors G-� - i ti o N a i")! LX- I g ye s No wlir.4T er-'Dct'b� g y /7, (-/m y.,e- 1 $ i _ No tot No No 241-) (x4p a 44POE4-♦ 83 �9, rva LP--- I c o Lin �"1L0 'T'awicA twoo S I ?� ��� CR- i B N� NO 2���-• -- ��.u�, y ? �� loo �� - I 1 Ile gyp No ND LNv�-w/n9 ze 87 zG, oo Z,oe lB ND 4,'o 1� F .,� 87 x ,� �� �� 1 �, � �� /1 a t i{ a // � ww f t� I L oTQa V pP[ / c�r1 e�J.f `j82 fegav e-t> A-Ds-.S 3S9g N•�%..� 11, !�+-8��� 8� 5�0o s�'. Lac -� c ye�5 ��S �3� (J►s�o �r-� Gl.ov�+e 7, 8h� yl2- I C' /v 0 N O Cs �Vr WA t �N f30f li i Dip IV Y o�_ WIZ /0� Does A)a do $9O ,J a No * Alo ' 1 i CAf�.,.r. %-117r-jt�? #. ,,) yPAf o it TID PI^-L Cb e f r_ A eq�J ,At Ae-r-r • n, C I'-) a 0 s, . em't' �. SO AG . LR-lC Lot Area Variance Actions 1980-87 Existing House on Name Address Property Mertes ( Casco Cr _ No Belden/ '3598 No Shore Dr~ Yes Meline Pemberton 3580 No Shore___Dr Yes Hedlund 39-90_No Shore Dr No Barth/ <_180Q ShadLwood RcP No Johnstone Ulku `1416 Bat ur—Pk.Rd Yes williams �932 Fagerne_ss Pt R Yes Nunnally (-3844 Cherry Ave , Yes Burnevik 3640 Northern Ave Yes Glover 3036 Casco Pt Rd NO Lorge 2697 Casco Pt Rd No Home Inds 3545 Ivy P1 1 No of Wayzata----- Posnick (-1396 Baldur Pk -Rd ` Yes Approved Denied X X X X X ya V40%kice Date Area 2 9 87 16,748 ziy- 6/23/86 5,300 '11A% 1/13/86 11,130 H9' 9,532�- 1/14/85 15,100 3t`� X 2/13/84 10,100 SL%ir X 8/13/84 6,327 717. X 2/21/84 11,296 H.f.&,: X 12/19/83 7,500 LLyo X 1983 19,500 fc, (by Court Settlement) X 1/10/83 10,000 X 8/15/83 12,870 L4 y- (No others back to January 1, 1980 in LR-lC) Summary Denied 5,300; 9,532; 7,868; 10,000 HS Vac Vac Vac Approved 16,748; 11,130; 15,i00; 10,100; 6,327; Vac liS Vac HS HS 11,296; 7,500; 19,500; 12,870 HS HS Vac HS PATTERN: Vacant lots 10,000 s.f. or less have generally been denied, vacant lots 15,C00 s.f. or greater have generally been approved. Substandard lots with existing houses have generally been approved, except in the one case of an unusually small lot on which the existing building was deemed hazardous and the access was directly to a heavily traveled County ro:ld (3598 North Shore Drive). A c .*) LR-1B LOT AREA VARIANCES 1982 - 1987 A. Granted: 10-87 Kaplan 9-87 Kost 3-37 Lange 9-86/11-87 Maxfield 6-86 Glesne 4-86/9-84 Clifford 8-84 Howells 4-84 Smiley 4-84 Brockopp 4-84/10-81 Haapala 9-83 Caples 8-83 Bloms 3-83 Hommeyer 6-82/3-87 Langhans B. Denied: 4-85 Hedlund 2-84 Fisk 2695 Kelly Ave. 4760 Tonkaview 4160 Forest Lake Dr. 4175 North Shore Dr. 1475 Cherry Place 4760 North Shore Dr. 1448 Park Dr. 2720 Pheasant Rd. 993 Wildhurst 4015 Dahl Rd. 4798 North Shore Dr. 4195 Forest Lake Dr. 477 Palk Lane 1374 Rest Point Rd. 3990 North Sh r.. Dr. 493 Park Lane C. Granted, but never used (Expired): 11-83 Munsell 4100 North Shore ur. T "-po 6 T;L 'L 12 - ?,7 q( I q! Z-7 0.39 acre 0.58 acre 0.45 acre 0.46 acre 0.64 acre 0.39 acre 0.60 acre 0.60 acre 0.40 acre 0.39 acre 0.42 acre 0.39 acre 0.52 acre 0.63 acre 0.22 acre 0.25 acre 0.23 acre p �7 (), 5� Ac Np U7 No $. �s n)o .Syr v o 3(4- ND GI% NO U01% yE -S NDi: ,I YES. eo•. �j o t, f Ij 50 ". ,A,; 6�Y. Yes ya'� Nu NC) - r to o :0, . I r, 0 z?'%.1 (C11 --1 #4c#,* • u M 1 . F ' 3.1 r",r i J'' �' .Y• ' 12"" VAC'014" ' A 3 'AlS tic W �a� stic CA a z a AWAC ON T PQoPwl x , 0 wNtwit X ptrJOTFS J toe ,r T/ol) le NeTpof-i or ALVIS �. fAEtNAM cOLINTr supyly" �� _IV. 'tor " fiNLr•Yy ic%UNT �M♦AN ,#/0Z6, MEMORANDUM TO: Orono City Council DATED: June 27, 1988 RE: APPLICATION OF EDWARD R. HENRICH 4115 Highwood Road No. 1025 Ladies and Gentlemen: This memo is presented as an outline of the position of applicant, and with the request that it be reviewed and made part of the official record in this hearing. FACTUAL BACKGROUND. Applicant requests necessary variances to construct a dwelling on a pre-existing lot of record located in the Highwood Lake Subdivision. The lot in question contains 50 feet of frontage on Lake Minnetonka and an area of .0193 acres. The lot has a sewer connection and has been assessed for one full sewer unit. The lot is located on Highwood Road. There are 12 parcels located on Highwood Road, excluding the parcel owned by applicant, of which 9 are .25 of an acre or smaller; one is .34 of an acre, and two are greater than 5/10ths of an acre. Applicant has presented substantial documentation to the Planning Commission and staff, including physicians' statements supporting the fact that he is medically restricted from activities necessary to the continued maintenance of his present dwelling. Mr. Henrich's request is to allow construction of a smaller residence and ultimately the sale of the main residence to applicants adult child to allow necessary maintenance and medical assistance. 1. THE CITY STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR DENIAL BASED ON THE "SPIiiT AND INTENT OF THE LR-1B ZONING DISTRICT IS NOT SUPPORTED BY FACTS. The staff in its recommendation places emphasis on the fact that the neighorhood is densely populated. The staff has assumed that the intent oLR-1B Zoning District is to prc•iide a density no greater than 1 dwelling per acre. The City of Orono, however, has rountinely granted variances to properties located in LR-1B zones. During the five year period from 1982 to 1987 for example, 17 such variances were granted while only 2 were denied. Of particular significance is the fact that the City of Orono, based on information provided by the Assistant Zoning I Awninistrator has NEVER DENIED BUILDABILITY TO A LOT ON WHICH A SEWER CONNECTION WAS AVAILACLE AND WHICH HAS PAID A FULL SEWER ASSSESSMENT. Of Simi Tar icance is the fact that of the 390 lots zoned LR-IB, only 111 (281) are equal to greater than 1 acre and over half of the lots with this zoning (197) are SMALLER THAN 6/10ths OF AN ACRE. It is clear from looking at these numbers that although the designation of an one acre minimum lot size might be justified as a desirable standard, the imposition of this zoning category on over half of the lots presently so zoned, does not conform to long established use, and the application of the present ordinance does not support a "spirit or intent" of one acre parcels. An analysis of applicants immediate neighborhood Fhows a smiliar pattern. 75% of the lakeshore lots on Highwood Road (exclusive of applicant's property) are less than 26/100ths of an acre. None equals 1 acre and only 8`d (1 out of 12) is as large as 6/10ths of an acre. An analysis of all properties located on Highwood Road yields an even greater disparity. Of the 24 properties in this category, none is equal or greater than one acre; one is equal to or greater than 8/10ths of an acre; one is between 6/10ths and 8/10ths of an acre and the remaining 22 are less than 6/10ths of an acre. 2. THE STAFF POINTS OUT THAT THE GRANTING OF THE REQUESTED VARIANCE FOR LOT AREA AND LOT WIDTH W(,ULD LEAD TO REQUESTS FOR ADDITIONAL VARIANCES FOR AVERAGE LAKESHORE SETBACK AND ALSO FOR HARDCOVER REQUIREMENTS. The proposed dwelling would in fact lead to a request for average lakeshore setback. In reviewing this request, however, it should be noted that the propo^ed location is consistent with, and on line with, virtually all other residences on Highwood Road, with the exception of the adjacent property owned by Mr. George Applebaum located at 4109 Highwood Road. The property at that address is a non -conforming structure which predates the existing building ordinance. The dwelling built on that lot has an extreme setback from the lake, and in fact does not meet the road setback requirements of the ordinance. Mr. Applebaum has reviewed and discussed the proposed construction with Mr. Henrich, and has made a written statement to the City stating no objection to the plans, and indeed acknowledges that it is the location of his dwelling which is the cause of the problem. With regard to the assertion that hardcover variances would be requested, this is pure speculation on the part of the staff. The proposed plans are within the restrictions and the 75 to 250 foot section of the lot. In the 0 to 75 foot segment there are existing improvements which are non -conforming structures. Applicant has indicated to staff, and is willing to stipulate that if the present variance requests are approved, he will relandscape the property in the 0 to 75 foot area, removing all unnecessary hard cover and terracing tLe property to prevent any surface water from running off and polluting the lake. J. THE STAFF INDICATED THAT IN ITS OPINION GRANTING THIS VARIANCE WILL "ULTIMATELY HAVE A NEGATIVE IMPACT ON THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND THE CHARACTER OF THE QUALITY OF THE WATER -2- OF LAKE MINNETONKA There is no evidence to support this assertion. An analysis of the lot size data provided by the City, and referred to above indicates that applicants proposal is totally consistent with the neighborhood. Indeed, a review of all the properties in the City on North Arm Bay indicates that this is an area which has been used for high density single family residences for close to half a century. In addition, there are no other potential building sites on Eighwood Road which have sewer connections and have paid sewer assessments, and which are not presently developed. The history of this neighborhood is that the City has allowed substantial renovation and rebuilding on lots which are essentially the same as applicants, and have routinely granted variances to accommodate such construction. As indicated above, any effect on the quality of Lake Minnetonka as a result of applicants proposal would be positive.• The relandscaping of applicant's properties would remove hardcover in th,. 0 to 75 foot zone where run off effects lake quality most substantially. 4. THE STAFF ASSSERTS T9AT THE PARCEL PRESENTLY HAS SOME USE AS A SIDE YARD TO AN EXISTING DWELI.ING. This position ignore: the very fundamental realty that historically the lot in question has been used as a separate building lot, and indeed the City has classified it as such in imposinc_, a full sewer assessment to the property. The City has always treated the parcel as a separate tax parcel, and at no time suggested to Mr. Henrich that the removal of the residence previously located on the parcel would change the character of the lot in question as a separate building parcel. Having benefitted from its treatment of the parcel in question as a separate building site, the City should not now attempt to assert that Mr. Henrich has an adequate use for the property as a non - building site. �. THE CITY S REFUSAL TO GRANT THIS VARIANCE WOULD BE AN ARIB" RY A14D CAPRTCIOUS ACT. An analysis of the past history of variance requests in the City of Orono indicates that minimum lot size and lot width variances are routinely granted. Indeed in the LR-1B District only 2 such requests have been denied. The City has arbitrarily assigned in excess of two-thirds of the lots in the LR-1B Districts to that category in spite of the fact that only 111 of 390 such lots are equal to or greater than one acre in size. When faced with variance requests on those lots which are of substandard size, the City has consistently and overwhelmingly approved the requests and has consistenly held that the existence of a sewer hookup and payment of a full sewer assessment is determinative of buildability. Indeed, information provided by the City staff and statements made by Assistant Zoning Director, -3- Mike Gaffron, indicates that the City has not previously denied buildability in any similar sewer situation, and that the granting of variances in the pre:.ent case would not set advicerse precedent. The number cf similar iots which are undeveloped, and therefore potential building sites, if any, is negligible. In short, there is no rational basis upon which the present application can be denied, and to do so might well subject the City to an action for both an injunction and money damages. We respectfully request that the City avoid this type of unpleasant litigation and approve applicants request. S4inceely, / moo- George C. MacDonald Attorney for Applicant V June 27, 1988 Mr. Ed Henrich, 4115 Highwood Road - Variance request. 7;� /'Q 2 5 I believe that the Orono Council should grant the variances requested by Mr. Henrich for the following reasons. 1. Mr. Henrich has a legally platted lot which he has owned in good faith for many years. 2. This lot had a hose on it previously, which was destroyed. 3. The lot in question was assessed a separate sewer-m charge by Orono, which has been paid. This indicates Orono felt this to be a buildable lot. To quote our staff in a written memo dated 5/18/87, " By f o r c i in g p ay ne n t o f an assessment , i t c an be argued that the c i ty lied recogn i s,ed Lo t 119 a s a s e p a r a t e and s elf — suf Picient Lot, which oust receive a variance as a non—conPormning use_ 4. Orono changed its lot size requirements in the area some time after this lot was legally platted. This action would affect new plattings, but should not alter the usability of an existing lot. 5. More recently, our previous council recognized the legal rights of an owner of a similar legal but small lot for Inky Johnstone on Shadywood Road. In ■y opinion, the previous council set a precedent by permitting a home to be built on this lot. Therefore, in order to be consistent, this council should approve this request. To do otherwise would be discriminatory. 6. Beyond what I feel our moral obligation is to treat all of our citizens justly and fairly, it would appear that we have historical evidence that to deny this request will cost the taxpayers of Orono a great deal of money. It is probable that the City of Orono will be overruled in court, if we try to deny this landowner his right to build on this legal lot. (Lorge case, Smiley case, what other cases ?) by William Sine To: Mayor Grabek Orono Council. Members City Administrator Bernhardson JUN 27 19 . CITY Of QKUtgt From: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator Date: June 23, 1988 Subject: #1171 Landmark Construction 3820 and 3830 Bayside Road - Final Subdivision - Resolution The applicant has fulfilled all conditions of Resolution #2301. A11 required submittals have been received by the Building & Zoning office. Staff recommends approval of the final plat, Bayside Landing, subject to the findings and conditions set forth in the enclosed resolution. e A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PLAT OF BAYSIDE LANDING APPLICATION NO. 1171 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 has adopted subdivision regulations for the orderly, economic and safe development of land within the City; and WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the application for a subdivision application of a plat by Paul D. Swanson, President of Landmark Construction, Inc. a Minnesota Corporation, (hereinafter "the subdivider"); and WHEREAS, the subdivision has been found to meet all standards of both the RR-lA and LR-lA zoning districts finding that each lot is of a size and configuration that will allow its use as a single family residence to be fully developed without the need of any variances; and WHEREAS, the subdivider has completed all requirements of the platting regulations of the City, including: 1. Completion of all the requirements of Resolution No. 2301. 2. Dedication on the plat of right-of-way for a public road, shown as County Road No. 84. 3. Dedication on the plat of drainage and utilities easements. 4. Creation of a new private road shown on the plat as Outlot D, to be known henceforth as Landmark Drive. 5. Concurrent with the creation of this private road, the Subdivider has dedicated to the City a Road and Utilities Easement granting to the City permanent access, improvement and utility easements over said Outlot; the Subdivider has created non-exclusive ingress, egress, drainage and utility easements over said Outlot in favor of all abutting and/or benefiting lots including a declaration of certain maintenance covenants wherein each of the abutting and/or benefiting lot owners covenants and agrees to permanently maintain and i.ay the cost of maintenance for said private road. rage 1 of 3 6. Dedication to the City of a Flowage and Conservation Easement providing for limitations on the use of wetlands and drainageways described therein and shown on the plat as "drainage easements". 7. The execution of a Subdivider's Agreement providing for completion of certain :.mprovements as a condition of subdivision approval. 8. Execution of a special lot combinations over Lot 1, Block 1, Lot 2, Block 2, and Outlot A, defining the shared ownership of the two residential lots with the riparian Outlot. The use of Outlot A is limited to one residential dock with four slips. No accessory structures are to be constructed on the Outlot, nor shall a parking area be installed on said Outlot. 9. Payment to the City of a Park Dedication fee in the amount of $100.00. 10. Payment to the City for the legal review and filing of the plat easements and covenants in the amount of $150.00. 11.Payment to the City for the final plat application fee of $150.00. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Orono hereby approves the plat of Bayside Landing, Hennepin County, Minnesota; subject to the following conditions: 1. The plat of Bayside Landing provides the only approved legal access to four properties as follows: Lot 1, Block 2 Bayside Landing shall be served by Outlots c' and D. Lot 2, Block 2 Bayside Landing shal 1 be served by Out? of D and either B or C. Lot 1, Block 1 Bayside Landing shall be served by Outlot D. Property defined as acception on the Flat shall be served by Outlots B and D. The Subdivider shall be responsible for granting the appropriate access easements to benefittinr lots depending on final ownership of driveway Outlots B & C. 2. The aforesaid plat shall be filed by the City of Orono with either the Hennepin County Recorder's office or Registrar of Titles on or before December 27, 1988 together with a certified original copy of this resolution and executed copies of the easements and covenants noted above. The approval of this resolution shall expire shall if the plat has not been filed by the date st.ecified above. In thet Page 2 of 3 event, it will be necessary to file anew application with the City of Orono for subdivision review. Dated this 27th day of June, 1988. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk James R. Grabek, Mayor Page 3 of 3 City, of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 2'01 A RESOLUTION GRANTING PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF A PLAT FOR LANDMARK CONSTRUCTIOA, INC. APPLICATION NO. 1171 WHEREAS, Paul D. Swanson, President of Landmark Construct -on, Inc. (hereinafter "applicant") on June 26, 1987 filed a Class III subdivision application with the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") for approval of a 3 lot plat of a property legally described on Exhibit A attached to this resolution (hereinafter "the property") and WHEREAS, after due published and mailed notice in accordance with Minnesota Statues 462.358 et. seq. anc7 the City of Orono Zoning and Platting Codes, the Orono Planning Commission held a public hearing on July 20, 1987, 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, 1987, the Orono City Council considered the subdivision application of the applicant, noting the following findings of fact: 1. The property is located within the RR-lA Sir.yic Family Rural Residential and LR-lA Lakeshore Residential Zoninr, Districts requiring respectively a minimum of 5 acres and 2 acres of dry buildable land within each newly created lot. 2. The property contains a total of approximately 22 acres. Lot 1 contains 7.2 acres of dry contiguous land; Lot 2 contains 2.3 acres of dry contiguous land and Lot 3 contains 2 20 acres of dry contiguous land. J. All three plat lots and the existing homestead to the immediate west of Lot 2 shall be served by a private road that shall access from Bayside Road. 4. A single family residence can be constructed on all three lots without the need for further variances. 5. Septic testing has confir►ned that Lots 2 and 3 have suitable soils and areas for on -site sewage disposal systcros. The wetlands have placed limits on available areas for septic development. Lot 1 has not been tested because it contains over 5 acres in area. 6. A road bed has existed within Lot 1 through the wetlands providing access to the north and higher elevations. Page 1 of 4 Cite of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 2301 7. The riparian outlot cannot be developed as a buildable lot and can only serve as an accessory use. The outlot consists, of approximately 420 lineal feet of shoreline. 8. Lot 1 does not meet the required lot width to the rear of the front yard setback line, the applicant has asked the City to consider the following hardships: a) The need to make use of existing road het intersects wetlands. b) Minimize tree removal and impact on wetlands. c) Provide feasible grades for drive to house location. 9. Lots 1, 2 and 3 shall be served by a private road that has been designed to minimize the impact of the construction on the surrounding development but yet provide a safe use level for the public. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that based upor, either one or more of the findings noted above, the City Council of the City of Orono hereby approves the preliminar, plat of Landmark Construction, Inc. per plat drawing by Coffin and Gr arg, Inc. and further grants a variance to the standard that would requite all lots have frontage on a public road with the creation of the private road and per Section 10.02, Definition. 77, grants a width variance to Lot 1 because the lot does not meet the required 300 feet at rear of required front yard and grants a variance and conditional use permit to allow the installation of a private driveway through a designated wetlands within Lot 1 and a variance for a single dock, accessory structure, on a lot that cannot sustain a principal structure, subject to the following conditions: 1. Prior to the issuance of building permits for new construction, the final plat must be filed with either the Hennepin County Recorder's Office or Registrar of Titles Office, road base installed and approved by City, and, if required improvements are not completed, the applicant must execute a developer's agreement and post a letter of credit (150% of cost of remaining improvements). 2. Required improvements: A) Private road to be constructed per standards set forth in Section 11.33, Subdivision 4 and 5 for road serving 3-6 lots c -cept for changes in design recommended by City regarding the 1 acement of curb cut at Dayside Road within road outlot. L,igineering plans for road must be submitted for City's approval prior to construction. F; D) Private driveway through Lot 1 to be constructed per engineering designs submitted by Coffin and Gronberg, Inc. and per recommendations by City Engineer. Page 2 of 4 Cit.'.Wt7 of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 2301 C) Fencing provided for septic test sites prior to any land alteration. Applicant to contact City inspection staff upon installation of temporary fencing around all septic areas. 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: Final Plat Submittals 1. RECORD PLAT drawings in the form of two (2) mylar copies (3 copies if property is torrens) and one (1) copy reduced to 1"=200'. Drawing to include: A) Lot lines platted per preliminary survey. B) Dedication of "drainage and utility easements" 10' wide along all perimeter property lines and 5' each side of internal property lines. C) Dedication of 66 feet of right-of-way for Bayside Road. D) Designated wetlands and drainageway to be shown on the plat as "drainage easements" - wetland within Lot 3 at 931.5 elevation. E) Designate 20' wide drainage easement over drainageway on sout.;i side of Bayside Road through riparian outlot. F) Designate private road, riparian tract and 20 feet wide driveway tract to western homestead as outlots. G ) Road outlot to be realigned per final deternsination of City Engineer - please make arrangements with Mabusth and Cook to meet at site to determine final road placement - staff will seek further direction from the County regarding lineal length of road that must be prependicular to County road. H) Designate shoreline at 929.4 elevation. I) Designate outlot to serve Lot 1 per attached staff sketch. 2. LEGAL DOCUMENTS required: A) Title opinion addressee 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. Paqe 3 of 4 City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. The applicant must provide certified copies of all recorded easements currently affecting the property. C) Execution of the following forms and easements required by the City. Please contact the Building & Zoning staff if you have any questions in the execution of these documents: 1) Flowage and Conservation Easement - over all designated wetlands and drainageway within riparian tract. 2) Underlying Road & Utility Easement over road outlot. 3) Road Maintenance Covenants - if developer has considered other covenants for road upkeep and maintenance of private road, please see that City gets an original executed copy for review and filing with the plat. Plep.se also note this document does not deal with the issue of ownership of the road. 4) Road Name Request - please see that three choices are submitted. Road name approval is a separate Council action and should be submitted for Council's consideration as soon as possible. 5) Developer's Agreement - to include all improvements not completed by final plat approval. Mote lot grading or road construction cannot begin until all grading and revised road plans have teen approved by the City. 6) Special Lot Combination - to be executed for Lots 2 & 3 with riparian rights over riparian outlot (designate as an outlot). Doc):age shall be limited to a single dock not to exceed 4 slips. 3. FEES TO BE PAID: Total Due $400.00 TO Park dedication fee per current schedule: $100.00 for Lot. 1. b) Final plat fee - $150.00 c) Filing fee for plat and associated documents - $150.00. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held November 23, 1967. ATT 5iT: 7 Edward Callahan, Acting .,_jQi- r othy —, - Iialli.n, City Clerk Paso 4 of 4 r u� N i s i/• t• ro � I• /L'� M/ a C>� c'J � r■� 1 r I .: a �Ic Y ■f �! if(i i l t ■ t� ! , r JUN 27 19` To: Mayor Grabek Orono Council Members CITY OF 131MU., City Administrator Bernhardson From: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator Date: June 24, 1988 Subject: 11257 Catharine A. Cram 3760 Watertown Road - Final Subdivision - Resolution The applicant has fulfilled all conditions of Resolution #2399. All required submittals have been received by the Building & 'Zoning office. Staff recommends approval of the plat, Hillaway Farm, subject to the findings and conditions set forth in the enclosed resolution. City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PLAT OF HTLLAWAY FARM APPLICATION NO. 1257 WHEREAS, the City of Orono is a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesotaf and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Orono has adopted subdivision regulations for the orderly, economic and safe development of land within the City; and WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the application for a subdivision application of a plat by Catharine A. Cram, (hereinafter "the subdivider"); and WHEREAS, the subdivision has been found to meet all standards of the RR-lA zoning district finding that each lot is of a size and configuration that will allow its use as a single family residence to be fully developed without the need of any variances; and WHEREAS, the subdivider has completed all requirements of the platting regulations of the City, including: 1. Completion of all the requirements of Resolution No. 2399. 2. Dedication on the plat of drainage and utilities easements. 3. Dedication on the plat of rights -of -way for public roads, shown as Watertown Road and Stubbs Bay Road. 4. Dedication to the City of a Flowage and Conservation Easement providing for limitations on the use of wetlands described therein and shown on the plat as "drainage easements". 5. Payment to the City of a Park Dedication fee in the amount of $200.00. 6. Payment to the City for the legal review and filing of the plat easements and covenants in the amount of $150.00. 7. Payment to the City for the final plat alplication fee of $150.00. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Orono hereby approves the Elat of Hillaway Farm, Hennepin County, Minnesota; subject to the following conditions: Page 1 of 2 City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL s NO. 1. Any future subdivision of Lot 2, Block 1 Eillaway Farm must address the issue of the second residential unit by providing either a 5 acre lot for the residential unit or by filing for a Conditional Use Permit for a non -rental caretaker or guest house use. 2. If Lot 1, Block 1 Hillaway Farm has not been sold by June 27, 1989, the Subdivider shall either legally combine Lot 1, Block 1 with Lot 2, Block 1 or remove the barns/accessory structures from Lot 1, Block 1. If Lot 1, Block 1 has been sold and a building permit has not been issued for a principal residence by June 27, 1989, the new owner wi'.1 be asked to remove the Larns/accessory structures from Lot 1, Block 1. 3. The future owner of Lot 1, Block 1 is hereby advised that the setback of the barns (less than. 150' from all adjacent lot lines) will only allow the use of the barns for the non-commercial keeping of animals. 4. The aforesaid plat shall be filed by the City of Orono with either the Hennepin County Recorder's office or Registrar of Titles on or before December 27, 1988 together with a certified original copy of this resolution and an executed copy of the easement noted above. The approval of this resolution shall expire shall if the plat 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. Dated this 27th clay of June, 1988. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk James :�. Grabek, Mayor CATHARINE A. CRAM IN THE SW 1/4 OF SECTION 32-118-23 HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA ••�/4•la t/Aar M 5�.1-, f,� r • f' w.•. t...r sv w .r ..., amid—, y•M•ll 1 e• I .•. t'` i tat Sc.ai j4wl Alce;,tl7e . ro, alas r yA i l MQ �`v A fe er'! tw ILN I a •'pre«! N.+rrY 4 �• O .•r 11�r. aUaaf• r.YlaW t to A pe It l IYfI I�•--•MHrIwN}wl. Y S-4L k..1 t.'h a Ina t."ow at �\ r reel *tat of the to tateet W0,101, Irt t4 Sos.vaa Ouu LF, IecUM 1'. :.fMIP 1'a. af`V. I] C•:. nawf os Nt , •" 'I . eels: �., tY tail life *t w: IV~% J.ertw N the Satanist Owler N/taft nt.*1 Ieu $04h f, ..tl ly prttw.s twfw ar i ,. L..c•ratc ,.udr of the S..t'.sit weftw, theft* Most. at IIV4 aryl" is tale last 11•0. a aids.. of I6S ftr; t race ': �.!11 p . ,rant ,file tc .-•p;� �Irlso eer a, os. Itlse tnsea at ler.wtlot 1..14 N{or, erne' IMe I. thwrtt 1s.theost«If al*" lard teal., 1.s to the .it Iivtewast p.wta• at the Sart•antt (At -ter. twa o prt11 Hw1e •are aft teN A the setts rM tMel ar.t. . t*ratry t* its ro.e•r�*',t ],,lair ;t:­?r IIIM Mat d t•+ a them*, ofSattlef W. m". to ne a-+u. *uM* it Wt WI Ali. It. all :e:e.1 bthas. wx,lnea O Nuena. tlgemltp at is /Nil wt the *set I'm of the Se./afeat Mlr rue nl Iat u toot tawte, a lrw..w ere•y Iat/ ant I'm. /no li tetrtamw twee N tale Sw•tOlaet lborm. items Moat lo►M NI of At tat Nor" 11.9 d its e Sswrt"It µwtw 1 al staalt ` i :Q fM! SoNof pt•I sop tale apt IIM tsa S1f11tf wa WA~ t at neaee .M ft"; the-* moa Waist wal;.l .111 tale ew ar tl Ilat of t'v - .i•asssl•wlf, a erlt tste oflo a".00 few. am, ass if WSJ tooWt% sp•r s *sat I tor 1h7Ma la.eo. N esKte► to "to IaYjn I lass of the 10, ...it suarur: tar•+. wit al'" UN Mottle IIM N a palet IMe.arJ test faN, iN r M� toll o IUte. onto too r► &lnl caner or S.,I 1eNlawf' ;+ tar. 'twt.0 •path part; lea .Ito the wet also, at Mta Sa.towet .wiTfi t etnatrc. *1 l!9.11 ow, lissome Oft WOW Its :als ►vth Ir d mM ,"vlf.rf"1 I• [.• r ',,; t.t+ 2f Hi. tO *I: tamwa Sl*/t*�abA Mir tact u-s 1ur1/ taw fal%a earl, . 11"Wat MIN foot. wM Nat'l prafffl w01 toe tf.•L low 1 V. Soatr,t a.ar1: • tf • r Ill Sd* -) toll lul sssp."d @Iola NN eeraf IN Ise I." Uw Bost Ilhe a rIm la n%wit *wt*,. tent* Sort■ wollel .1ta aaN twit It" to tar uftila Ill -se of lard SewtlMtt µrtw. demo lost stead t.11 feM� 1/lo t• tit SattswYt car •ar of the `asset strtl pw oar /f %..e Smwths oil par ttr. Ins,.. M•t' .hiss loss tail Ill* N ws iwl•+p1 stwter w lap t eltwor' to III* MM I.•e a oeteru.. -0. tors, lt.,"otttwtf tls" the •.f.. ,• 11� f/ IuII •wJ to lass Is. /Its N "to if elt.etl erw/er; tft"o ewtn Il enq f111 !'Mf Jlw w lea :.e.t'.•.sl errta It the • r••l *t �.*Iwns ,. trill A t r••I ✓ sa •s SwtNat'l orNr/w of w Sarlaha/t «,ter dgtrttot/ p tstrlttlrttti al o Nlnt *. eM ! -s1 I.a I ttJ ,Alrart host, w tar ',w:nett •. If llr9 tat Is tin Sa.ts Irma the awtm.ftl wrw yt sail 1w61oes orw i*r .f the A•t'w.:t •).ant♦. '.fry* test. K :r�.'t r.'es 1* tr t lfsl - >^ r as t•a•.• rl '!11f•I. I.rrst. Sw.la, al 1 nteel aryl.. to tow 'OK Ilfr nt 94wto.o 1..Y. ctrfta 'w,tYtfl+•f. HtW oaf r—the I,+o +c tw Ua 1 ., u•^ L+t7nt e.►Iw 1A le. wp tpwft Maas'. tlohte tires Hirst we earl Ilse Iwel "^uw. kA IrAf' Ll .f fro :a tv 5v . . *r Settle. 11 Iola* a1Mn tat lreN flea wtp tl •*tr10N le lafss '.: M 's•. r, •. .e'nl 'e .. .,. t4l .s , t .t•w.11 ..•ate• W the k—moll µare, aaar.ala . "+ ttitr,.: �s deny V* I.N life to sills tvrlo.ps e w •� u. •w�5 'fro lea tI .-s. ts.. •Lwrt•r.-., ., ,.;.• ..._ veil ,"allot .fth .If. le1.Mo awl tr*la,l pro w - fat 1lylet. f•.o sa1 st tens M Pa Ywtlr.t' a.r -. r,a a.est MN►. tft . # w se.. ItN f-we, Ile to to* teNh w•tssee Swrl wit e*w rw w ter t.•,tl wr l!, qas~. tnftst• ust tf ssq e/ egloatry. 1 hlfrra s�irlt flat tUa.✓ .1a wowed M .e t urtN sf a.aal lass I Islas t M fw::I—•+� 401r1 y(tall, •v-0 t4N I • s / I lt'.nsH .awn i✓..rew ,ftro•r '.•+ ea:• toarearf N. Nee at "t. k.l..1 r,.nNfrt e, flea w.w City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 11 �99 A RESOLUTION GRANTING APPROVAL OF THE PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR CATHERINE A. CRAM IN THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 32, TOWNSHIP 118, RANGE 23, HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA APPLICATION NO. 1257 WHEREAS, Catherine A. Cram (hereinafter "the applicant") filed a formal subdivision application with the City on February 29th, 1988 for the purpose of platting three lots of the property legally described as follows: See attached Exhibit A (hereinafter "property"); and WHEREAS, after due published and mailed notice in accordance with Minnesota Statues 462.358 et. seq. and the City of Orono Zoning and Subdivision Codes, the Orono Planning Commission held a public hearing on March 21st, 1988, 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 March 28th, 1988, the Orono City Council considered the subdivision application of the applicant, noting the following findings of fact: 1. The property is located within the RR-lA Single Family Rural Residential zoning district requiring a minimum of 5 acres of dry land and 300' of width within each newly created lot. 2. The property contains a total of 71.99 acres of dry contiguous land. 3. Each of the three lots created in this subdivision s.,all be served by individual curb cuts off of Watertown Road. 4. All lots meet the required 300' width at the rear of the front yard/street setback line adjacent to an approved public road. 5. A single family residence can be constructed on all proposed lots without the need for further variances. 6. Septic testing has not be required with this subdivision application as each lot contains well over five acres in area, as follows: Lot 1, Block 1 = 22.7 acres in area Lot 2, Block 1 = 30.1 acres in area Lot 1, Block 2 = 18.6 acres in area Paqe 1 of 3 The existing septic 1 are conforming proposed lot lines. City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. systems that serve the residences on Lot 1, Block and meet all setback standards from the newly NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that based upon either one or more of the f indi^gs noted above, the City Counci 1 of the City of Orono hereby approves the preliminary plat application of Catherine A. Cram per plat drawings by Mark S. Gronberg, dated February 19, 1988, subject to the following conditions: 1. Prior to the issuance of building permits for new construction, the final plat must be filed with either the Hennepin County Recorder's Office or Registrar of Titles. 2. Applicant is advised that the final resolution approving the three lot plat that will be filed against the chains of title of the property will contain the following conditions: A. Any future subdivision of Let 2, Block 1 must addriss the issue of the second residential unit by providing either a five acre lot for said unit or a conditional use permit for a non - rental caretaker unit. B. If Lot 1, Block 1 has not been sold within a year of the approval date of the final plat, applicant shall either legally combine Lot 1, Block 1 with Lot_ 2, Block 1 or remove the barns. If the the lot has been sold and a building permit has not been issued for a principal residence within a year of the approval date of the final plat, the new owner wi l l be asked to remove the subject structures. C. Future owner of Lot 1, Block 1 would be further advised that the setback of the barns wi 1 1 only allow the use of the barns for the non-commercial keeping of animals. 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: FINAL PLAT SUBMITTP,L3 1. RECORD PLAT drawings in the form of two (2) mylar copies and one (1) copy reduced to 1"@2001. Drawing to include: a) Lot lines per preliminary plat drawings. b) Describe wetlands within Lot 2, Block 1 with angles and bearings and define as drainage easement. Page 2 of 3 City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY LOUNCIL NO. `4 9 11/0900000 All ledication of "drainage and utility easements".' asements 0wide aff 0 all perimeter property lines and 5' each side af. iZilOfbdr•Ng' property lines. - 1 RCI d) Dedic-ation of road right-of-way for roads shown as Watertown Road and Stubbs Bay Road. 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 applicant must provide certified copies of all recorded easements currently affecting the property. c) Executed Flowage & Conservation Easement (see copy attached). Legal description to be filled out as follows: The drainage easement as shown in Lot 2, Block 1, plat name _, Hennepin County, Minnesota. 3. FEES TO BE PAID: Total Due $500.00. a) Park dedication fee per current schedule: $100.00 for each newly created lot. Total Fee: $200.00. b) Final plat fee: $150.00. c) Legal fee for plat and associated documents: $150.00. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held this 28th day of March, 1988. ATTF_,ST : B-oeothy Me--$allin, city Cler James A. Gra a yor Edwat.i J. Calla h, Jr., Acting Mayor I Page 3 of 3 i INAKE Ok FIC£ :1 ,� . ro. �V EXHIBIT A Resolution No. 2399 EXISTItie LEGAL DESCRIPTION Southwest Quarter. Section 32. IO.n;ge hip lid, kJn23. Ces:rl::•d is beginning at a :,Olr, on t:,e tali rc 1416 That part Of the Southeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of tree Southwest Quarter distant 449.62 feat So,tence m m- attaort9't riser Of stheaid centeralirre ofturuno ROdJyNO. `�1,° "'' swat test, at right angles to said East Ilce, o distance of along teats ta.t itr� of SJId :JuthcaSt Quarter cf the S�utte.cst Carter, tter.ce tsinneapolts and Watertown Road); thence Southeasterly along said center lire to tna Nprt� along Sato East Itne to the point of beginning. accordin) to the W�aririkiit Surr•�y thereof. That part Of tie Sal t Itt quarter of Section 32. Township li3 nor[n• kange 2) West of the Sth rrti.cipal �rtutan, descn uaJ as fill— J.ainn ou at e point on tt•.e East line of said Southwest quarter distant 40.32 feet South, as measured along said East 11ne, from ills Northeast earner of said :oettre ruarer, thence West parallel with tree North line of said Sculh.ast a=arter a distance of 575.CU feet: ttx •ce Soutn p.4rJllel with said East tine Of tr+e_ 5cuthweSL CuarLl/ d OtSLdnCe Of 350.00 feet; [quart west saidl parallel liineaid 0 theth line of SOOuuttfwest quarter`Iwest [heenceuWestralongSSaIJeOf North4line ropt. e OvInntCSW W feet parallel with said East line of the Southwest quarter to said East, as rea:ured along said North line, from tree rortn•est corner of said SOULl,.est euarter; thence Suuth parallel with the Went line cf sa;1 So -thw0stJ ` J:'Cr a distance or 439.3t feet; thence weft pirollcl will, SJIJ ti0rth 111W ul 'lie _'7[IrweSL gi:Jr[pi a ui•.LJ�Cd of 3':u. �� i�'a. peen •- ;ja: of the Sn Tsca quJr[Cr a dtst.[e of 039.31 fat: Uitic blast :,Jraael w1Ut :aiJ tU'tti line of t:c s,.r west quarter to a pint S2U. S lent t a.t ' J., au-•; ,; :e from the West line Of said Southwest quarter. thence South parallel with Said West line to the Sc+uth lure of aid So:wIle ofl ,. rr r Said South line to the Southeast corner of tthe Southwest own R034*, [Acker, utftCJSte0, said �rly alonguthwest gtnetcrntertlMlne o►t;aadroroad fitu[rhe East 11r:.Jof Sai� ' - "••e;t Warter. tre Stu:"west quarter to the pncrllre of Mence North along said East nine of the Southwest quarter to the point Of tiginning• EXCEPT that cart Of said Southeast quarter of trWar er [escrtbcd as beginning at a point on the East line of said Soutnca:t quarter of Uia Southwest quarter distant 449.62 feet x7utt. from It, I-,',Jie3st c riser Of Said Southeast quarter of ttie Southwest quarter; thence West, a, right angles to said East Ilse, a distance Of l65 fart: U fit Scatauth- es a rirt areSle. to the center line Of Yetertowr goad: thence Southeasterly alongOSEICEPInter line tofttheEaSouifhaastst Oquerter off sj:d Sectionquarter with n rativ� g�:of trience North along Said East line to the point of beglnni way as described in hook 742 of Deeds. Page 612. as Docownt rio. .3301.0. ALSO EXCEPT that part of Said Southwest quarter or ire line of sat quarter described as folios: Beginning at the Southeast corner of Said Southwest euartar of the Southwest quarter; trk>n,e yurtn along lie East Itne nr sail Suawnje CuarL`'r of the Southwest quarter to the center line of Watertown krlad; Jidiice Eastulina oftwesttheaSou tuestlong dquerter ufcenter ritreOSOuthwestits rquartur:win•:.ith deli, tfe o li0rg�saldfrom el with and f09.10 feet Westerly, measured at right angles. parallel line to the South lire of Said Soul0west quarter of the Suuthwes[. quarter; thence East along %J�d South If = to tin �i!�sl ui Nv r-1,11'k Mt-O-ING JU12719m To. Mayor Grabek ff Oron, . y Ccunci 1 Members y.g �r �� City Ao.linistrator Bernhardson From: Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator Date: June 20, 1988 Subject: #1268 Donald Pe' ,..,,.,n 3048 North Shore Drive - Varianre - Resolution Application: Hardcover variance to construct room expansion to west side of house. Application was revised to include a deck also. Zoning District: LR-lB, Single Family Lakeshore Residential - Sewered - 1 acre. List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Proposed Resolution Exhibit B - Planning Commission Action Notice 6/8/88 Exhibit C - Memo and Exhibits of 6/1/88 Discussion The applicant is requesting a hardcover variance in the 0-75' and 75-250' setback zone to construct a room addition of 336 s.f., and to construct a deck of approximately 328 s.f. A portion of the deck would encroach approximately 5' into the 0-75' zone. The entire room addition is in the 75-250' setback zone, and would meet the required 10' side setback. The applicant originally had not requested the deck, however, at the Planning Commission it was noted by applicant that he does wish to construct a deck in the future, hence Planning Commission asked him to bring forth a revised proposal, which he did. At their June 6th meeting, Planning Commission recommended 4 to 0 to approve the hardcover varian for the deck and addition, and recommended approval of the 5' encroachmci. into the 0-75' zone with the ollowinq conditions: 1. Maximum 0-75' hardcover allowed =542 s.f. (8.68). 2. Maximum 75-250' hardcover allowed = 5500 s.f. (34.6%) 3. No additional future hardcover will be al lowed in the 0-250' zones. Please review the mPmns of June 1, 1988 and May 10, '988 for further detail regarding this request. staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval per the Planning Commission recraunendation. A resolution reflecting that recommendation is attached for Council review. City Of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.22, SUBDIVISIONS 1 a 2, AND SECTION 10.55, SUBDIVISION 8 FILE #1268 WHEREAS, Donald Peterson (hereinafter "the applicant") is the owner of the property located at 3048 North Shore Drive within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as follows: That part of Blocks 1 and 5, and that part of vacated View Avenue, all in "Crystal Bay Park" lying easterly of a line described as beginning at the most Easterly corner of Lot 12 in the said Block 5, thence Northeasterly 96.4 feet along the Southeasterly line of said Block 5, thence deflecting to the left 93 degrees 27 minutes to the shore of Maxwell Bay and lying Westerly of a line described as beginning at the most Easterly corner of Lot 7, in said Block 5, thence Southwesterly along the Southeasterly line of said Block 5 a distance of 38.6 feet, thence deflecting to the right, 83 degrees 11 minutes to the shore of Maxwell Bay, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City For a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Sections 10.22, Subdivisions 1 & 2 and Section 10.55, Subdivision 8 to permit the construction of a deck which will encroach 5' into they required 75' lakeshore setback where no structure or hardcover is normally allowed, and to permit construction of a room addition, such room addition and deck portion comprising hardcover in the 75-250, lakeshore setback zone in excess of the 25% hardcover normally allowed in that zone. Minnesota: ■OW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as coning File #1268. 2. The property is located in the LR-lB Single Family Lakes! )re Residential Zoning District. 3. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on June 6, 1988, and recommended approval of the proposed variances based upon the following findinge: Page 1 of 5 City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. A) The existing house extends into the 0-75' lakeshore setback zone. The proposed deck is proposed to be located adjacent to a portion of the house that is more distant from the lakeshore than the closest point to the lakeshore of the existing house. The proposed deck will constitute new structural hardcover in the 0- 75' zone, but will have no effect on neighboring views of the lake. The proposed deck location is less obtrusive than if it was placed further north on the property. B) The site plan of the existing house on this long, narrow lot precludes a mere conforming layout of their proposed addition, given that the existing house already encroaches partially into the 0-75' setback zone. C) The :arge non-hardcovered yard area helps to decrease the effect of hardcover on the property. The total hardcover that would be allowed on the property would be 1.3,400 s.f. The proposed hardcover is just over 9,000 s.f. The lot area is approximately 1.15 acres. D) The applicant can remove areas of non-structural hardcover in the 0-75' zone that will result in a net decrease in 0-75' hardcover of approximately 66 s.f. or 1%. Additionally, non- structural hardcover in the 75-250' zone can be removed so that, in conjunction with the proposed deck and addition, the net hardcover increase is 244 s.f. or 1.5%. This results in final hardcover on the property of 8.6% in the 0-75' zone and 34.6% in the 75-250' zone, and leaves 9.6% in the 250-500' zone where as much as 30% would normally be allowed. 4. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicant and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. 5. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variance would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property: would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate a demon- strable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicant; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. f'age 2 of 5 City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO, CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the findings noted above, the Orono City Council hereby grants a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivision 1 to permit the construction of a deck which encroaches no more than 5' into the 75' required lakeshore sett, ck, and grants a variance to Pections 10.22, Subdivision 2 and 10.55, Subdivision 8 to permit the construction of deck and room addition which comprise additional hardcover in the 0-75' and 75-250' lakeshore zones, in excess of the hardcovers percentages normally allowed in those zones, subject to the following conditions: 1. Hardcover allowed on the property is as follows: 0-751: (area = 63,000 s.f.) House 430 s.f. Deck 112 s.f. Total 542 s.f. (8.68) Applicant shall remove 178 s.f. of plastic from existing landscape beds in the 0-75' zone, prior to final inspection of the proposed room addition. 75-2501: (area = 15,900 s.f.) House 2,436 s.f. Concrete and Steps 371 s.f. Shed Portion 65 s.f. Driveway 2,084 s.f. New Deck Portion 208 s.f. New Room Addition 336 s.f. Total 5,500 s.f. (34.6%) Applicant shall remove the 20 s.f. of steps on the east side of the house, and 280 s.f. of plastic underlaid landscaped beds in the 75- 250' zone, prior to final inspection of the proposed room addition. 2. Applicant is advised that no future hardcover will be allowed in the 0-75' and 75-250' zones on this property, and that any future proposal to increase hardcover on the property will not be approved, but might be approved only in conjunction with removal of an equivalent amount of existing hardcover, resulting in no net increase in hardcover. 3. Authorities granted with this resolution run with the property not with the applicants, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit within one year of the date of Council approval, or this variance will expire on -.hat date (June 27, 1989). Page 3 of 5 City Of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 4. Violation of or non --compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this resolution shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 5. The undersigned 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 Orono City Council on this 27th day of June, 1988. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk Property Owners) James R. Grabek, Mayor Page 4 of 5 TONING FILE NO. 1266 CITY OF ORONO NOTICE OF PLANKING COMMISSION ACTION P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 473-7357 Date of Notice: 6-8-88 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- TO: Donald Peterson COPIES TO: 3048 North Shore Drive Wayzata, MN 55391 TYPE OF APPLICATION: Variance ----------------------------------------------------------- DATE OF MEETING: 6-6-88 VOTE: 4 For 0 Against Planning Commission reco miends the following: Approval subject to conditions noted below NOTES AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS: Planning Commission recommended approval of variances for hardcover in the 0-75' and 75-250' takeshore setback zones, and recommended approval of a 101x32.8' deck located partially in -the 0-75' zone, to be set back 70' from the lake at the nearest point, conditioned on the following: 1. Maximum 0-75' hardcover allowed 6 542 s.f. (8.68). 2. Maximum 75-250' hardcover allowed R 5,500 s.f. (34.6%). 3. No additional future hardco•�r allowed in 0-250' zones. Applicant's next scheduled meeting is confirmed as: City Council Monday June 27, 1988; 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. I To: Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson From: Michael Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator Date: June 1, 1988 Subject: #1268 Donald Peterson 3048 North Shore Drive - Variance - Second Review Note: this item was tabled at your May 16 meeting pending further review of the additional hardcover items noted to exist on the property, and to give applicant time to better present his proposed future deck configuration. List of Bzhibits Exhibit A - Revised Proposed Site Plan Exhibit B - Applicants Revised Hardcover Calculations Exhibit C - Staff Review of Hardcover Revisions (Exhibits F-I) Exhibit D - Memo and Exhibits of 5/10/88 Exhibit E - Notice of Planning Commission Action 5/19/88 Discussion Applicant has submitted a revised site plan that indicates the location of the rock beds with plastic and the location of a proposed deck along the north wall of the house, but not extending as far towards the shoreline as the easterly portion of the existing hcuse. The hardcover percentages are as follows: Original Calculations Existing 0-75' 430 s.f.(6.8%) 75-250' 4,976 s.f. (31.3%) 250-500' *2,700 s.f. (8.68) Revised Calculations Existing 0-75' 606 s.f. (9.68) 75-250' 5,256 s.f. (33.1%) 250-500' **3,015 s.f. (9.6%) *Staff Estimate **Calculated by Applicant Proposed No change 5,312 s.f.(33.4%) No change Proposed 542 s.f. (8.6.8) 5,500 s.f. (34.68)', No change Based on the corrected calculation which includes the existing plastic - covered areas, the net result in the 0-75' zone is a decrease of 66 s.f. or 1.0%. In the 75-250' zone, the proposed addition, deck and removals result in a net increase of 244 s.f. or 1.5% hardcover. The proposed deck will constitute new structural hardcover in the 0-75' zone, but will not have any effect on neighboring views of the lake, and does not require an average Lakeshore setback variance. Because the easterly portion of the existing house is already only about 52' from the '1 'Or wnal•l R. Pat el WO In Bloc. 1 and s. Crystal Car rdtk IkMMrnn County. Nnmes:•n 1 rr. i. Mom. i J f.uwy fI I heleny certify that this Is . trw and orrerl representation of a surrey Of �'�.,�J•,; , the 118undarles Of the fulloriny desc, lOed vole rtr: That ya,t Jf Bloc, I one S. and that part of vacated View Avenue, all F R} In 'Crystal w► Park' lying Easrerly of a l M AWrteed as Oplml at j ten cost E/sterir corner of tot 12 In said Block S, theme NortANstKly'%.e • t ox ,\ feet along the Slnithersterlr line of said Block S.thence deryecting to the to, \ left 93 Jape..% 2, mfnctes to the more of Naxuell Bay and lying Westerly or line •M••�I fteJ a, nsglnm ng at the most Easterly corner o/ Lot 7. In \ %.na Block 5, :np•va bouthwesterir along the SMtlleasterly lien of sold 1 \y!ork 5 a glstanre 0' w.6 feet. thence deflecting to the right 83 degrees ail M, t. the snore of Maxwell Bay, according to the plat thereof on file 1 t pl rd!Iprn In the office Of the lk,llstelOf Leeds In and for said Jenne- \ • �.In County. �M 1 and Of tht IJcatl:nn Of' 11{ ewlsling tellidings. If any. ti—,on, It \ \ do's no pun llr•t t0 snow am other improvements or entrwriments. \' COFFIN B Gn WRG. INC. \\\\ /N. Engineers. tam« erg Sur Cie? PloT \\ ,� lglg laee. NlfiMfOta En f . to' rr-Nli env -awe' an, -alx Aa 6-01111,4 Na,e4rY ♦ A :x � IF x.F Mo JYI�X ss sx .r is \ 16\ , \y Scale 1 . 30, ., Date U-26-01 o Iron marker IN, \ \ \ � Nylr.r rwr.rvwr.� v. • Zoning File #1268 Page 2 of 2 shoreline, the proposed deck location is most appropriate, and will be much less obtrusive than if it was placed further north on the property. Staff Roca■siendation Staff recommends approval based on the hardships noted by Planning Commission at the last meeting: 1. The site Flan of the existing house on this long narrow lot precludes a more conforming layout of the proposed additions, given that the existing house alrezdy encroaches into the 0-75' setback zone. 2. The large non-hardcovered yard area helps to decrease the effect of hardcover on the property. (Note that the total hardcover allowed on the property would be 13,400 s.f. The proposed hardcover is just over 9,000 s.f., or about 2/3's of that which would be allowed if it was in the correct locations.) Planning Commission at the last meeting also recommended adoption of the condition that no additional hardcover be allowed on the lot in the future. Staff understands this condition to mean that even though the 250-500' zone has less than its full allotment of hardcover, none of that allotment could be used without a further variance application. If that is Planning Commission's intent, please make that clear in your recommendation. �W �. / �'_ (aa �) /J0 War A. r f HARDC:OVER REGULATIONS AND WORXSHERT A. HARDCOVER ORDINANCE - In 1975, the Orono City Council adopted an ordinance limiting the percentage of lot area that can be covered with impervious surfaces (•hardcover•) such as roofs, driveways, sidewalks, etc. on properties located within 1,000 feet of a lake. Studies have shown that sediments, oils, and debris carried into the lake from highly urbanised areas have a detrimental impact on the quality of water in the lake. The intent of Orono's ordinance is to ensure that rainfall run-off will be cleansed by filtering through grassed or vegetated yard areas before entering the lake. B. HARDCOVER SETBACK ZONES - PERCENTAGE ALLOWED I. 0-75': in the area within 75' of the lakeshors, No Hardcover is allowed (01). - II. 7S-2SO's in the portion of the lot located between 75' and 250' from the lake, 250 of that portion of the lot may be hardcovered. III. 250-500's in the portion of the lot located between 250' and 500' feet from the lake 300 of that portion of the lot may be hardcovered. IV. S00-1,000't in the Dortion of the lot located between 500' and 1,000' feet from the lake 350 of that portion of the lot may be hardcovered. NOTE: These regulations apply even if you have a lot that does not abut the lake but is within a lakeshore zoning district. C. HOW TO DETERMINE LOT AREA WITHIN EACH SETBACK ZONE (To be used as denominator in all hardcover percentage calculations) I. 0-75' Zone Area - 75' x (Average width of lot in 0-75' zone) measure parallel to shoreline J 75' x AG ft. (Avg width) Area of 0-75' zone "4 !I. 75-250' Zone Area a (175'or avg lot depth in zone) xrAvg width of lot in 75-250' zone) `` measure parallel to shoreline J i ! 175' x 117 ft. 1-7 s.f. (2) (Avg width) Area of 75-250' zone III. 250-500' Zone Area - (250' or avg lot depth in zone) x(Avg width of lot in 250-500' zone) measure parallel to shoreline J 250' x , /// ft. ---'-7 73'0 s.f. (3) (Avg width) Area of 250-500' zone IV, 500:1� 000' Lone Area - (500' or avg lot depth in zone) xrAvg width of lot in 500-1000' zone\ lmeasure parallel to shoreline J 500' x S ft. 5175 e.f. (4) (Avg width) Area of 500-1,000, zone ) r D. HARDCOVER CALCULATION SUMMARY ,� A. E. C. D. Existing Final Lakeshore Existing Hardcover Proposed Setback Lot Area Hardcover Percentage Hardcover Zone In Zone In Zone (S/A)xIOO In Zone 0-75' 6"'13'0 of ?G, sf 75-250, /G_1J --5sf " " : sf 250-500' t-,773oo of of 500-1000' 51 7 a of �ot•� S6s5�� Er y HARDCOVER LIMITATIONS _a V`^ �pM #``" 0 c9 Od \ ` R OA C, E. OTHER LAKESHORE REGULATIONS E. F. Hardcover Allowed Percentage Hardcover (D/A)x100 Percentage y. E • 5> '� of = • 0 • x45 52y9 of 33• • 25 • • ? of % h • 30 • E "/ • y54 of • 35 • HARDCOVER INCLUDES: - Structures with roofs - Decks, even if slatted - Sidewalks - Driveways (paved or gravel) - Decorative landscaping areas underlain by plastic sheeting - Tops of retaining walls, rock walls - Any other surface that does not allow direct absorption of rainfall into the ground SEC. 10.22, REGULATIONS FOR 'LR-IA', 'LR-IA-l', 'LR-1B', 'LR-IC" AND 'LR-IC--1' ONE FAMILY LAEESBORE RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT. Within any "LR-IA', LR-lA-1", "LR-1B', "LR-1C", or "LR-lC-1' One Family Lakeshore Residential District the following regulations shall apply: Subd. 1. Lakeshore Set Hack Regulations. The set back from the shoreline for lakeshore lots shall be at least 75 feet and no building may be located closer to the shoreline than the average distance from the shoreline of existing residence buildings on adjacent and nearby lots. Subd. 2. Lakeshore Hard cover Regulations. within 75 feet of shoreline there shall be no excavating, filling, herd cover, temporary or permanent structures. Within 75 to 250 feet of the shoreline there shall be no greater than 250 hard cover. Within 250 to 500 feet of the shoreline there sha11 be no greater than 30• hard cover. Within 500 to 1,000 feet of the shoreline there shall to no greater than 351 hard cover. Suod. 1. Tree Removal Regulations. No trees within 75 feet of the shoreline with the diameter of six (6) inches or more shall be removed without first obtaining a permit from the Council. HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET Setback Zone: (circle one) 0-75' 75-250' 250-5009 500-1000, Existinq Hardcover in Zone a. House =- i x i .?/ yY/ a.f. length width x • s.f. x _ • s.f. x _ • s.f. x s.f. b. Garage x • G s.f. c. Driveway x • G s.f. x • s.f. d. Sidewalk x G s.f. x • s.f. x • s.f. e. Patio/ x s.f. Deck x s.f. f. Landscape � i x i� . .;�• :� s.f.-, areas i / /b underlain .2 � x ?/ "C/ 7 s.f. by plastic sheeting 3 x s Y . s.f. • s.f. . Other x • s.f. x • s.f. x s.f. TOTAL EXISTIMG mARocmn IM soars • /`/. 7 s.f. (1 ) _ r ... ... - +..aat,;.: w�..R...s ..,�.�"w'.-'•, s•'��9.,..+a+a..�.R+�iR /P.sw'. Existing Hardcover t • Total Existing Hardcover x 100 Lot Area Within Zone �. ` SE r�.�.. .c, x 1oa • ". Additional Pxrdcover to be zdded in zone: Item Length x Width • TOTAL s.f. - e, '4 x 35 . /1;2 s.f. x a.f. x s.f. x s.f. TOTAL S.F. To BE ADDED //.? (2) Existing Hardcover to be Removed, if any: Item Length x Width • TOTAL s.f. x s.[. x • s.t. (—� ' ) TOTAL S.F. TO BE REMOVED ;'fi• S t31 Fi^al Hardcover Frnrosal: (Line (1) • Line (2) -Line (3)] _ Existing To be Added :o -a Removed Final Procosed Hardcover t • Line (4) x 100 5-5 3 s.f. : lOC • e, 571� Line (1) �ySv s.f. HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEtT Setback Zone: (circle one) 0-75' 75-2`50' 250-500500-1000' Existing Hardcover in Zone a. House 3•p x '2/.7 r ' / s.f. length width x s.f. x x • s.f. 53 b. Garage x ��• s.f. c. Driveway x / S s.f. x • s.f. d. Sidewalk i x > • 1/1�' s.f. i x j5 fl. s.f. 3.7 x ;? 9 S s.f. e. Patic/ Deck x s.f. f. Landscape 3 x a.f:' areas underlain x 3 • T S s.f. by plastic sheeting 3 x 3� • ` 3 s.f. .. s.f. . Other :�/' 4 x . is s.f. x x TOTAL EXISTING HARDCOVER IN 209E • s.f. • '� s.f. (1) Existing Hardcover • Total Existiag Hardcover x 2CO Lot Area Within Zone • Sc ` S 3.f. x 100 • 3!. s /59GL s.f. AdditiGnal Hardcover to be cdded in tone: Item LevmMh x Width • TOTAL s.I. 17 y.c x �•' �' .[. dreA: 32 x '-s . 20 s.!. TOTAL S.F. TO BB ADDED (;i) Existing Hardcover to be Removed, if any: Item Lerq_th x Width • TOTAL s.f. x a 280 s.l. x x • s.f. TOTAL S.F. TO BE REMOVED 3 G (3) Final Hardcover Proposal: (Line (1) ♦ Line (2) -Line (3)) ( LO5 Existing To be Added 7o Removed Final Proposed Hardcover % - Line (4) m 100 • s.`. x 100 • �3 • „S Line (1) l59Gt, s.t. HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET Setback Zone: (circle one) 0-751 7S-250' 0-500500-1000' Existing Hardcover • Total Existing QardceoeE x 300 cxistiag Hardcover in tone Lot Area Within some �565 s.f. x 100 i a. Rouse x • s.f. )y7_5,r, S.f. length width x Additional Pardcover to be edded in x s.f. — Item Length x Width • TO -AL s.f. x s.f. x • — —. - s.f. x s.f. - x • _ s.f. b. Garage x • G s.f. x _. — s.f. c. Driveway /✓ x ZSD SGL s.f. x _ s.f. x • s.f. TOTAL S.F. TO SE ADDED O (2) d. Sidewalk x • s.f. Existing Hardcover to be Removed, if any: x • s.f. Item Length x Width TOTAL s.f. x s.f. x s.f. e. Patio/ x • s.f. — x s.f. Deck x s.f. x • s.f. f. Landscape x • s.f. x • s.f. areas underlain x s.f. rr�� TOTAL S.F. TO BE REPROVED O (3) by plastic Final Rardcovor Proposal: oheeting x • s.f. (Line (1) • Line (2) -Line (3)) • s.f. I . Other x s.f. Existing To be Added :o :.e Removed Final 6S x • s.f. P-o-cosed Rardeover t • x • s.f. , z Line ( x I00 • - s�J s.f. i� ! + t TOTAL J EXISTING HAROCOM I1 SM • s.f. (1) s.f. Line (11)) �i•/>`C .r..c,cy?s-..v,�y�,a..� w • err � �;wc. •.. H,',RDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET 1 Setback Zones (circle one) 0-751 7S-250' 2SO-5001 500-1000• Existing Hardcover 11 • _Total Existing Hardcover x 100 Existing Hardcover in Zone Lot Area Within Zone a. House x • s.f. 100 • 7/ 7 7 s.f. _1 length width x s.f. Additional Pardcover to be added in zone: x s.f Item Length x Width • TOTAL s.f. x _ . s.f. x —__ ' s.f. x _ s.f. x s.f. b. Garage x • G 3.f, x ` s.f. c. Driveway _f�_ x `15 . %SG s.f. x ` s.f. - x s.f. TOTAL S.F. TO et ADDZD G 12) d. Sidewalk x G s.f. Existing Wardcover to be Res+owd, if any: x s.f. Item: Length x Width . TOTAL s.f. x s.f. x s.f. e. Patio/ x s.f. x s.f. Deck x s.f. x s.f. f. Landscape x • G s.f. x s.f. areas underlain x • s.f, TOTAL S.P. TO at REMOVED D (3) by plastic sheeting x • s.f. Fi^al AardCover Procosal: s.f. (Line (1) + Line (2) -Line (3)) I SU + . Other x . s.f. Existing To be Added Removed Final x s.f. Procosed Pardcover I • x s.f. TO TOTAL Line !4) x 100 s••• x IC� 8 7 t EXISTING AAADCOVEI! IM ZONE • �l�D s.f. . ( 1 ) Line ( 1 ) S/ ; 5 s.f. IF w/Pia-s •r� L = C3 X 2 `�� + 12 I • , `) �2 i > , r-� / '7 B s ;�. ♦ T • if --� Pr,.oporE+p 3 2' f- j 12 � 7X PON C:;t7t�- r4 rx- of i Ho%4sF C. C. T 71" �Sk44> P0tJ Det I v flo.,xy laNc•sC*e&' RV os "'/('/-A s T1 C- �,., N 2 . (..44, --i tft- . , J4&1:� M lPw- Pe(e--rlAN 3x32, $ - ?B, C/ 2 , , y 3 7, y 3l r 13 3 8� x i7 52SG• �- � y e- ' ,- ,D. trla�r* B4 u S N ter- Iti eleZ yes f =- TO: Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson FROM: Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator DATE: May 10, 1988 SUBJECT: #1268 Donald Peterson, 3048 North Shore Drive - Variance - Public Hearing Zoning District - LR-lB Single Family Lakeshore Residential - Sewered - 1 Acre Application - hardcover variance to construct room expansion to west side of house. List of Exhibits L,:hibit A - Application Exhibit B - Plat Map Exhibit C - Property Owners List Exhibit D - Survey Exhibit F. - Applicant's Hardcover Calculations Exhibit F - Staff Hardcover Calculations Exhibit G - Selected Portions of Co.istruction Plan Pertinent Facts 1. The proposal is to construct a left side expansion of the existing house, resulting in an increase '.n hardcover in the 75- 250' zone. Hardcover is as follows: existing 6.°I proposed no change 75-250' - existing 31.3% - proposed 33.4% 25.-500' existing 8.6% proposed no change 2. The applicant's surveyor had initially omi' .od including the dri,reway as hardcover, because it is gravel. and sa,.d in character. However, to be consistent, that gravel driveway which is driven on must be included as hardcover on the property. 3. The pc,posed addition was designed by tie applicant to meet the to foot required side setback in the I,R zoning district. Discussion This property is approximately is 1.2 acres in area and is relatively flat, hence runoff rates are relatively slow. The 1 additional hardcover in the 75-250' zone will constitute a 2.1% increase in hardcover. It would appear the only reasonable area that hardcover could be removed would be in the driveway apron area. However, in order to end up with no increase in hardcover in the 75-250' zone, enough of the apron would have to be removed that the applicant might be forced to create a new backup apron in the the 250-500' zone, which is potentially inconvenient but feasible. The proposed 75-250' hardcover of 33.4% is not unusually excessive and may be offset by the large yard area. Staff Recc aendation �/� Staff would recommend approval of e hardcover increase in the 75-250' zone based on the flat t pg aphy of this site and large remaining yard area that is not covered. A � —jam �,,,, � ;;� , t • i � '' . J,4f� . ��-GS� r PS � ' ; ���' ( � �v i . �� � Y ,�: y '1 (i/' � r'r: ��'-� . V` •l 0 s D N -ro I-. P: c-r- re . rrJ c o7- �•� Tl c tt,Nac�2 1'20 C !�c — tAyo (_- AT 77D r Rl— 2 CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APP *AT1 Initial Application Fee $1Maar+le) ($50.00 per each additio Renewal Variance Fee $75.00 (no change from original application) After -the -Fact Fees (Double application fee) ----------------------------------------------------------- PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address ✓4�% B �oy7'i s/ICYf_ L�r/YP 1 I I ; ' OROND > -r rlcclCc i�l'I�^'V" VI I 1. 1 VVV``� I C1 GE"J 150.00 c CIEVIk Tt i50.00 RE C,E IP T— TH4Nk YOU #07551,V c001 Rol T11:4 04115" S. Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) 1.2 0OD1/ Please creck one - Property abstract or X torrens? Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. ---------------------------------------------- APPLICANT Phone (home) " - 450 / NameP47ers Or) Phone ( work) y %/ Address: 30�e$ WY7�,S.4are l%/'yb4 City: O• "*10 zip: 55311 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- OWNER (if different than applicant) Phone (home) Name Address: sQ 'PPP Phone (work) — City: zip: Date Property Acquired - 718 7 (month/year) I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- PRESENT USE OF PROPERTY Present 'Zoning District L Present Use of Property )!Residential Other (specify) ------------------- --------------------------------------------------- -- DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $ ys:oPo Describe request in detail: o-4-" �� ;3j6 j %> VARIANCES PEQUIRED Iot Area Lot Width X 11.31dcover Setback variances ( Front Other Side Rear) i HARDSHIP e' Describe, undue hardship or practical difficulty resulting from strict enforcement of zoning G regulations: anc.���n n6,�/Py:�ns. of /i.-xTy.- C4. R��X 6� uv�rc.�at Al 6�/ ���G,rv� l�iwv.�i 6J��f�+ s<i.�n Aran e•.✓iiucr 7 D•.r�,v,►, area DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe unusual property conditioj�s p eventing compliance with Zoning Code Requirements : A�� s�76ac.+�t c. -1 be Art �, corer dk; /%�= �f jA,,ty( ive i1 qoT wF'Aw a a.w! , ,east r.* /5.2 70 OIRED SUBMITTALS 1. Completed Application Form Certified Property Owners List of owners within 150' (you must obtain this list froir Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Govt Center 340-3271). 3\. Stamped, legal sized envelopes (#10) pre -addressed to etch of the names on the above list with no return address (use address labels obtained with property owners list). Certificate of survey including hardcover calculations as required. SC Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing grade are proposed. Plat ',ap (obtained with property owners list). 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 your variance application is not complete if the above information has not been included. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Certification by Zoning Department that Variance Application is complete. Zoning Official's Signature Date APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Loring Administrator, agrees to pay all fees anal/or unusual expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. /� /% Applicant's Signature �X // T" x� Date lfP.-Ill ,�f�'� OWNERS SIGNATURE The owner hereby a k wledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents, Commission members, and Council members for purposes of investiga- tion and verifica ion his reques Owner's Signature .G��i Date Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before ty Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held rn ti— third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all sch aled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an appli 1' _L" unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to , je an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building 6 ;or+ing Office of this change prior to the meetinq. 10 NOERENI oronado 'Beach �,. R..,,L. S. , No. 1113 NO. 269� . H ,►r t 4 •" I a RUN DATE 04/t3/88 HENNEPIN CC:.^1TY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM REPORT NO. P1435401 PROPERTY C-'iERS LIST P/iE 41 &ITCH 00a 36 09-117-23 32 0001 PROP ACOR 03065 NORTH SHORE DR D:SI--R NAM- G V GROOM,; ETAL TAXPAYER GEC V GROOMS Nt3SE/ADDR 5065 NORTH S:rOtE DR WAYZATA tN 55391 38 09-117-23 32 0004 PLOP tODR 03048 NORTH SHORE CR C^:.tea NAME 0 R PETERSCH i K I PETERSON %—. AYER DONALD R i KAY I PETERSON KAY,E/:.00R 3045 NORTM SHORE OR WAYZATA MN 55391 38 09-117-23 32 0019 P4DP ADCP 03080 NORTH SHORE OR r1i.:iEp NAME L V A J H REARDON ;AAPAYER LAURENCE V REARDON NAI'.E/A7DR 3080 NORTH SHORE OR WAYZATA MN 55391 38 09-117-- 32 0002 03017 NORTH SHORE OR HELEN D ROSS HELEr1 DEAVER FOSS C/O 1ST t1ATL SK CF MPLS P C EOX A7"0 YPLS t:N 153C0 38 09-117-23 32 OOi5 030-5 Nr-ITH SHORE OR EEFTIL E OLSON CEP.TIL OLSCV 2420 FENNEPIN AVE YPLS MN 55405 38 09-117-23 32 0003 03020 NORTH SHORE DR J R L K C SWENSON JACK R SWENSON 3023 NO^TH SHCFE DRIVE WAYZATA rH 55391 38 09-117-23 32 0017 03060 NORTH SHORE OR D BRCDERSEN ETAL DUANE BP.ODERSEN 3060 NORTH SHORE OR WAYZATA rN 55391 3C 09-117-23 32 0020 CS070 NORTH SHORE OR S i J WEINER i STANFORD A WEINER TOTAL BATCh 009 00008 3070 t*P.TH SHORE OR WAYZATA MN 55391 Q e M t I CEITIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REP;ZESF.NTATIQ:1 OF INFOPr.ATIO.V AS IT APFEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HEK EPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF FROPERTY TAX,TION. THE BEST CD OF MY KtX)WLEDGE Ate BELIEF. 1, DATE BY t Adjacent Property Owners' Acknowledgenpnt Fore /r \\ X I (wt.) 1 . o c 3 5j�r nt name s 1Qr- Tprint addre-s have reviewed the rlaus for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the property located at 330yg P--;5 "-54t 1911rr also referred to as Land Use Application No. I (wt ) understand that in executing this acknowledgement, I (we) am (are) not asked to declare approval or disapproval of the property or use but merely to confirm for the City Council that I (we) am (are) aware of the improvement plans and that the proposed neighbor's project or use ' requires Council approval. g Pr per y OWner Date P pert n Date If you have any information that may assist the City in the review of this Land Use Application, please submit your comments to th- Building 6 Zoning Office at least 10 days prior to the scheduled m .ng 4.ate. Adjacent Property owners' Acknowledgement Fori I (we) ) U S ti t E �- Of .3 J Ald r� TM �J% print name s [print address have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the property located at 30yf ��✓���%' ��✓- also referred to as Land Use Application No. _ I (we) understand that it executing this acknowledgement, I (we) am y (are) not asked to declare approval or disapproval of the property or use but merely to confirm for the City Council that I (we) am (are) aware of the improvement plans and that the proposed neighbor's project or use requires Council approval. roperty Owner Date Property Owner Date If ;you have any information that may assist the City in the review of this Lat;d Use Application, please submit your comments to the Building & Zoning Office at least 10 days prior to the scheduled meeting date. ff, - 4 (MAXWELL BAY) LAKEINNE`ONKA 1 JL II as oV 1 1 1� s `I 1 I y! 1 y1• t 11.1 ..'Y. • 1 1 M � 1 /�•.. y W �•y` • 1. lll' �s Y.1 1 r � •o (l, UdnPs p Y (hd( o/A.,rVd/��1 �d 14�y Nr�;thP 1 11,`. 1 i Svj `' c () /�' !q/a�i pp s�Pnv J fystS 1 4( / of r t1j,/ P 11' ! ,cif' �ft r48 0, 6 f�(Nn Yd( i(pnll 1 rr, 1 y OP, N• — $ire JT 1 V 1 1 1 1 t ,1 1 t/�F6 OF y4 the I Cr/nd[ /P;.-Pe jst Ftl/ Gtlt oOF th vt rhi Of s y� O?l+ dS[P y p O/ P �G r IS WSJ/r��^�.0cf I I /�� it f/¢SP�y0?� fury G ;;•^PS, Ot.rtP,?p��OV dr?Vt�Pr/� �OtstP�� CO 7.7, ry 1"", P Of SOr hP9/ tr' //?N/� i ' cis thf+ the oP u 6 ��tPoy �t lor�s tr/1, .rdl OF / GOOCP�9 1 Crj t y Ot/'P,-9 bG' P/Av p� -O ,1 .c.'9� �� •tl`rC HARDLQVM RRGOLATIOIIS "D WORIfSBRRT-01 A. RARDCOVER ORDI11>+MC't - In 1975, the Orono City Council adopted an ordinance !imiting the percentage of lot -area that -can be covered with impervious au.faces (•hardcover') such as roes, driveways, sidewalks, etc. on properties located within 1,000 feet of a lake. Stue_ies have shown that sediments, oils, and debris carried into the lake from highly urbanized areas have a detrimental impact on the quality of water in the 1• e. The intent of Orono's ordinance is to ensure that rainfall run-off will be cleansed by filtering through grassed or vegetated yard areas before entering the lake. B. IIARDCOVP.R SETBACK ZONES - PERCENTAGE AILOWED I. 0-75': in the area within 75' of the lakeshore, No Hardcover is allowed II. 75-25091 in the portion of the lot located between 75' and 250' from the lake, 251 of that portion of the lot may 5e hardcovered. a III. 250-5001i in the portion of the lot located between 250' and 500' feet from the lake 300 of that portion of the lot may be hardcovered. IV. 500-1,000's in the portion of the lot located between 500' and 1.000' fset from the lake 350 of that portion of the lot may be hardcovered. NOTEi These regulations apply even if you have a lot that does rot abut the lake but is within a lakeshore zoning district. C. HOW TO DETERMINE LOT AREA WITHIN EACH SR"ACK ?ONE (To he used as denominator in all hardcover percentage calculations) I. 0-75' Zone Area - 75' x rAverage width of lot in 0-75' zone\ ` measure parallel to shoreline % 75' x fli; ft. - a s.f. (1) (Avg width) Area of 0-75' zone i Vv / I1. 75-250' Zone ' Area - (1751or avq lot depth in zone) x(Avg width of lot in 75-250' zone\ measure parallr o shoreline J 175' x `li ft. - /,� 1175 a.f (2) (Avg width) Area of 75-250' zone III. 250-500' Lone Area - (150' or avq lot depth in zc /Avg width of lot in 25C-500' zone) measure pa.ai!el to shoreline / 250' x /it ft. 75'J s.f. (3) (Avg width) '!rise of 2S0-500' zone IV. 500-1,000' zone Area - (500' or avg lot in zone) x(/Avq width of lot in 500-1000' zone\ measure parallel to shoreline J tv(j wl,lt h ) Area of 500-1,000' zone b. HARDCOVER CALCVI.ATION BQMMItY A. a. C. --------------------- D. E. ---------- F. "------- .....-- ---------------- -- --- .. ---- ..- Existing Final Lakeshore ExiettAg Hardcover Proposed Hardcover Lowed Setback Lot Area Hardcover Percentage Hardcover Percentari;r n::-drover :one In Zone In Zone (B/A)x100 In Zone (D/A)xl0' ,`4icentage 0-75' 6Y50 of ` Y of 6- 9 • y-/of 0 • 75-250' le 7 S of _ 5 / 3 9 of 3o. 2 7 _• .S`J75 of _ �• ? _• 25 • 250-500' f773,� !af 2254 of • "' - i _ef / • 30 • 500-1000, 7;f! SGfS✓ HARDCOVER LIMITATIONS C- w E c� N�� q;a -44 �S ROACH >a5 r. -4 6 3 t 4105 _of �->• 8 g • 35 • HARDCOVER INCLUDESt - Structures with roofs - Decks, even if slatted 01/' b9 - Sidewalks - Driveways ( paved or gravel) - Decorat've landscaping areas underlain br plastic sheeting - Tops of retaininc walls, rock walls = ys-1• - Any other surface that does not allow direct o= 1".60 tirabsorption of rainfall into the ground E. OTHER LAKESHORE REGULATIONS .e SRC. 10.22, RECULATIONS FOR %R-IA', 'LR--lA-l', 'LR-180, 'LR-1C' AND 'LA-IC-1' ORR FAMILY LAIIRRBORR RRSIDRRTIAL DIGTRICT. within any 'LA-' LR-IA-1', 'LR-1B', 61.11-1C', or r--1' One Family Lakeshore Residential District the lowing regulations shall apply: Subd. 1. Lakeshore Set Back Regulationj. The set back from the shoreline for lakeshore lots shall bE at least 75 feet and no building may be located :loser to the bhoreline than the average u.,tance from the shoreline of existing residence buildince on adjacent and agerby lots. Subd. 2. Lakeshorw Hard Cover Regulations. within T5 Feet of shoreline there shall ie no excavatiV9, f. 'n47, hard cover, temporary or perma:.ent structures. Within 7S to 250 feet of the a!ine there shall •o no oreater then 25• h.:d cover. j within 250 to 500 feet of the shoreline there -ha ° be no gre iter than 10• harl cover. within 500 to 1,?n0 feet of the shorelin heLr shall he no greater ch.a.i l • hard cover. Subd 3. Tree Removal Regulations. No trees within 75 feet of the shoreline with the diameter of six W inches or more shall be removed wi•ho— '!rot oltaining a wrmit from the Council. HARDTOVErt CALCULATION 'WORKSHEET Settack Zone: (circ' onel 0-t .7a 5-250' 251 -. 500-1c00' C=j.st:nq Mardcov,- Zone a. H: is* x E.f. length widt•. x • s.f. x s.f. x • s.f. x • 'Z fit 3; s.f. Garage x • t.f. c. C-:.veway _ x _ Z2y0 s_f. !. sidewalk x • 34/ s.f. e. Faiio/ _ x s.[. Deck .. s.f. �. landscape :as :nAeriain x _ _ • s.[. ty plastic shaeti:.q x s.f. • s.f. f. other 1'� : _--- ' �S s.f. x s.f. x s.f. I EYISTIV:, MARr.00VFP IN t ZONE 7/39 - s.f. (1) Existing Pardcover t • Total Existing Hardcover x 100 Lot Area within Zone • S�Q s.f. x 100 • 30.2-7 t 1�475 s.f. Additional Hardcover to be added in zone: Stew Length x Width • TOTAL s.f. st x ft 336 s. *1 x s.f. x a. *W__1 x • s.f.. TOTAL S.F. TO OE ADDED 33 6 f 2 7 Existing Rardcover to be Removed, if anyt Item Length x Width TOTAL x • s.f. TOTAL S.P. TO iii BE REMOVED (3) .� Final lardcover Proposal: (Line (1) • Line (2) -Line (3)) • ( _51-54 _ . 3 3 er . o ) ..S'' '75 s . f . (4 : Existir, To be AdAed _ To be Removed Final PrntwimPA aardcover t • -1 Line 41 x 100 s�s s.f. x 100 •3225t* Line (1) /t". J, s.i. P /Wa.VA Cllrgc Delve CXi�rtN c.. /lev�s• _ �1,!; 'I' ,gin' �l = O _ ;L , - G�. %5-250� Earl s r7N G. 5a 2P.Z s x/N, I owc . : , t xa Gla /Vk. - 210 31 sl 9s STt F y X = 2 0 swot► . (�iryS� 7 t-70 8r 30 = 2 y4 C� P�Pesfo ; ADD 3 3 G ,_yPA"Z t0" 2 t0 • Sflo i C��►1�41N0(}t- OF LO7 (No cK.wac ArttA : } 3 /, 4lDO a .0 .: ' 2700 ..r .R 8. L �. 41 ►�''� M� 1 STLWY • -V-1 GaAM �W 7 t -_--- -. i i '.t -- � 11F,�1 K�r ►�t►f , CtH4+' ►.r ISM Lf IJ i fs ►!r�(e. Nb` - r L II Lot - FULL 8A rwc,no+V w J 4z, ALI 4 _ �5130 l_• / ter_. BEDROOM *2 i a1Faa+►-S ,�+ I l �� CLOSET . I t ovum 400 , »:. ►r.it M; ► - _ mac . G-i opol"m fs • � - � t'"t�p i BEd tu�SLf 1 M.L- locA-C low r - -; �f . 1L BA _ ALG no►.I w� c l 21 BEDROOM # 2 No IC Or, �r—� t. j�`" ', � � _.�.._ , _..�--=•ray. f / _y r =DLQ c I. y . b MASTER BOOM00, 1- { a. 2,jAn y ' ' Et4r� cL4 j •',� ' ea��s s r ','Limp fUHe ol 10 A I' �1hS IAbPR.;fJ : - 00 Y►a�: ��c - Ate2�PJ p '"� oaf-oRcrv!�1] �s TMulnliC Gr'._ NIS LA {, i W4 4 Gst' t Z 01-litk , -- �1 1 � I�•G � y�AL�i � = � � i SUW PUMP �• J \ r No ��s•J t••j�ca,l ' 'b ry JKC�w� 1�W�li �N •k' F eq To 4^64vaa- iat es A csl' 12 T2'Jtt ! f HEN. ro nth I f. I i T s3 --- - - - - cw►9d*3Y .cAr � Al � 40 in ZONING FILE NO. 1268 CITY OF ORONO NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 473-7357 Date of Notice: 5/19/88 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- TOs Donald Peterson 3048 North Shore Drive Wayzata, MN 55391 -------------------------------------------------•-------------------------- TYPE OF APPLICATION: Variance --------------------------------------------------------------------------- DATE OF MEETING: VOTE: _5For 0 Against Planning CossRission recosends the following: Tabled for reasons noted below NOTES AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS: Upon being informed that the hardcover calculations did not include existing landscape beds over plastic, and that a future deck proposal using the plastic as a trade-off would likely be forthcoming in the future, Planning Commission voted to table this item pending further staff review of hardcover on the property. Applicant was advised to submit his deck proposal now so that the site planning can be comprehensively reviewed. Please contact Mike Gaffron at 473-7357 to schedule a meeting on the site for further review of your future plans and existing hardcover. Applicant's next t-cheduled meeting is dependent upon receipt of additional information. Deadline for the June 6, 1988 Planning Commission meeting is May 27, 1988. In all cases, the application must be continued with the submittal of requested information within 90 days or the City will consider the application as formally withdrawn. If the applicant has 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. L ING 71 JUf1 27 j1 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator DATE: ,June 22, 1988 SUBJECT: Additional Comments and Planning Commission Recommendation Planning Commission had no further comments outside of the points addressed in the staff memo listed above. The applicant, Gary Kirt of the David C. Bell Investment Company, has filed the required conditional use permit as the new owner of the property and plans to continue the same level of operation as approved by the previous owner, Doug Bumgardner. In the beginning, the operation will be slightly down scaled because there remains incompleted alterations and repairs to the structure that were never completed by Mr. Bumgardner. The market will continue to be called Summerfield Farm. The Planning Commission unanimously approved the conditional use permit for Gary Kirt. The enclosed staff resolution has been drafted per the Planning Commission's approving recommendation. I A RESOLUTION GRANTING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PER MUNICIPAL ZONING CODES SECTION 18.93, SUBDIVISION 5(H) AND RESOLUTION NO. 2188 - FILE 1276 WHEREAS, Gary V. Kirt (hereinafter the applicant) has an interest in the property located at 3800 Wayzata Boulevard, within the City of Orono (hereinafter City) and legally described as follows: Those parts of Lots 11, 12 and 13, "MINNETONKA GARDEN ACRES", according to the recorded plat thereof, lying southerly of the centerline of Hennepin County State Aid Highway No. 6 Plat 5, as delineated in Book 70, Page 3844152 of Hennepin County records. Also Lhe north 1/2 of adjoining old County Road No. 6 now vacated (hereinafter property); and WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City of Orono for a conditional use permit to renew the previous permit issued to the former owner for the "incidentia'. alteration" of the existing structure that contains a legal ron-conforming use by permitt;nn interior alterations set forth in the attached floor plan as page is of this resolution. Such improvements are cited as follows. 1. Relocation of approximately 50 square feet of office area within an already defined commercial used area. 2. The loss of commercial floor area totaling 90 square feet is to be off set by the expansion of new commercial f loor area adjacent to Area 1 of the f loor plan noted a..)ve and to be used f or open she It display purposes. 3. Delicatessen/catering area to altered providing more efficient use of area. and per Orono Resolution No. 2188 the applicant seeks approval of the transfer of the ownership of the property to the applicant. Page 1 of 10 NOW, THERFFORF. BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Counci 1 of Orono, Minnesota: FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #1276. 2. The property is located in the RR-1B Rural Residential Zoning District requiring 2 acres in area. The total area of the property is 71,482 square feet or 1.64 acres. 3. On June 6, 1988 the Orono Planning Commission reviewed the application as proposed based on the following findings: A. The proposed alterations will provide better circulation and access within the sales area. B. The propose(: interior alterations will not _esult in an increase of commercial floor area, but merely involves the redesignation of use areas. C. The proposed alternations and expansion of food services not considered an intensification of the existing non -conforming use. D. The City has received no negative comments from the surrounding property owners notified during the review of this application. E. The City has never received complaints concerning the operation by the previous leasee under the restrictive standards setforth in the previous resolutions that govern the use of the property. 4. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, the reports by staff and rents of the applicant and the affect of the proposed u. `he health, safety and welfare of the community. 5. The City Council finds that granting a c, itional use permit to permit the proposed alterations within the principal structure and to approve the transfer of ownership to the applicant will not be detrimental to the health, Page 2 of 10 safety or general welfare of the public, would not adversely affect light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to nieghboring properties, nor will it depreciate surrounding property values and that the proposed level of use of the property will be in keeping with the intent and 4)jectives of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon cne or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a Conditional Use Permit per Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.03, Subdivision 5 (H) and per the directives of Orono Resolution No. 1377 that established the original guidelines for the commercial use of this residentially zoned property to permit the proposed alterations of the existing structure as described above and per Orono Resolution No. 2188 to approve the transfer of ownership of the the property to the applicant, Gary V. Kirt, subject to the following conditions: 1. Per Resolution No. 1377, the comercial use authorized by this conditional use permit shall consist of, and be limited to, the following: a) Retail but not who' ^ .jle of farm produce, nuts, fruits, vegetables, bedding plants, christmas trees, flowers and similar items grown on or off this property. b) Retail sale of normal grocery items including food stuffs, bakery goods, dairy products, package meats, fish or poultry, candy, tobacco, sundries, cooking or cleaning supplies, paper products, pet food or bird seed, etc. Food shall not be served for immediate consumption either cn the premises or in the form of take-out restaurant. c) Retail off -sale of 3.2 beer subject to separate consideration of licensing provisions and requirements of the City. d) Retail accessory sale of miscellaneous items including small crafts, pottery, food or cook books, garden supplies or small quantities of firew000d provided such sales are accessory to the grocery or produce business. klage 3 of 10 e) Commercial sales and storage shall be confined within the main building and 500 s.f. yard area designated as outdoor sales area to the east side of the structure. f) outdoor sales of produce, plants garden supplies or seasonal items such as pumpkins, christmas trees, etc. shall be permitted provided such activities are confined to an area of approximately 500 s.f. located east of the main building as indicated on floor plan approved for this commercial operation and attached to this Resolution as page 9. outdoor display or sales may not occ,ir in the parking lot nor in the area referred as "porch" area of the main building nor in the front yard setback area nor in any highway right-of-way. g) Exterior storage of commercial stock, fixtures or supplies shall not be permitted except within the designated outdoor sales area. h) The ex.'sting detached garage may continue to be used for inside commercial storage. i) Commercial signage for the entire property shall be limited to approximately 200 s.f. including any temporary or portable signs as subject to the ordinances of the City. This would not involve traffic directional signs. j) Produce may be grown on -site for sale on the premises. k) The maximum number of regular employees on the premises at any one time shall not excee� 4. 1) The commercial/retail busineo:, may be open to the public 7 days a week; the hours of operation shall be between the hours of 6:00 a.m. and 9:00 p.m. m) 14 parking stalls as designated on the site plan approve' for the commercial operation of this facility see pa-e 9 of this resolution. Designated parking stairs must be maintained so as not to interfere with required building exit doors, service doors or required space for delivery trucks and/or trash contai^iers. Pace 4 of 10 2. To permit a mini -bake and limited delicatessen/catering service for pick-up retail use only. Immediate consumption on the premises of such products is not permitted. 3. To allow one picnic table to be placed within the 20 x 25 designated out door sales area to the east side of the market. 4. Approval of all "incidental alterations" as described in the floor plan approved with this conditional use permit and included with this resolutior as page 8. 5. Prior to re -opening the business to the public the applicant/owner or their contractors shall obtain all required permits to complete the re -construction of the interior of the structure. 6. The applicant/owner must obtain a license from the Hennepin County Community Health Department for the food preparation operation prior to the opening of the market. 7. The new owner is hereby notified that the City Council will not consider any future building construction, additions or expansion for commercial uses because to do so would extend or intensify the non -conforming use contrary to the intent of the zoning code and contrary to the intent of. the Comprehensive Community Management Plan. This provision does not preclude normal building maintenance, repair or incidental alterations necessary to continue the non -conforming use within the existing structure as permitted by the terms of this Resolution and Orono Re;olur_ion No. 1377. B. The applicant agrees that he has no vested property rights to continue commercial use of the premises except in strict accordance with the terms and conditions of this Resolution and Orono Resolution No. 1377, and the City mry impose additional conditions as may be needed in the future in order to protect the public, safety and welfare. Applicant further agrees to waive any rights to object to such other conditions if after a complete and full hearing the City Council determines that such condition is necessary to protect the public health, safety and welfare. Page 5 of 10 j ,e 9. This conditional use permit for a non -conforming us shall run with the land and shall be binding upon the property owners, applicants and their heirs and assigns, except as follows: a) This permit shall be automatically void for any violation of or non-compliance with the terms and conditions of Resolution No. 1377 and as amended in the terms and conditions stated herein. b) This permit shall be automatically transferrable to a new or differnt leasee/operator provided the property ownership remains unchanged. c) This permit shall be reviewed and must be tranferred by the City Council upon change in ownership. d) This permit for non -conforming use shall be automatically void upon discontinuance of commercial uL3e f.or a period of twelve months (Section 10.03, Subdivision � (E)), upon destruction by fire, flood or other calamity (Section. 10.03, Subdivision 5 (D)), or upon change to a conforming residential use [Section 10.33, Subdivision 5 (C)]. 10. This permit shall not serve to grant any property right other than as specifically provided and conditionad herein. 11. Any violation of or non-compliance with the terms of this permit or Resolution No. 1277 is and shall constitute 3 violation of the Orono Zoning Code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 12. Authorities granted by this -,.solution run with the property not with the owner, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit within one year of the date of Council approval, or the special conditions of this resolution will expire on that date (June 27, 1989). {'ac,;e 6 (-,1 ' 0 13. The undersigned applicant has read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms of the resolution and on behalf of himself, his heirs, successor and assigns, hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Adopted by the Orono City Council on the 27th day of June, 1988. ATTEST: -------------------------------- ---------------------------- Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk Edward J. Callahan, Jr. Acting Mayor -------------------------------------------- —---------- Prok-rty owner(s) Page 7 of 10 I- 8 n KLD 8 r?in S fires h �i1 a r k t.° r 3�ao yzata 131vd. i Ues } Area �C owlF: I FEB - 5 CIiY OF" f�ti0iU0 $ArH r� C . tiQ�tx A,"A ir of It r- Pefi. r .. is �; :: '• � ::. , i z a -1 off''t I ' � • t t-893 to • w =x HENN. CO. STATE AID HW IV OMW Op twr - 1r Rs.w. Qurcik•T�aE ' - , .. - G-Il �. �� ;C* �-[..�.,�\� .r.!•� 'ter _�. ; .1 ! WJ`r'"y /�DO -,\ �. a K :�', tiS'l I ' a pp�P ` Soo DO,�' -_ l 4P� �A • �� * , *• �� \ 1 /4r. AsitcN Ernst Cry I.'ws't• , T., k�,,,rc1 $ IT R-d l Wcx'SAAwe plaorctrr 3ffOo wkyi.QA Sa.YD. ©AP"b is-u-ti a :- To: Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson From: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator Date: June 1, 1988 Subject: #1276 David C. Bell Investment Company, 3800 West Wayzata Boulevard - Conditional Use Permit - Public Hearing 'oning District - RR-1B Total Area = 71,482 s.f, or 1.64 acres (required 2 acres dry contiguous, unsewered rural area) Council Directive of Orono Resolution #1646 (Condition 6 B & C) Any change in ownership of the Eroperty, if commercial market use is to continue, would require the filing of a new Conditional Use Permit. Pertinent Sections of the Code Section 10.03, Subdivision 5 Non -conforming Uses A through I List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Application Exhibit B - Property Owners List Exhibit C - Plat Map Exhibit D - Resolution #1377 Exhibit E - Resolution #1646 - Review Specific Section Condition 6 B & C, Page 7 Exhibit F - Resolution /1735 Exhibit G - Resolution #2188 Exhibit H - Floor Plan Approved with Resolution 11735 Exhibit I - Floor Plan Approved with Resolution #2188 ExhibitJ - Floor Plan Amended with Building Permit - Need for Fire Exit. Exhibit K - Staff Letter 2/5/88 Exhibit L - Approved Site Plan - 14 Parking Stalls Review of the Unique History of the Non -Conforming Use at Residential Zoned Property New members to the Commission or other members interested in the history of the property should review Resolution 1377, Exhibit D. Briefly to review, the property has sustained a commercial/market use since the early 50's and in 1968 the City granted a Non -Conforming Conditional Use Permit for an existing market building that also contained an apartment/residence for the current owner. The use under that owner continued through the 70's when at sometime in the late 70's the ownership changed and the residence apartment was no longer occupied. The City files reveal several zoning violations created under the new ownership because the owner persisted in expanding the non -conforming commercial use of the residential property. Resolution 1177 approved in 1982 clearly reflected the very conservative and restrictive position the City adopted in an attempt to contrcl the commercial use of the property. Under t.rie directives of Resolution 1377, Zoning File #1276 Page 2 of 3 and a series of more enlightened owners, the City had very few problems with the commercial operation of the market. The real problem appeared to be the inability to make a profit based on the severe limitations for the commercial operation of that market. In Resolutions 1646, 1735, and 2188 the new owners and operators of the market were granted more liberal use of the structure and property. The City would not permit expansion, but they did allow structural modifications within the existing building envelope such a s : 1. Removal of the apartment unit, as this proved to be an impractical requirement. 2. Expansion of the retail f loor area and with the -emova 1 of the residential area, the replacement with storage areas. 3. Expansic n uses allowing a mini -bake operation, a delicatessen type -use, catering use, the City noted very specifically that no tables for serving people within the structure would be allowed because of tl a severe limitations of the property. The catering/delicatessen operation was to be limited to a retail/pickup- type use. New members to the commission may wish to review the non -conforming use sections of the code noted above. It is important to remember that any non -conforming use cannot legally be allowed to be expanded or intensified; one non -conforming use cannot be changed to another non -conforming use; and, most important for this review, if a specific non -conforming use has been discontinued for over a year, a conforming use must be re-established on the property. Review Exhibit K. The previous owner of the property, Doug Bumgardner, had closed the market some time in June of '87 for the extensive repairs to the structure proposed with the approval of Applicaticn 1132 (review Exhibits G, I, and J). In the staff letter of February 5, 1988, the new owner, the David C. Bell, Investment Co., was cc'd a copy of the subject letter advising of the approximate deadline wheretiy the commercial use would have to be discontinued if the commercial market was not reopened by the appropriate deadline date. Gary Kirt of the David C. Bell Investment Company filed the required Conditional Use Permit as the authorized representative of new owner of the property, a new owner that wishes to continue the commercial market use of the existing structure. The subject structure is still in a state of disrepair as Mr. Bumgardner never completed the approved alterations within the interior of the structure. The applicant would not only have to apply for appropriate building permits to complete the structural changes, but would in effect have to seek approval of a Conditional Use Permit for the improvements sought by Mr. Bumgardner in Resolution 2188 as the deadline date for renewal expired on May 26, 1988. The applicant has been in touch with staff, but, unfortunately, because of the heavy number of applications filed for last month's meeting, had to be put off to the optional meeting for this month. Unless the Planning Commission has concern with the improvements approved by the City in Resolution 2188 being reapproved under the new ownershit staff would recommend approval of a renewal Conditional Use Permit for the non -conforming use of the property as a market by the Zoning File #1276 Page 3 of 3 David C. Bell Investment Company. Note the only change that staff would call attention to was a change required by the building inspector with the review of the building plans, review Exhibits I and J. A fire exit was required in the area established for the expanded office area. Staff would recommend approval of the modified floor plan as shown on Exhibit J. Mr. Kirt has not submitted the name of the manager of the store, but it is staff's understanding that it will be an individual who was to operate the delicatessen/catering service under Mr. Bumgardner's ownership. For this current review, staff would also suggest that the current owner review the conditions of approval set forth in Resolution 1735 that first approved the delicatessen/catering use for the property, specifically 1 through 4 found on page 3 of that resolution that states the following: 1. All equipment installed to support the mini -bake operation is subject to the standards of the uniform building code and fire code. 2. Prior to installing the delicatessen use, the applicants must obtain a license from the Hennepin County Community Health Department for the food preparation operation. 3. All foods consumed at informal outdoor picnic area mus: be purchased at retail from within market. 4. Food shall not be served for immediate consumption either on the premises or in the form of take out resturant. It is most important that the current owner realize that there were definite limitations as to the approved delicatessen/catering use for the property. There were to be no indoor tables for consumption on the premises. The owner/applicant is allowed a single outdoor picnic table for the hikers use from the near by Baker Park Reserve hiking trails. Staff Recommendation Based on the directives of Resolutions 1377, 1646, 1735, and 2188 staff would recommend the following guidelines for the limits on the continued commercial use of the residential zoned property located at 3800 Wayzata Boulevard. 1. All conditions as itemized in Resolution 2188 lA through M. 2. To permit a mini -bake and limited delicatessen/catering service for pick-up retail use only. Immediate consumtt.ion on the premises of such products is not permitted. 3. one picric table to he 1.1aced within the 2f" by 25' designated outdoor sal^ area at the east side of market. 4. Approval of all interior alterations as discribed in Exhibit J of the Planning Commission packet submitted for the June 6, 1988 meeting. 5. Prior to reopening the business to the tublic the applicant/owner or their contractors shall obtain all required permits to complete the reconstruction of the interior of the structure. 6. The applicant/owner must obtain a license from the Hennetir County Community Health Department for the food pretarati.on operation prior to the opening of the market. 7. The applicant/owner is hereby advised that all conditions set forth in the previous resolutions that defined and limited the commercial use of this residential property are still in effect and any violation of these conditions of operation may result in the tossihle revocation of the current Conditional Use Permit. CITY OF ORONO - GENERAL LAND USE APPLICATION --------------------------------------------------------------- PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address 3800 West Wayzata Blvd. Orono. Mn. Property Identification Number (P.I.D. ) 29118 340009 CITY OF CRONO FINANCE OFFICE Please check one - Property XX abstract or torre`n l,00000 (for Conditional Use Appt�ations only) 0; rEN 2`0.00 Please attach legal description to application if not inclu�r TL 250.00 on required survey. KEC"PT-1HAA'K' YOU ------------------------------------------------------------ APPLICANT Phone (home) 474-1665 Name Gary V. Kirt Phone (work) 920-1880 Address 3915 tlwy. 7 City Mp1s. zip 55416 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- ONUM (if different than a pli t) Phone (home) Namey �N / A� �I Phone Address ,aa-2 G4u1� �"� L.�ilaad; City zip T; _ _ Date Property Acquired 2-18-88 - (month/year) I ot) also own t e ad acent A, s of land. ------------------------------------------- _..---------------------------- FEES - CONDITIONAL OSB PERMITS - Renewal Fee - 1/2 Current Fee After -the -Fact Fee - Double Current Application Fee $100.00 a) Residential accessary Use $150.00 b) Institutional (church, school, etc.) $150.00 c) Duplex Credit/Bldg X $250.00 d) Commercial/industrial Use $200.00 f ) Land Alteration Grading and filling - designated wetland or floodplain Grading and filling - 101 cu. yd. or more Grading, seawall, retaining walls within 75' of lakeshore PRD/PID - see fee schedule APPLICt1:1I008 $150.00 Commercial Site Plan Review (+ consultant fees) $250.00 vacation $150.00 Basement vacation $ 50.00 Zasement Vacation With Subdivision $250.00 Rezoning $100.00 Appeals __ Other - see fee schedule PRESENT USE OF PROPERTY Present 'Zoning District Convenience Grocery/ Present Use of Property c„ ,,,,.,-c i 11 Gourmet store Other (specify) --------•------------------------------------------------------------------- DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Describe request in detail: Continuation of existing Conditional_ Use Yertnic (mu$t is iL)oly due to new ownerslliu) --------------------------------------------------------------------------- REQUIRED SUBMITTALS 1. Completed Application Form. 2. Certified Property Owners List of owners within 3501(you can obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Government Center 348-3271) 3. Stamped, legal sized envelopes (#10) pre -addressed to each of the names on the above list with no return address. 4. Certificate of sui vey. 5. Topographic survey (existing and proposed contours) if land alterations involve changes in elevation (grades). 6. Construction plan, if applicable (see staff for requirements). 7. Plat Map. 6. As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- The applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your application is not complete it the above information has not been included. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Certification by Toning Department that Land Use Application is complete. Zoning Officials Signature _ Date APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information requirQd or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay all fees and/or unusual expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. ' r� Applicant's signature Date OWNERS SIGNATURE The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorized reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents, commission members, and Council members for purposes of investigation and veri 'cation this request. Owner's signature !',' ` Date a Applicant must have all s bmittals 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 Planninq Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend 'i scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agent. attend in your place and advise the Buildi.nq & 'Zoning Office of than change prior to the meeting. V RUM DATE 01/10/67 BATCH 009 38 29-118-23 32 0006 PIOP AD00 OWNER NAME HENN COUNTY PK PE:,EPVE GIST TAXPAYER HE41 COUNTY PK RE:E;..E DIST NAME/ADOP 38 29-118-23 34 0006 PROP ADOP 03660 SIXTH AVE N 0 NER NAME PARK GUN CLUB INC TAXPAYER PLRK GUN CLUB NAME/ADDR C/O RUBY GESCHWIND 4939 VERA CRUZ AVE MPLS MN 55429 38 32-118-23 21 0003 PROP AGOG OWNER NA'SE S A CIRSPINSKI ETAL TAXPAYER CLIFFORD L OTTEN NAME/ADDR ZZ65 W WAYZATA BLVD LOtG LAKE M'1 55356 38 32-118-23 24 0004 PROP R7DP OW,4fR NA1tE LISLE VICKERMAN JR ET AL TAXPAYER ORCHARD PARK FARM INC NAME/ADCR 3980 WATERTOG71 RU MAPLE PLAIN Y-! 55759 HEFMPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFOPMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY O104ERS LIST 38 :9-118-Z3 33 0001 03960 SIXTH AVE N F J THC'1PSON ETAL GLENN CUltMINGS 3960 6TH AVE N LONG ujkE MN 55356 38 29-11C-23 34 0008 03740 WAYZATA BLVD S A CIRSPINSKI ETAL CLIFFORD L OTTEN ZZ65 W WAYZATA BLVD LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 32-113-23 22 0002 03825 SIXTH AVE N FPEO HOLASEK JR ETAL FRED HOLASEK JR 3325 6TH AVE N LCNG LAKE *1 55356 TOTAL BATCH C09 00010 REPORT NO. PI435401 PAGE 29 38 29-118-23 33 0008 DURLIN,,TON NORTHERN RY BURLINGTON t=THERN RY 38 29-118-23 34 0009 03800 WAYZATA BLVD MaYO:1A v CIRSPINSKI MAYONA V CIRSPINASKI—SUNDLIN 3907 JANET LANE EROOKLYN CENTER MN 55429 38 32-118-23 22 0003 03825 SIXTH AVE N FRED HOLASEK JR ETAL FRED HOLASEK JR 3825 6TH AVE N LONG LAKE MN 55356 I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTEC APE AN ACCURATE Al1D TRUE REPRESENTATICt1 OF INFC7MATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE 014 THE RECORDS OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PPOFERTY TAXATION. TO THE BE$— OF MY KNONLEDGE AND CELIEF. i / f DATE 'I ) BY I� t ,� s— tt G� to LIP Olt 7 4c, I] City of OR ONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 1_�11 APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR VICKI WISEGARVER AND TOM BROKL AUTHORIZING CONTINUED NON -CONFORMING USE OF RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY AT 3800 WAYZATA BLVD FOR COFLMERCIAL PURPOSES AS LIMITED HEREIN WHEREAS, the City of Orono is a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, pursuant to State Statates 412 et. seq. and 462 et. seq. the City Council of the City of Orono has adopted zoning regulations for the protection of the public health, safety and general welfare; and WHEREAS, the subject of this resolution is certain res- identially -zoned property located at 3800 Wayzata Blvd in the City of Orono, hereinafter referred to as the "Wisegarver Property", which is legally described as follows: 1. "Those parts of Lots 11, 12 and 13, "MINNETONKA GARDEN ACRES", according to the recorded plat thereof, lying southerly of the centerline of Hennepin County State Aid Highway No. 6, Plat 5, as deliniated in Book 70, Page 3844152 of Hennepin County records. Also the north 1/2 of adjoining old County Road No. 6 now vacated." 2. The above described property is divided into three tax par s identified as follows: a) PIN 29-118-23 34 0002 n) PIN 29-118-23 34 0005 c) PIN 29-118-23 33 0006; and WHEREAS, use of the Wisegarver Property has been the subject of previous City Council actions including: 1. A nor -conforming use conditional use permit issued to then owner -occupant Mayona Sundlin on September 13, 1968, for: a) "Non-Conforminq Use Permit for Fruit 6 Vegetable Stand." b) "One building for vegetables and groceries plus living quarters. Approximately 40' X 501. One acre for building and parking. Cold Storage Building." u Gaye 1 of 15 City of OR ONO RESOLUTION Or T_Z: CITY COUNCIL NO. - -- �-1-Z — �. Rcsoluticn No. 1239 Finding Facts and Denying the Variance and Conditional Use Permit Applications by Orton and Vicki Wisegarver adopted January 12, 1981. 3. Resolution No. 1271 Regarding the Status of Property known as Kellers Market, 3800 Wayzata Blvd adopted May 11, 1981; and WHEREAS, the Wisegarver property was the subject of a temporary restraining order issued by Hennepin County District Judge Lindsay G. Arthur on April 9, 1981, which order enjoined Orton and Vicki Wisegarver individually and doing business as Kellers Market from operating any business or permitting any habitation or use of the premises until further Order of the Court or until various building code and fire code violations as noted therein were corrected to the satisfaction of the City: and WHEREAS, on or before April 8, 1981, the Kellers Market business has been closed to the public and all non -conforming commercial use of the property was discontinued; and WHEREAS, on December 1, 1981, Vicki Wisegarver and Tom Brokl the proposed lessee of the Wisegarver Property, hereinafter referred to as "The Applicants", have applied for a new non -conforming use conditional use permit to allow correction of the various building and fire code violations and to allow reopening of a limited commercial non-conforminq use on the Wiseqarver property; and WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed this new application, the recommendations of staff and the Planning Commission and written and oral comments of the applicants. NOW, THEREFORE DE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Orono hereb} makes the following Findings of Fact: 1. The Wisegarver property is located in the RR-113 One Family Rural Residential Zoninq District., which district includes the following performance standards (34.842): Minimum Lot Area: 2 acres = 87,120 sf Minimum Lot Width: 200 feet Minimum Front Yard, Rear Yard or Side Yard Adjacent to :,t reset : 50, Minimum Interior Side Yard: 301 I11.1ge 2 of 15 City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 1 2. The Wiseqarver property, includiny all three tax parcels, contains 71,482 sf or 1.641 acres according to a certificate of survey by Gary G-briel dated April 19, 1980, as revised February 25, 1982. 3. The Wisegarver property contains the following structures or improvements as shown on the Gabriel survey: a) One 49.0 ft X 60.0 ft concrete block main building plus a 5.0 ft wide open awnin, or canopy over a concrete slab on the southwest or front side. This building previously housed the Kellers Market commercial use referrenced in Resolution No. 1239, and prior to that it contained the Sundlin (later Cirspinski) residence and 12-Iii Market referrenced in Resolution No. 1239 and in the September, 1968 conditional use permit. This building is setback 14.2 ft from the Wayzata Blvd highway right-of-way, and the awning or canopy extends 5 ft closer to within 9 ft of the right-of-way. b) One 24 ft X 26 ft detached residential garage converted to commercial storage purposes, referrenced as the "cold storage buildinq" in the September 1968 Conditional Use Permit. c) One small storage shed or root cellar built into the hillside east (,f the main building. d) One 16 ft X 40 ft wood framed "greenhouse" no longer in use. e) Asphalt paved parking lot around the south, west and north sides of the main building with paved driveway accesses one each to Wayzata Blvd and to County Road 5. 4. The Wiseqarver property is owned in fee by Mayona Cirspinski (nee Sundlin) as contract for deed vendor to Keller Trust, contract vendee and Trustee for Vicki Wisegarver's five minor children. Applicant Vicki Wisegarver has the power to act can behalf of the Keller Trust. 5. Orton Wiseqarver, the principal applicant and subject of Resolution No. 1239, no longer has any interest in the Wiseqarver property or in the current application. PaOe 3 of 1`i City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. -_ / 3 7 - --- 6. Applicant Tom Brokl intends to lease the Wisegarver property from the Keller Trust and then to operate the business and property as E chowind's Country Store. 7. The finding:; of fact contained in Resolution No. 1239 are hereby reaffirmed and made a part of this application and this resolution as if fully set out herein. Some of the more pertinent findings are restated as follows: a) Mayona Cirspinski lived in and used approximately one half of the main building as her residence until September 9, 1977, when all residential use of the premises was terminated upon purchase of the property by Orton and Vicki Wisegarver. b) Sometime after September 9, 1977, Orton Wisegarver made several structural changes in the main structure by removing the conforming residential apartment and thereafter increasing the non conforming commercial use. c) These structural and use changes were made without obtaining building permits without obtaining the required conditional use permit and approval by the City, and in violation of zoning code provisions prohibiting changes in or expansion of non -conforming uses. d) Outdoor sales and storage activities increased dramatically and resulted in unpermitted commercial use of required yard and setback areas, and otherwise created distractions for motorists trying to negotiate the the Iliqhway 12 County Road 6 intersection. e) Reconstruction of the highway intersection by the State Department of Transportation in 1980 resulted in a quick -take condemnation of a portion of the original Wisegarver property as shown on the February 25, 1982, Gabriel survey, and further resulted in severing of a portion of the on -site sewage treatment drainfield causing surfacing of untreated effluent and failure of the septic system. f) The existing driveway entrance onto Highway 12 was judged to be a safety hazard and recommended for closure by Chief of Police Mel Kilbo and Public Works Coordinator John Gerhardson for the following reasons: 1. lack of sight distance to tho east 2. conflicting intersection movements Page 4 of 15 City of OR,ONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. /377 - 3. lack of deceleration lane to Kellers driveway f 4. existing driveway location allows unsafe movements across Highway 12 to/from westbound County Road 6 5. discourage "impulse" decisions where through travellers suddenly stop and turn without adequate warning 6. dramatic increase in frequency of accidents at the Highway 12 - County Road 6 intersection in last year's time 7. existing entrance is too close to intersection 8. 55 mph speed limit is too fast to encourage turning movements 9. pedestrian traffic is attracted by outdoor displays adding to potential conflicts and hazards 8. Resolution No. 1239 concluded by finding that the Kellers Market use as existing on the Wisegarver property at that time constituted a violation of the Orono Zoning Code and the Comprehensive Plan, and that the requested conditional use permit was denied until such time as the various physical problems and building code violations were corrected, and the property use returned to a level consistent with the original conditional use permit issued in 1968. 9. After adoption of Resolution No. 1239, Orton Wisegarver kept the Kellers Market business operating and open to the public kith little or no attempt to correct the violations or problems noted in that resolution. 10. In March of 1961, routine building and fire prevention inspections revealed a long list of building code and fire code violations which were judged to be direct safety hazards to the public. Correction orders were issued to Orton Wisegarver on March 1.1, 1981. Failure to correct these violations and failure to answer- subsequent citations resulted in the City seeking a temporary restraining order requiring closure, of the business to the public until the itemized safety hazards were corrected. 11. On April 9, 1g81, Ilennepin Count,,., [District Judge Lindsay G. Page 5 of 15 City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. . -- -13- :7 7 - - Arthur issued a temporary restraining order enjoining Orton and Vicki Wiseg3rver individually and doing business as Kellers Market from operating any business or permitting any habitation or use of the premises until further Order of the Court or until the various building code and fire code violations as noted therein were corrected to the satisifaction of the City. 12. Following issuance of the Temporary Restraining Order, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 1271 to clarify the status of the property. The findings of fact and conclusions of Resolution No. 12711 are hereby reaffirmed and made a part of this application and resolution as if fully set out herein. Some of the more pertinent findings and conclusions are restated as follows: a) ".......the property and business known as Ke:llers Market is closed to the public and shall remain closed for any business use until such time that the use and premises are in full compliance with all Buildinq, Zoning, and Fire Code regulations of the City. Any occupancy, construction, alteration or business use of the building or premises without prior written approval and authority from the City Council shall be deemed to be a violation of the non -conforming use provisions of Section 31.100 of The Orono Zoning Code." b) "Issuance of new permits as required for any construction or alteration work on these premises shall be subject to prior approval of a conditional use permit by the City Council." c) "No business shall reopen and no business activity shall occur on the property unless the City Council first shall issue a Conditional Use Permit for continuation of a non --conforming commercial use in the RR-1B single family residential zone pursuant to Section 31.100 of the municipal cede." i) The new application and intended use shall be con- sistent with the directions contained in Resolution 1239 and with the provisions of they original nonconforminca use conditional u!-.e permit issued to Mayona Sundlin on September 11, 1968. T'a7P fi of 15 City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COU1.GIL NO. — --?- e) Approval of any such conditional use permit shall be conditioned upon abatem.+nt of all outstanding building, zoning and fire code violations prior to reopening of the building or premises to the public. 13. This current Conditional Use Permit application by Vicki Wi-segarver and Tom Brokl was made with full knowledge Gf the existence and contents of Resolution #1239 grid Resolution 1271 and Judge Arthur's temporary restraining order. The current application is made with she intent of resolving all the violations noted in said documents and of complying with all requirements of the City so as to reopen a limited commercial produce and grocery market consistent with the 1968 non -conforming use conditional use pe nnit is-ued to Mayona Sundiin. 14. A review of the current application by the Hennepin County Department of Transportation has resulted in a recommendation to eliminate the existing driveway access onto County Road 6 and to serve the entire site with one new access onto County Road 6 located approximately 50ft. east of the existing de- tached garage as shown on Exhibit A. 15. A septic site evaluation report has been submitted to the City and approved by Mi-hael Gaffron, City On -Site Manager_. This report cells for an entirely new mound -type drainfield to be installed on the hill east of the garage structure, citing the area of the existing failing on -site system as unsuitable for continued use as a drainfield area. 16. Vicki Wisegarver and Tom Brokl have agreed to obtain required permits and to do the physical repairs and improvements cited in the temporary restraining order and as the March 11, 1981, City Correction Order, including but not limited to: a) C�-)rrectinq fire coda violations b) Repairing or replacing structural work so as *.a correct building, plumbing and mechanical codes violations c) Installing a new conforming on -site sewage treatment. system. 17. Vicki Wisegarver and Tom Brokl have agreed to reinstall living quarters within the main buildinq which quarters Pa -le 7 of 15 City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 13?7 will be occuppied as the primary residence of an individual involved in the operation of the business on a daily basis. This installation will return conforming residential use to the premises in accord with the 1968 conditional use permit. 18. Vicki Wisegarver and Tom Brokl have agreed to revise the parking area and driveway accesses to remove and eliminate all vehicle access to Highway 12 and to remove and relocate the access on County Road 6 from the existing location to the new location as approved by Hennepin County Depart- ment of Transportation. 19. This current application, its intent, its review, and the promises of the applicants satisfy the orders and direction contained in Resolutions No. 1239 and 1271. THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that based upon the above findings of Fact, the City Council of the City of Orono hereby grants a non -conforming use conditional use permit to the Keller Trust and Vicki Wisegarver subject to the following conditions and limitations: 1. This Conditional Use Permit shall be issued pursuant to Section 31.100 et. seq. relating to continuation of existing non --conforming uses, but prohibiting expansion of n.)n- conforming uses, and preventing changes in use except to confor.�ing uses. 2. This Conditional Use Permit shall authorize limiter: com- mercial use of the Wisegarver property as an accessory use to the permitted residential use of that property. If residential use of the Wisegarver property should cease in the future, then the non -conforming commercial use shall al^o cease. 3. The commercial use authorized by this Conditional Use Permit shall consist of, and be limited to, the following: a) Retail but not wholesale sale of farm produce, nuts, fruits, vegetables, bedding plants, rhristmas trees, flowers and similar items grown on or off this property. h) Retail sale of normal grocery items including food stuffs, bakery goods, dairy products, packaged meats, fish Page 8 of 1 City of OR ONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 1377 or poultry, candy, tobacco, sundries, cooking or cleaning supplies, paper products, pet food or bird seed, etc. Food shall not be cooked on the premises or otherwise prepared or served for immediate consumption eit'ier on the premises or in the form of take-out restaurznt or delicatessen service. c) Retail off -sale of 3.2 beer subject to sel con- sideration of licensing provisions and require.,.cnts. d) Retail accessory sale of miscellaneous items including small crafts, pottery, food or cook books, garden supplies or small quantities of firewood provided such sales are accessory to the grocery or produce business. e) Commercial sales and storage shall be confined within the main building except as specificially permitted herein. f) Outdoor sales of produce, plants, garden supplies or seasonal items such as pumkins, christmas trees, etc. shall be permitted pros d such activities are confined to an area of approx.L.-itely 500 square feet located east of the main building as indicated on Exhibit A. Outdoor display or sales may not occur in the parking lot nor in the "porch" area of the main buildinq nor in the front yard setback area nor in any highway right-of-way. g) Exterior storage of commercial stock, fixtures or supplies shall not be permitted except within the designated outdoor sales area. h) The existing detached garage may continue to be used for inside commercial storage, or may be reconverted to a garage at the applicants discretion. i) Commercial signage for the entire property shall be limited to approximately 100 square feet including any temporary or portable signs. j) Produce may be grown on -site for sale on the premises. k) The maximum number of regular employees on the premises at any one time shall not exceed 4, which number shall include the resident -employee. Paqe 9 of 15 City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 1) The commercial/retail business may be open to the public 7 days a week but the hours of operation shall be limited to between the hours of 7:00 A.M. and 9:00 P.M. m) At least 14 parking stalls each at least 9' X 20' in size shall be available at all times to support the approved level of commercial use (1600 sq ft interior retail + 500 sq ft exterior retail = 2100 sq ft = 1 space/150 sq ft), plus at least 1 parking stall maintained for the private use of the required residence. Designated parking stalls shall not be located so as to interfere with required building exit doors, service doors or required space for delivery trucks and/or trash containers. 15 sF-Aces are indicated on Exhibit A. 4. The residential use required by this Conditional Use Permit shall consist of at least the following minimum requirements: a) 600 square feat of the main building devoted to a re- sidential apartment i.ncl;.ding bedroom, bathroom and living area. The residential toilet may also be used for the required commercial toilet if it conforms with building code requirements for public use. b) Independent access to the residential unit separate from any access thru the commercial area. c) At least 1 residential parking space as noted above. 5. The required residential apartment shall be occuppied as the primary residence of an individual employee, manager or owner who is involved in the operation of the business on a daily basis. 6. The main building shall be used for both the required residential use and the authorized limited non-conforminq commercial use. Of the total 2940 square feet building, at least o00 ,q ft shall be devoted to the residential use and noL more than 1600 square feet shall be devoted to interior retail sales area (including the semi -enclosed south side veranda but excluding the 5 ft open "porch"). The remaining areas may be circulation space and commercial storage, office or preparation areas. No reduction in the required residential. arez, shall be permitted. No ex- pansion of the commercial retail area shall be permitted. Pagv 10 of 15 City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. f3777 Any such commercial expansion would constitute a violation of the terms of this Conditional Use Permit and would be a violation of Zoning Code Section 31.108. 7. Prior to reopening of the business to the public, the -i-Inlicants or their contractors shall obtain all required nits and shall abate and correct all fire code violations and all building code violations as noted in Judge Arthur's April 9, 1981, Temporary Restraining Order and in the City's March 11, 1981, Official Correction Orders. Correction of these items will be verified by the City Building in- spector according to State Code standards and requirements. 8 Because of the time of year, the City will authorize strictly temporary use of the existing septic tanks as sealed holding tanks which shall be regularly pumped to remove all effluent from the premises provided that as a condition of this permit the applicant's hereby agree to install a now mound -type on -site drainfield and associated pumping system in accordance with the design prepared by iiankanson Anderson Associates dated December 4, 1981, as reviewed and approved by Michael Gaffron in a report dated January 29, 1982, which work shall be completed and in use not later than June 15, 1982. The new on -site system shall be subject to all normal permits and inspections pursuant to Ordinance #210. 9. Upon completion of the corrective work noted in item #7 above, but not necessiarily prior to completion of the new septic system noted in item #8 above, the City Attorney will advise Judge Arthur that the City's requirements have been satisfied and that the April 9, 1981, Temporary Restraining Order should be released. 10. Prior to reopening of the business to the public the applicant's hereby agree to complete the County forms necessary to legally combine the three separate tax parcels of. the Wisegarver property into one parcel for tax and zoning purposes. 11. The applicants hereby agree to remove the ;ng wood frame greenhouse from the Wisegarver prope, later than June 15, 1982. 12. A specific and vital condition of this permit is that all Page 11 of 15 City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. _% 77 _ vehicular access to the Wisegarver property be from County Road No. 6, that no vehicular access be permitted from Wayzata Blvd, Highway 12, and that all access to County Road 6 meet the location and design approval of Hennepin County Department of Transportation. The applicants hereby agree to obtain a new access permit from Hennepin County, and any work permit that may be required from the Minnesota Department of Transportation, which permits will authorize the following: a) Complete removal of the existing driveway access to Highway 12 including reconstruction of the ditch line removing all traces of the existing fill. b) Similar removal, if required by Hennepin County, of the existing driveway access to County Road 6. c) Construction of a new driveway access to County Road 6 according to the requirements of Iiennepin County Depart- ment of Transportation. d) Restoration of all disturbed areas with sod or seed. Further the applicants hereby agree to physically block - off and prevent use of the existing driveway access to Highway 12 prior to reopening of the business to the public, and to physically complete all of the required access re- movals and changes prior to June 15, 1982. 13. The applicants are hereby notified that the City Council will not consider any future building construction, addition or expansion for commercial purposes because to do so would extend or intensify the non -conforming use contrary to the intent of Zoning Code Section 31.108 and contrary to the intent of the Comprehensive Community Management Plan. This provision does not preclude normal building maintenance, repairs or incidental alterations necessary to continue the non -conforming use within the existing structures as permitted by the terms of this resolution. 1.4. Resoluti-on No. 1271 noted for the record that April 8, 1982, was the 12 month deadline date for reopening of some form of commercial business on the Wisegarver property in order to preserve non -conforming use rights pursuant to Zoning Code Section 31.105. Because of the good -faith efforts Page 12 of 15 City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. _/� 77 of this application, the City Council hereby extends the deadline for reopening of the business to not later than June 15, 1982. 15. The applicants hereby agree that they have no vested property rights to continue commercial use of the premises except in strict accordance with the terms and conditions of this resolution, and that the City may impose additional conditions as may be needed in the future in order to protect the public health, safety and welfare. Applicants further agree to waive any rights to object to such other conditions if after a complete and full hearing the City Council determines that such condition is necessar•!, to protect the public, health, safety, and welfare. 16. fused upon the findings of fact in this case, including the findings of Resolution No. 1239 and No. 1271, the City Council hereby declares that they would have denied this current application except for the promises made by the applicants that they would strictly adhere to the conditions and limitations set forth herein, and further the Council declares that this application and conditional use permit shall be denied and will be considered to be invalid unless all the terms and conditions of this resolution are complied with. This declaration is made for one or more of the following reasons: a) Any other commercial use or any increased or expanded commercial use would not be consistent with the prior existing non -conforming use as documented in the 1968 conditional use permit for Mayona Sundlin, and therefore such use would constitute a "use" variance as prohibited by Minnesota Statutes 462.357 Subd. 6 (1). ,r b) Removal or elimination of the prior existing residential J occupancy would likewise constitute a prohibited "use" variance. c) Failure to correct the listed building code and fire code violations would be a direct health and safety hazard to the public. d) Failure to correct the failing septic system would constitute a direct pollution and health hazard to the public. Page 13 of 15 City of OR ONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 13 77 e) Failure to revise the vehicular access points and/or indescriminate expansion of outdoor sales activities would distract drivers and constitute a public safety hazard for all persons travelling through the busy Highway 12- County Road G intersection. 17. This Conditional Use Permit shall become effective upon adoption by the City Council and upon agreement and signature by the applicant Vicki Wisegarver and by the intended lessee Tom Brokl. This permit shall be automatically void if not signed by the applicants prior to June 15, 1982. 18. This Non -Conforming Use Conditional. Use Permit shall run with the land and shall be binding upon the property owners, applicants and their heirs and assigns, except as follows: a) This permit shall be automatically void for any violation of or non-compliance with the terms and conditions of this permit. b) This permit shall be automatically reviewed and the terms and conditions reconsidered by the City Council on or about April 1, 1983, at which time such reconsideration may be required annually thereafter. c) This permit shall be automatically transferrable to a new or different lessee/operator provided the property ownership remains unchanged and provided that prior to such lessee change the new lessee agrees in writing to the terms and conditions contained herein, which agreement shall be indicated by signature on the original copy of this Resolution as kept of record by the Orono City Clerk. d) This permit shall be reviewed and must be transferred by the City Council upon change in ownership to any party other than the Keller Trust, Vicki Wisegarver, or Tom Brokl. e) This permit for non -conforming use shall be automatically void upon discontinuance of commercial use for a period of twelve months (Sec. 31.105), upon destruction by fire, flood or other calamity (Sec. 21.104) or upon change to a conforming residential use (Sec. 31.103). 19. This permit shall not serve to grant any property right other than as specifically provided and conditioned herein. Page 14 of 15 City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL N0.__1,371 ___ 20. Any violation of or non-compliance with the terms and conditions of this Conditional Use Permit and/or Variance Resolution are and shall constitute a violation of the Orono Zoning Code which shall be punishable as a misdemeanor as provided therein.. Adopted by the Orono City Council on this A,2, day of 1982. ATTEST: Alberta M. Strom, City Clerk William B. Van Nest, Mayor Mary C. Butler, Actinq Mayor We the owners and applicants have read and understood the above Conditional Use Permit and/or Variance Resolution; we agree on behalf of ourselves, our seccessors and assigns that the use of the above described property may be so regulated by the City of Orono; we agree to the terms and conditions of this permit as specified herein; we agree that any violation of or non-compliance with the terms and conditions of this resolution shall constitute a violation of the Orono Zoning Code; and we agree to the filing f a copy of this re- solution in the chain of title to the roperty STATE OF MINNESOTA ) Vic i Wisegarver app scant and ) ss. Attorney in Facts or the Keller COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) Irrevocable Minor's Support Trust The f regoin�i instrument was acknowledged before me this C' day of �LZ 198Aw._• by 'f_ �. ]'i o ary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA Tom Bro es e ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) Theoregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 3 day of _/?,Ite, 1 19 .�► by � �� G _zg n Rotary Public �l;_loll „ --- Page 15 of 15 HENN. CO. STATE AID �E„ram-- acc& s; �\ N EMj AcceLS Lora bwl �a..r«J QE /�►l A"R&Wb %Y Raw m WIT R.o.0 •� � ' J7 N L it 79 47, G tea. /� ce.owG v� F Lo Fp ♦� s•Iv,oE y �' ♦ •, 4L 4�r WIC~C. sua 4\ 1/0 •:wxA--a':!:.tWo - HWY. NO. 6 _ NeTE ' �Iclet nvw�r �E (REOL. (1;q) / UAS anti awever� To Tic Rar•.e� SITE RAN We�.,F.�� PhogEtri Woo Mr,&rz try %-YD. � ,o JAJ 1-M-fro EW iz u ii a 2 25-tt H a t LU k C W aE•� rJ {{roouJ i RCQD Ilk - VI/ Tot COK• ♦ S Tom. • ! • _, . _ .' • . � AAfA ats�' �RCSG NALTCNED soTsloE sous Adtlrl PRoP. oPs{c¢ i I \ -. - ! 20Yt� s Seo SF, � - FLDe2 Pl•U� �' ' S041- EwJCIDSaA VCQ�AIDA C~A.4 �M �IEg< TLfTet� ARlTA PfJCTY {atLUDtp Ml ~ t / 4AW $(JIC�IA+Ir� O, Pew roacw NO SPACES PERM ITt{ram • - --- ��-19' :r 3 9 City of ORON()8 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 1646 A RESOLUTION APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR LOWELL SCHAPER AND GLENN NELLIST AUTHORIZING CONTINUED NON -CONFORMING USE. OF RESIDENTIAL. PROPERTY AT 3800 WAYZATA BOULEVARD - FILE #826 WHEREAS, Lowell Schaper and Glenn Nellist (hereinafter the applicants) have an interest in a property owned by Vicki Wisegarver (hereinafter owner) located at 3800 Wayzata Boulevard within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as follows: Those parts of Lots 11, 12, and 13, "MINNETONKA GARDEN ACRES", according to the recorded plat thereof, lying southerly of the centerline of Hennepin County State Aid Highway No. 6 Plat 5, as deliniated in Book 70, Page 3844152 of Hennepin Co,.nty records. Also the north 1/2 of adjoining old County Road No. 6 now vacated ( herei naf ter the property) ; and WHEREAS, the applicants have applied to the City for a conditional use permit per Section (10.03) Subdivision (5A-J) and per Orono Resolution #1377, 18(c) of the conditions of approval to permit changes in the non -conforming, commercial use of the residential property. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: Fi.,dings 1. The application was reviewed as zoning file no. 826. 2. The property is located in the RR-1B,Rural Residential Zoning District. 3. On March 22, 1982, Council approved Resolution. #1377 establishing standards and limits on the commercial use of the residential zoned property. 4. In filing application 48,6, the applicants requested modifications in the approved use levels and alterations both external and internal of the existing structure as follows: a) Removal of the defined residential apartment, said area to be used only for storage and employee rest room, Employees lunch room and office. City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 1646 b) Relocate west access to a more central location on west wall and removal of existing office area to allow better flow and circulation within the store. The 188 sf of office area will not be used as commercial sales area but shall serve only as open circulation area. c) The ext.�rior alterations involve construction of a second story loft area, new roof, removal of canopy on south side of existing structure, privacy f encing around outdoor sales area and 3 1/2' split rail fence along the boundaries of the property. Applicants propose no commercial use of the loft as the loft will be used for display and decorative purposes. No public access to loft will be allowed. 5. Council has approved applicants request to remove the residential unit within the existing structure finding no intensification or extension of the commercial use of the residential property based on the following findings: a) The area occupied by the residential unit shall be used solely for storage, lunch room/employee lounge and new office. The approximate 450 sf of the residence apartment may never be used for commercial sales area. b) The structure has not contained a residence since late 1970's. c) The City Inspector has never issued a certificate of occ.apancy for the rehabilitated apartment. d) The previous lessee and current applicants note the following drawbacks in rentinq such a unit to an employee oz owner: (1) The existing apartment is too small and cannot provide adequate living area. ( 2 ) A responsible agent of the store would never want to live there. (3) Since the applicants all own their own homestead farms, they could not claim i_. apartment legally as their residence. (4 ) A single renter may not wish to be subjected to the possible dangers of breakins and the associated responsibilities. City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 164Fi Council approved applicants request to relocate access and remove existing office finding no intensification or extension of the commercial use of the residential property based on the following findings: a) In relocating the western entrance, the old access will be closed off providing a more centralized entrance to sales area. h) The 188 sf of existing office will be removed and relocated in a section of the old apartment. The newly vacated area will provide better circulation and better flow to sales areas. The 188 sf will not be used for commercial sales but serve as more formal, directional entrance area to the store. 7. Council approved applicants request to modify exterior structure to barn motif with loft area and erect outdoor fencing finding no intensification or extension of the commercial use of the residential property based on the following findings: a) The proposed barn like structure is more associated and consistent with residential use. b) The removal of the canopy area along south side of building as part of proposed reconstruction will completely eliminate potential use as outdoor sales area. No outdoor sales can take place within the area beginning at front line cf building running to road right of way. c) The privacy fence along the 20' x 25' outdoor sales area will better define the outdoor commercial sales area. 8. Application 1826 does not involve any changes in the commercial, non -conforming use of the residential property nor does the application propose an intensification of the existing commercial use. 9. The major structure changes proposed for the existing structure will not intensify the commercial use but will jr.,ther create a structure more associated with accessory residential uses. 10. The City hws received no negative comments from the surrounding property owners notified during th4 review of application #826. City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 1646 Phe City never received complaints on the commercial use of the property as operated by the previous lessee under the standards of operation setforth in Resolution #1377. 12. The City. Council hay considered this application including the finding and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City Staff, and comments by the applicant and other intE:rested persons and the effect of the cont nued commercial use of the residential property as proposed on the health, safety and welfare of the community. 13. The City Council finds th. grantir- a Conditional Use Permit to permit the continued commerc: se of the residential property as proposed will not be .mental to the health, safety or general welfare of the p .-lic, would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property, nor will it depreciate surrounding property values and the location and proposed use of the residential property will be in keeping with the intent and objectvies of the zoning code and comprehensive plan of the City. Conclusions, Order and Conditions Based on the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a conditional use permit per Section 10.03, Subdiv (5 (a) through (j)) and Orono Resolution #1377 to Lowell Schaper, Glenn Nellist, and Vicki Wisegarver to permit. the continued commercial use of the property located at 3800 Wayzata Boulevard as proposed by the applicants subject to the following conditions: 1. Per Resolution 1377, the commercial use authorized by this conditional use permit shall consist af, and be limited to, the following: a) Retail but not wholesale sale of farm produce, nuts, fruits, vegetables, bedding plants, christmas trees, f lowers and simlar items grown on or off this property. b ) Retail sale of normal grocery items includ i • 3 food stuf f s, bakery goods, dairy products, package meats, fish or poultry, candy, tobacco, sundries, cooking or cleaning supplies, paper products, pet food or bird seed, etc. Food shall nc�_ be cooked on the premises or otherwise prepared or served for immediate consumption either on the premises or in the form of take-out restaurant or delicatessen service. City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 1646 c) Retail off -sales of 3.2 beer subject to separate consideration of licensing provisiuns and requirements. d) Retail accessory sale of miscellaneous items including small crafts, pottery, food or cook books, garden supplies or small quantities of firewood provided such sales are accessory to the grocery or produce business. e) Commercial sales and storage shall be confined within the main building and 500 sf yard area designated as outdoor sales area. f) Cutdoor sales of produce, plants, garden supplies of seasonal items such as pumpkins, christmas trees, etc shall be permitted provided such activities are confined to an area of approximately 500 square feet located east of the main building as i.idicated on Exhibit A. Outdoor display or sales may not occur in the parking lot nor in the area referred to as "porch" area of the main building nor in the front yard setback area nor in any highway right-of-way. g) Exterior storage of commercial stock, fixtures or supplies shall not be permitted except within the designated outdoor sales area. h) The existing detached garage may continue to be used for inside commercial storage. i ) Commercial signage for the entire property shall be limited to approximately 200 square feet including any temporary or portable signs. This would not involve traffic directional signs. j) Produce may Le grown on -site for sale on the premises. k) The maximum number of regular employees on the premises at any one time shall not exceed 4. 1) The commercial/retail business may be open to the nublic 7 days a week; the hours of operation shall be between ie hours of 7 a.m. and 9 p.m. 5 City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 1646 m) At least 15 parking stalls, each at least 9' x 20' in size, shall be available at all times to support the approved level of commercial use. Designated parking stalls must be maintained so as not to interfere with required building exit doors, service doors or required space for delivery trucks and/or trash containers. Prior to reopening the business to the public, the applicants or their contractors shall obtain all required permits to correct any code violations on the property specified by the Building Official. The applicants and owner are hereby notified that the City Council will not consider any future building construction, additions or expansion for corc,mercial uses because to do so would extend or intensify the non -conforming use contrary to the intent of the Zoning Code and contrary to the intent of the Comprehensive Commmunity Management Plan. This provision does not preclude normal building maintenance, repair or incidental alterations necessary to continue the non- conforming use within the existing structures as permitted by the terms of this resolution and Orono Resolution #1377. 4. The applicants and owner agree that they have no vested property rights to continue commercial use of the premises except in strict accordance with the terms and conditions of this resolution and Orono Resolution #1377, and that the City may impose additional conditions as may be needed in the future in order to protect the public iealth, safety and welfare. Applicant further agree Lo w..ive any rights to object to such other conditions if after a complete and full hearing the City Council determines that such condition is necessary to protect the public health, safety and welfare. 5. The conditional use permit shall become effective upon adoption by the City Council and upon agreement and signature by the owner Vicki Wisegarver and by the intended leasees, the applicants, Lowell Schaper and Glenn Nellist. This permit shall be automatically void if not signed by both owner and applicants prior to August 7, 1984. City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 1646 6. This non -conforming conditional use permit shall run with the land and shall be binding upon the property owners, applicants and their heirs and assigns, except as follows: a) This permit shall be a:1tomatically void for any violation of or non-compliance with the terms and conditions of Resolution #1377 and as amended in the terms and conditions stated herein. b) This permit shall be automatically tz­nsferrable to a new or different leasee/operator provided the proper-ty ownership remains unchanged. c) This permit shall be reviewed and must be transferred by the City Council upon change in ownership to any party other than the Keller Trust, Vicki Wisegarver, or Glenn Nellist and Lowell Schaper. d) This permit for non -conforming use shall be automatically void upon discontinuance of commercial use for a period of twelve months (Sec. 10.03 Subdiv 5 e), upon destruction by f ire, f lood or other calamity ( Sec 10. 03 Subdiv 5 d) , or upon change to a conforming residential use (Sec 10.03 Subdiv 5 c). 7. This permit shall not serve to grant any property right other than as specifically provided and conditioned herein. 8. Any violation of or non-compliance with the terms of this permit or Resolution #1377 is and shall constitute a violation of the Orono Zoning Code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 9. The undersigned have read, understood and hereby agree to the terms of this resolution and hereby agree to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Adopted by the Orono City Council at a regular meeting held June 11, 1.984. ATTEST: Alberta M. Strom, City Clerk Mary C. Rutler, Mayor `\ _ 7 F t City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 1646 UJ.IGi LY Uwner (3) Property Owner (4) Property Owner STATE OF MINNESOTA )SS. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this (ZLTtday of _ , 1984, before me a Notary Public within and for said County, personally appeared r C+•�-�..` ? known to me to be the persons descried in and who xecuted the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged thy: he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PU C _ _ CIPJDY J. HE.Ur.a luaK-MINWSOIA �' m1NC°"`'`�' i2•iaa� MY COMMISSION EXPIRES 8 I 5308423 City of ORONO RESOLUTION Of THE CITY COUNCIL • NO. 1735 I A RESOLUTION APPROVING A CONDITIONAL, USE PERMIT ?OR LOWELL SCHAPFM AND GLENN NELLIST APPROVING AN AMENDMENT OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION 1646 ALLOWING NEW RETAIL USES WITHIN EXISTING RETAIL AREA OF MARKET PILE 893 i WHEREAS, Lowell Schaper and Glenn Nellist (hereinafter the applicants) have an interest in a property owned by Vicki Wisegarver (hereinafter owner) located at 3600 Wayzata Boulevard within the City of Orono (hereinafter 'City') and legally described :.s follows: Those parts of Lots 11, 12, and 13, 'MINNETONKA GARDEN ACRES", according to the recorded plat thereof, lying southerly of the centerline of Hennepin County State Aid Ilighwa- No. 6 Plat 5, as deliniatcd in Book 70, Page 3844152 of Hennepin County records. Also the north 1/2 of adjoining old County Road No. 6 now vacated (herein- after the property)I and VVEREAS, the applicants have applied to the Cit7 for a Conditional Use Permit per Section 10.03, Subdivision 5 (H) and to amend Resolation 1646 Item. 1 (B) of the Conclussions, Order and Conditions section of that resolution to permit a mini bake, limited delicatessen service anti one picnic table to he placed within 201x25' designated outdoor ■alen area at the east side of market. NOW, TURREPORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City of Orono, Minnesota: FINDINGS 1. The application was reviewed its zoning Pile No. 893. 2. The property is located in th,t RR-10, Rural Residential Goninq District. !. ncc applicants have applied for a Conditional Use Permit to permit a mini hake, providir,q for on -site baking of prepared doughs, within the existinq retail area of the market, a limited delicatessen service providing delivery or pick-up service of tray foods prepared in kitchen and sold within retail are of market and one picnic table placed within designated outdoor sales area at east side of market to serve retail eustooers. F City of ORONO Cory RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF NO. i 5 • • • • 4. On June I1, 1QP4, council approved Resol':tion 1646 � grAntines a conditional Use permit to the applicants, sec- tions of that resolution rt't forth limitations on the retail urrs of the market, A large non-corforminq use, the alpli- ' cants seek Amendment of the following section of that resolttion: Item 1 (A) of the Conclusions, .-.dor and Conditions: b) PetAil 'Ale of normal grocery items including food stuffs, hAkery goods, rlairy products, package meats, fish or poultry, candy, tobacco, sundries, cooking or cleaninq supplies, raper products, pet food or bird seed, etc. Food shall not he cooked on the premises or otherwise prepared or served for immediate consumption either on the pre -,ices or in the form of take-out restaurant or 9eliratessen service. S. The applicants also perk confirmation per Section 10.03, SubdiVision 5 (irl - incidential Alterations which do not extend or intensify the non -conforming :•se- that the uses proposed above will not intensify or extend the current market operation. f'. en February in. IQPS, the Orono rlannina Commission voted unanimously to reeonmend approva) of a Conditional Use Permit for the Arr 1 i cint F based on one or more of the fol!owinq findir.ns: A. ".he new ""'i will act involvr Permanent structural changes or additions to existing strurtu-e• .'I. The new uses will net retail Area. involve er.pansion of trip C. The nrw uses wi I 1 not rnc•ourage customers to rcn^u-e fool rn t'te 1•remifle� a• w th n restaurant use, n. The new unrn arrenr rcn:•Ivtent with the or:,;inal I nt r n t and rrere of the market .'n net forth in I'es.11utIon 164h. The aprlieAnthave net vioi,1t0rIItion of Rn., l tit i on i e. 4" • F'• At the .- nr►rnt I rve 1 11f nper,, Inn, t here 1 s �deq,i.�t a r'ark i ng arcs. The new unrq wi 1 l not rreAte Add l t i onn 1 r'n r k i nn ,1nmAndn , � 4 City of ORONO CI TY RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF NO. I R • -- C. The new uses will result in the elimination or cuttinq down in On(- Phdse of retail and replacement with a new retail use. • 11. The City ;.Is never re^lived a complaint from resi- dents on the operdtion of the market by the applicants. 7. The City Council has considercu this application including the .findings and recoirmen,lat ions of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the aplicant and the effect of the additional retail uses in the overall operation of the market as proposed on the health, safety and welfare of the community. 8. The City Council finds that granting a Conditional Use Permit to permit the addition of the new retail uses as proposed will not be detriment..) to the health, safety or general welfare of the public, would ;ot adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danqer to neighborir;g property, nor will it depreciate surrounding ,,roperty values and the location and proposed use of ile residential property w:ll be in keeping with the intent and objectives of the zor.irq code and comprahensive plan of the City. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Dared upun the above findings, the Orono City Counci: he grants a conditional Use Permit per Section 10.03 Subdivision 5 111) :.nd Orono Itesolutions 1177 and 1646 to Lovell Schaper and Cler.n Nel list to permit the addition of new retail uses as specified above at the Summerficl-i Farms earket located at 3800 Wayzata Boulevard subject to the IcIlowinq conditional I. All equipment inr.tal led to support the mini bake Operation is subject to the btandards of t'lle Uniform Building Code and Fire Code. 2. Prior to inbtalltaq the delicatessen use, the applicants must obtain a license from the Hennepin County Community 1lealth Department for the food preparation operation. ). Al l foods cansume,l it informal outdoor picnic area must be purchased nt retail from within market. 4. Foods shall not bt• H.rrved for immediate consumption ither in th.r premia.•n or in the form of take-out restaurant. Pago 7 of 5 City of ORONO CITY RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF NO. 1735 •-• • 5- 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. 6. The undersigned owner and parties with an interest in the property 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 ;ity Council on this llth day of March, 1945.14 Zy AM74?Pn, C ty Clerk �+► troperty O✓A�r Mary C. Butler, Mayor PAq" 4 of 5 N City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. ?1��; A RESOLUTION GRANTING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PER MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.03, SUBDIVISION 5 (H) AND RESOLUTION NO. 1646 FILE #1132 WHEREAS, Douglas G. Bumgardner (hereinafter "the applicant") is the owner and future operator of the property locateu at 3800 Wayzata Boulevard within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as follows: Those Farts of Lots 11, 12, and 13, "MINNETONKA GARDEN ACRES", according to the recorded plat thereof, lying southerly of the centerline of Hennepin County State Aid Highway No. 6 Plat 5, as deliniated in Book 70, Oage 3844152 of Hennepin County records. Also the north � of adjoining old County Road No. 6 now vacated (hereinafter "property"); and WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City of Orono for a Conditional Use Permit co permit the "incidental alteration" of the existing structure that contains a legal. non -conforming use by permitting interior alterations that involve the relocation of an office within the defined commercial floor area and an equal replacement of commercial floor area, a delicatessen use within the counter area defined as Area 1 per attached floor plan diagram and to relocate an office area of approximately 49 s.f. within a non-commercial floor area per Municipal Zoning Code Sectio,► 10.03, Subdivision 5 (H) and per Orono Resolution No. 1646 seeks approval of the transfer of the ownership of the property to the applicant. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #1132. 2. The property is located in the RR-lB Rural Res4dential Zoning District. 3. On April 20, 1987, the Orono Flanning Commission reviewed the application as proposed and recommended approval, based on the following findings: A) The proposed alterations will provide improved circulation and better access within sales area. B) The proposed interior alterations will not result in an increase of commercial floor area but merely involves the redesignation of use areas. Page 1 ref 6 City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. -1 1 is 8 C) The proposed alterations and expansion of food service is not considered an intensification of the existing non -conforming use. D) The City has received no negative comments from the surrounding property owners notified during the review of this application. E) The City never received complaints concerning the operation by the previous leasee under the rest.ictive standards set forth in previous resolutions that govern the use of the property and will continue to govern the property. 4. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by staff and comments of the applicant and the effect of the proposed use on the health, safety and welfare of the community. 5. The City Council finds that granting a Conditional Use Permit to permit the proposed alterations within the principal structure and to approve the transfer of ownership to the applicant will not be detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare of the public, would not adversely affect light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring properties, nor will it depreciate surrounding property value; and that the proposed .level of use of the property will be in keeping with the intent and objectives of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a Conditional Use Permit per Municipal 'Zoning Code Section 10.03, Subdivision 5 (H) and per the directives of Orono Resolution No. 1377 that established the original guidelines for the commercial use of this residentially zoned property to permit the proposed alterations of the existing structure as de::cribed above and per Orono Resolution No. 1646 to approve the transfer of ownership of the property to the applicant, Donald G. Bumgardner, subject to the following conditions: 1. Per Resolution No. 1377, the commercial use authorized by this conditional use permit shall consist of, and he limited to, the following: a) Retail but not wholesale of farm produce, nuts, fruits, vegetables, bedding plants, christmas trees, flowers and similar items gr(,wn on or of: this property. Page ' of 6 City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 188 b) Retail sale of normal grocei:y ::.ems including food stuffs, bakery goods, dairy products, package meats, fish or poultry, candy, tobac;:o, sundries, cooking or clewing supplies, paper products, pet food or bird seed, etc. Food shall not be served for immedipte consumption either on the premises or in the form of take-out restaurant. c) Retail off -sales of 3.2 beer subject to selarate consideration of licensing provisions and requirements. d) Retail accessory sale of miscellaneous items including small crafts, pottery, food or cook books, garden supplies or small quantities of firewood provided Duch sales are accessory to the grocery or produce business. e) Commercial sales and storage small be confined within the main building and 500 s.f. yard area designated as outdoor sales area. f) Outdoor sales of produce, plants, garden supplies or seasonal items such as pumpkins, Christmas trees, etc. shall be permitted provided such activities are confined to an area of approximately 500 s.f. located east of the main building as indicated on Exhibit A. Outdoor display or sales may not occur in the parking lot nor in the area referred to as "porch" area of the main 1,ui lding nor in the front yard setback area nor in any highway right-of-way. g) Exterior storage of commercial stock, fixtures or supplies shall not be permitted except within the designated outdoor sales area. h) The existing detached garage may continue to be used for inside comiaercial storage. i) Commercial signage for the entire property shall be limited to approximately 200 s.f. including any temporary or portable signs. This would not involve traffic directional signs. j) Produce may be grown on -site for sale on the premises. k) The maximum number of regular employees on the premises at e any one time shall not exceed 4. i 1) The commercial/retail business may he open to the public 7 days a week; the hours of operation shall be between the hours of 6:00 a.m. and 9:00 p.m. Page 3 of 6 City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 1 }� m) 15 parking stalls shall be available at all times to support the approved level of commercial use. Designated parking stalls must be maintained so as not to interfere with required building exit doors, service doors or required space for delivery trucks and/or trash containers. 2. The owner is hereby notified tnat the City Council will not consider any futurt* building construction, additions or expansion for commercial uses because to do so would extend or intensify the non- conforming use contrary to the intent of the 'Zoning Code and contrary to the intent of the Comprehensive Community Management Plan. This provision does not preclude normal building maintenance, repair or incidental alterations necessary to continue the non -conforming use within the existing structures as permitted by the terms `xf this resolution and Orono Resolution No. 1377. 3. The owner agrees that he has no v( ted property rights to continue commercial. use of the premises except in strict accordance with the terms and conditions of this resolution and Orono Resolution No. 1377, and that the City may impose additional conditions as may be needed in the future in order to protect the public health, safety and welfare. Applicant further agrees to waive any rights to object to such other conditions if after a complete and full hearing the City Council determines that such condition is necessary �o protect the public health, safety and welfare. 1. This conditional use permit for a non -conforming use shall run with the land and shall be binding upon the property owners, applicants and their heirs and assigns, except as follows: a) This permit shall be automatically void for any violation of or non-compliance with the terms and conditions of Resolution No. 1377 and as amended in the terms and conditions stated herein. b) This permit shall be automatically transferrable to a new or different leasee/operator provided the property ownership remains unchanged. c) This permit shall be reviewed and must be transferred by the City Council upon change in ownership. d) This permit for non -conforming use shall be automatically void upon discontinuance of commercial use for a period of twelve months [Section 10.03, Subdivision 5 (E) i, upon destruction by fire, flood or other calamity 1- --tion 10.03, Subdivision 5 (D)), or upon change to a confo:A%.:.y ;cduidential use [Section 10.03, Subdivision 5 (CH. Page 4 of 6 City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. "188 5. This permit shall not serve to grant any property right other than as specifically provided and conditioned herein. 6. Any violation of or non-compliance with the terms of this permit or Resolution No. 1377 is and shall constitute a violation of the Orono Zoning Code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 7. Authorities granted by this resolution run with the property not with the owner, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit within one year of the date of Council approval, or the special conditions of this resolution will expire on that date (May 26, 1988). 8. 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 Orono City Council on this 26th day of May, 1987. fames R . -Gra , Mayor Page 5 of 6 City of ORONO STATE OF MINNESOTA ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. =-1- --- - — On this ,� day of rY�C�,f 198� before me a Not4ry Public _ within and for spid county, personally appeared T,` 1'. h'. <<y��,,� f/� known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing ins'_rument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) 1 free act. and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC �LNAM C M w fir.. � MY COMMISSION EXPIRES STATE OF MINNESOTA )ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN 1 on this -� day of J << t1987, before me a N, t ry Public within and for said County, personally appeared known to me to be the persons escribin and who executed the foregoi,iginstrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their`) free act and deed. A- 01 NOTARY PUBLIC w L MAA• — C/ Mi801.1 ! -_.L. yftlftftiiMq couNT� MY COMMISSION EXPIRES ��" mar.. Flage 6 of 6 tk Su 7n 2>r 11+5,1) F8 r)llS F= r.es k )TI a r is e 7 3(-J:-5zata t3tvd. I 1 D Se o�1G Des i Pa r k i nc, Area Area 1,J , d&WA4sasf 61J9. Appt.�x. ID v.1° .r !Ti,Ay .Of E 2- R3-5W'i Ll CITY OF C�kUN0 hlvrtrc q RE Clrs.tA ' I 9,:rm is A& :%'A I PJ,¢c N i,'rra,,L A �� I ,4 � 8--al CJ irJ Trt r D Fanms Fees h ii1 a I-k e r o Ut, z at a 131vJ. CI Y OF oRONo I- r o• . - SC 4,.1 - Ues} ! pa r ktric� - Area � �Sn►tirc,� Bar►+ � . ' wv�x A"A Coo�6A. R ' D'�I t c �7�d.,,,• a K / tie u fir+ i Rom• Qorw is - pep (RCnrAc. Ag) sw t I` + U 2n rn� r CI.D F,', r.�n 5 �." 5 F ez h' %i a r k e T ? CI Y OF ORONO ej (Jay -afz) 131vd. !: �rn � Barb F y %JP4x AAX q �ooL6a ; cr Ues ParkiR O N O . y MANA tea ��v�cvr lI ctr It tr DATZ —'-- He U, OVT, PERMIT ITTED TH ORRECTIONS AS NOTEQ Mi"n TIOM NOT APPROVED CORRECT & RESUBMIT. ,.fun ==are for information. AN wwk "WIN be dag auwwnwft with aq �� m*iuding itetas: t spudicanaw coft 1r. THIS PLAN S4 T ON SITE AT ALL TiM Sir EL re r , r CITY of ORONO Post Office Box 66•Crystal Bay, Minnesota M)323•Municipal Offices On the North Shore of Lake Minnetonka February 5, 1988 Douglas C. Bumgardner 9201 Cain Road Corcoran, MN 55340 Re: Property at 3800 Wayzata Boulevard, Orono Dean Mr. Bumgardner: This letter is written to you as the last confirmed owner of the above referenced property. Staff has received recent information via an informal phone *;onversation with a representative of the David C. Bell Investment Company, that the investment company had purchased the property for the purriose of leasing. If this is the case, a copy of this letter has also been sent to the David C. Bell Company. It is important that the _wner of the property be made aware of the limitatic; - of the commercial use of the property currently zoned RR-lB, Rural Residential (unsewered). The grocery/speciality food store use is recognized as a legal non- conforming use, a use that has existed on the site under multiple leasers and/or owners for over 30+ years. If the legal non -conforming use is discontinued for one year, the use of the property must revert back to a conforming residential use. The Summerfield Market was closed to the public on approximately June 15, 1987 (June 7th or June 8th). If it is the intent of the new owner to continue the grocery store use, a conditional use permit must be filed with the City of Orono by April 22nd, 1986. Staff has enclosed specific sections of the RR-1B zoning district that deal with permitted uses (approved accessory uses or conditional uses). In addition, we have enclosed copies of previous resolutions approved by the Orono Council for the grocery/speciality food shop use that will prcvide background on the unique physical limitation of the property and the limitations on that use. If the present owner wishes tc install a less i.tense, new commercial use of the residential proper'._y, the applicant would have to file a land use application by that same April 22nd, 11)88 deadline date. Depending on the nature of the commercial use ..e applicant/owner may he advised that a re -zoning would be require'.. and petition for sewer extension.. BUILDING A ZONING - 473.7337 • ADMINISTRATION A FINANCE - 473.7358 • Pt HIM WORKS - 73-7359 ASSESSING Douglas C. Bumgardner Re: 3800 Wayzata Boulevard February 5, 1988 Page 2 of 2 Please contact my office if you have any questions on the matters discussed above. Sincerely, Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator JAM/tin Enclosure cc: David C. Bell Investment Company, 3915 Hwy 7, Mpls, MN 55416 Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator CO HEN_N. _ _ CO. STATE AID -, - -- w EMS►. I�JDS i1 NEMJ *Ac"'s Lo"Tomw rt.o.w. gvrcK AXE r _ G-sr•7q .. K I cPd* `C 14 R_ int ir�Ewr `. -. y �/°bRI- a s' t\ r✓/cee sera �s HWY. NO. 6 wm Riot mwa oorIE 14"Aww�►m , ZZ1=G 1 _SITE Raw) W5EaAAV" NOW&Ts moo %wAVZ- rA 8.-w. Om-M .L,1bJLTC a To: From: Date: Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Admir.istrator June 2, 1988 Subject: #1277 Big Island Board of Govenors Record Lot 1, Conditional Use Permit 2 Phase Review - Second Review Zoning District - RS District, Seasonal Recreational Zoning District Pertinent Sections of the Code Section 10.31, Subdivision 1 Purpose of District, Subdivision 3 (C) 1-9 Day Use Recreation Area, Subdivision 4 Accessory Uses A Docks, Subdivision E Conforming Record Lots - Record Lot 1, Subdivision 8 Yard and Setback Requirements, Subdivision 9 Lakeshore Hardcover Requlations, Subdivision 11 F-3 Additional Fire Protection System Requirements, SubdivisionllG) Additional Building Security Requirements Other Standards Considered During This Review 1. *1979 NFPA standards for homes and camps in forest areas. 2. *Hennepin Parks - Department of Planning & Engineering - Picnicking standards for public park areas within Hennepin County. These standards have not been enclosed in your packets. if any member wishes a copy, please advise prior to the meeting. Other Sections of the Municipal Code Applicable for this Review Section 5.25 Large Assemblies - Special Events - Ordinance 22., Second Series List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Pages 3 & 4 of Staff Memo, dates 5/13/88 Exhibit B - Board of Governors' Roster for 188 Season Exhibit C •- Signage Plan Exhibit D - Trash Can Bin Exhibit E - Applicants' Addendum Information Exhibit F - Well Test Results Exhibit G - Gaffron Memo 4/27/88 Exhibit H - Map of Site Utilities Exhibit I - Section from Hennepin Parks Standards Exhibit J - Fire Alarm Station Fxhibit K - Fire Ring Exhibit L - Charcoal Grill Exhibit M - Site Plan for Day Use Recreation Review of Application - Second Phase Planning Commission recommended approval of the firs phase of this ccnioiticna1 Use Permit review allowing workers to camp 0%Lrnight in order tc eomllf-ty the final cleanup and repair of the island. The current review i r, .,o 1 %,es the. second phase of that Conditional Use Permit that would allow Zoning File #1277 Page 2 of 5 the Big Island Board of Gnvernors to open the facility to the public for day use recreation only. It is understood by the applicant that overnight camping would require a seperate review. It is staff's understanding that the applicant plans to submit an application some time in July. Staff will begin the review of the day use recreation in consideration of the standards set forth in the RS district (Subdivision 3 (C) 1-9) as follows: Item 1. Minimum dry, buildable Minimum area required - 5 Existing - 57 acres 100 user require 5 acres Each 20 additional users area required for number of users. acres to requires an additional acre The applicants propose a maximum number of 240 picnic/users of the day use recreation area. In applicants addendum, Exhibit E, staff noted that applicant would apply to the City if the user level exceeded 1,140 (20 users x 57 acres). Based on the current user level for this Conditional Use Permit, the applicant must obtain a Special Events Permit from the City of Orono if any event results in a user level over 240, review 5.25 of your Municipal Code, Ordinance 22 Second Series. Item 2. The minimum lot width of the shoreline shall be 200', the applicants recent survey information confirms that they have almost 6,500' of shoreline. Item 3. The Veterans group have applied for a joint use dock licenso. showing an expansion of 20 boats from the originally approved joint license of 8 for a total of 28 units. Review Exhibit N. In the absence of a formal marina committee, the amended joint use dock license will be reviewed and acted on under the current Conditional Use Permit. For the RS standard, the proposed increase of 20 boat units is easily satisfied with the 6,500 linel feet of ohoreline (1 slip per 50' of shoreline required by the LMCD ordinances). Planning Commission members may wish to review Code Section 5.42 for joint use dock license application standards. Staff did ask in the original review foi a site plan showing the lucaticn of the new dock. In reviewing Exhibit M, the proposed site plan for the day use recreation area, 3 docks are now noted along the shoreline. For the joint use dock review, staff would have to have a more detailed plan showing the length of those docks and the slip location at each of those docks. The docks clearly meet the required 10' setback from adjacent lot lines for the first 0-50' of dock length, in addition to satisfying the 15' setback fur a dock length between 50 and 101'. Item 4. The swimming areas have been clearly marked off on the site plan and its location appears to be well away from the boating traffic. Applicant should be advised to consider some form of formal sups.rvision during the I:ublic beach hours. Applicant would be well advise•3 to check their liability insurance to see what would be required. Zoning File #1277 Page 3 of 5 Item 5. On site sewage treatment. As staff noted in the earlier review, Mike Gaffron has confirmed that the South Hill. and the Peanut Row lavatory structures are adaquate to serve the day use recreation area, review Exhibit E, specifically page 3, the summary section. Although the Hennepin County Health Department has no jurisdiction at this point, the applicant does plan to send the interior elevations of the toilets for their review. Item 6. The applicants propose no new structures with the day use recreation area. Item 7. The applicant reports that they have a telephone line, as required for emergency telephone purposes. Item 8. Property is most certainly located directly on the shoreline with adaquate 6,500 linal feet of that shoreline. Item 9. Based on our plat maps, the property is still shown with three sepl(rate tax parcels and should be combined as one. Our plat maps are old and applicant may have already completed the legal combination at this point. If not, the City would ask that they legally combine all three tax parcels. This completes the review of the standards set forth under the day use recreation use. Staff would now like to address the items noted on page 3 of the staff memo, dated May 13, 1988. Item 1 of that memo deals with the upgrading of the site plan. All existing structures are shown on the site plan. Applicant advises that picnic shelters tie not planned for the immediate opening of the day recreation area, but picnic tables will be provided. The area of picnicking has been designated, there is no actual number of picnic tables. The fire stations and fire ring areas have bren located on the site plan. Review Exhibits J, R, and L. Staff would ask that a non-combustible surface be provided at least 4' around all of the su' •t st uctures. Staff has the following comments on the fire alarm a Lon: the fire triangle must be hung with chain, not wire and a sign shc.uil be provided near the triangle that says "fire alarm use only". The nea dock areas have been shown, including the informal mooring area of the beats, along the southwest shoreline. Future helipad sites have been shown. The 10, 14, aluminum fishing boats will be stored to the west of the dock area, adjacent to the shoreline. The applicant has advised that they have no current plans to subdivide the property. If Planning Commission has any specific comments to make regarding the site plan for this facility, please note them at the meeting. Item 2 of the staff memo. Applicant has proceeded with applying for an LMCD permit for the expansion of the joint dock and has also applied for a joint use dock license with the City for a total of 28 boat units. As part of the joint use dock license reviews, staff must ask for a more detailed plan of the three docks, giving the dimensions and ti,c length of the dock and designating the slid, area. Applicant must provide a more detailed plan of docks prior to Council's approval of the joint use dock license. Zoning File #1277 Page 4 of 5 Applicants' joint use dock application refers to permanent pilings, suggesting a permanent dock structure. Applicant is advised that if dock is not a seasonal dock, then a Conditional Use Permit would be required for a permanent dock with pilings. This would also require DNR and LMCD approval. Item 3, Signage. All free-standing signs should be located at least 75' from the shoreline. Camp rules signs may be allowed attached to the dock structures. Review Exhibit C for sionage plan. Item 4. It appears that Mark Peterson, the full time caretaker with have a part time assistant and the Board will be looking for volunteers to assist during the peak weekend times. Refer to page I of Applicant Addendum, Exhibit E. Items 5. Trash will be retained in a fenced garbage area, shown on the cite plan and covered garbage cans will be carried to the mainland whenever the ferry goes to the mainland. A once a week trip will be made as a special trip to dispose of any remaining garbage. Review Exhibit D, a sample of a trash can bin that is considered for use by the Veterans Camp. Items 6. Control of the number of visitors to the facility. The applicant remir,ds us that this 1s indeed a camp for the exclusive use of Veterans and ttey will attempt t, pzo­ide appropriate no trespassing or private property si,ins around the island perimeters. All users of the camp will be required to register. During peak hours of use, volunteers will be responsible for havi:,y -11 guests sign in. All unregistered visitors will he required to leave. The water Patrol will be the agency used to control a trespass problem if needed. Remember the maximum number of uses is limited to 240. Items 7, fencing. The applicant has agreed to provide a minimum of 100 lineal feet of 3 and a tip if feet high cyclone fencing along ti:e top of the enbankment of the south hill shoreline. Items 8. As Gaffron's memo has confirmed, the two existing septic systems will be adaquate t-, serve 240 user level. The two lavatory structures or toilet facilities will t rovide 8 toilets. Item 9. The septic system serving the caretaker unit will be replaced as of July 15, 1988. The aptl±.cants advise that if a system has not been instal led, that al l use would cease and that the caretaker would now use the septic/lavatory facility at Peanut Row. Staff recommends approval of the day use recreation Conditional Use Permit for the Big Island Board of Govenors for their Big Island Veterans Camp facility based on the following findirjs: 1. The 57 +- acres site is large enough to si,pport the proposed day use recreation without any adverse effect upon the lake or upon the adjacent wetlands that. are located within the subject property. Zoning File #11277 Page 5 of 5 2. The proposed use will have no negative impact upon the neighboring adjacent property owners. 3. Based on the level of use, the fire protection system developed by staff and applicant will provide the extra precautions necessa.y to maintain the public safety and welfare. 4. The use of the facility at 240 user level will well satisfy the ratio recommended by this ordinance for day use recreation at a 20 user, per 1 acre ratio. Approval would be subject to the following conditions: 1. Prior to the car r, opening to the public, the Orono staff must inspect the facility to insure the following required improvements have been completed: a. All debris, trees and tree trimmings to be disposed of as approved by the Orono staff, either by removal, buried, burned, or stored in an approved area for removal when icc is in. b. All buildings secured as directed by of the building inspector. The caretaker cabin shall be completed for legal occupancy. Inspector to confirm upon that final inspection. C. Fire stations installed. d. Toilet facilities to be readied for public use. e. Fencing installed along top of enLankment at South Hill (Point Charming). f. Ground cover maintenance completed. g. Trespass/Private Property signage installed. This should also include the signage for the rules of operation of the facility that is to be installed at the dock area. h. Security lighting should be reviewed with staff prior to opening. i. The area for helipad lse should be staked out and kept clear. Applicant should also provide information to the City concerning which emerr-,ncy agency facility sill be contacted in cases of emergency at >r.e facility. j. Submit a copy o, the current liability policy/coverage for the Big Island Veterans Camp. other conditions of this approval: 1. won-combustable (possibly crushed rock) ground cover 4' in width around the fire rings and the charcoal grill areas. 2. Fire stc.`ihn ground area must be kel.t clear of weed coverage, chain instea•: (-,f wire to be used for holding the triangle tend appropriate signage defining the triangle is for fire alar.- use only. 3 3. Complete the appropriate signage for the facility. Per signaac plan subm.Ltted for the Conditional Use Permit review. 4. Approval of a joint use dock license by the LMCD for the dock to be installed at the campsite. Prior to scheduling this application tefore the Council, the City staff must_ review a more detailed dock plan for 28 boat unit Applicant should advise i-f new dock is to o be a permanent clock. Additional Co ents and Planning Commission Recommendation The only co::,,s,ents the Planning Commission had in addition to the staff report noted above was the issue of the signage proposed for the site. Planning Commission felt the 8' by 8' sign advertising the camp was far too larg for the recreational use district and recommended that the minimum sign area for a commercial use be allowed not to exceed 50 s.f. in area. The applicant had no problems in reducing the signage for the proposed use. The Planning Commission moved to adopt the staff recommendation noted above and in addition sited the limits on the size of signage and that the "camp rules" sign at 3' by 5' could be placed by the dock. All other signage would have to meet the 75' setback from the lakeshore, The enclosed staff resolution has been drafted per the Planning Commission findings and conditions of approval. Cite of ORO NO ) RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. A RESOLUTION GRANTING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PER MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.31, SUBDIVISION 3 (C) FILE i1277 WHEREAS, Edward S. Morrow, Chairman of the Board of Governors, Big Island Veterans Camp (hereinafter "the applicant") has an interest in the property located on Big Island per Orono classification Record Lot 1 located at 215 Hollander Poad within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as follows: Government Lot One (1), Section Fourteen (14), Township One E'undre'! Seventeen (117), Range Twenty -Three (23); and Government Lot Two (2). Section Twenty -Three (23), and that part of Government Lot Three (3), Section Twenty-three (23), commenci..g at the Northeast corner of said Government Lot Three (3), Section Twenty -Three (23); thence Southwesterly along the lake shore '_o ;he Northeast corner of I.ot A, Morse Island Park; Thence South 350 feet to Lake Minnetonka; Thence East along the shore of Lake Minnetonka to the East line of said Lot Three (3); thence North to the place of begins i ng (hereinafter "the t roperty") ; and WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City of Orono for a Cnnditi.onel Use Permit to allow a Day OF recreation area for L e property at a maximum 240 user level per day per Municipal zoning Code Section 10.31, S,,bdi vision 3 (C). Minnesota: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, FINDINGS 1. This Application was reviewed as Zor° , File #1277. 2. The property is located in the RS, Seasonal Recreational Zoning District, requiring a minimum of 5 acres in area. The property consists of approximately 57 acres in area. 3. on June 6, 1986. the Oron. Plann:ng Commission reviewed the app 1 ic4tion as prol-osed and re, mmended approval, based on the following findin,s: A) The 57+ tic ,site is large enough to support ti s day use recreation area wLLnout any adverse effect upon the laka or upon the adjacent wetlands that are incated within the subject property. Page I of 6 City of OKONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. B) The proposed use will have no negative impact upon the neighboring adjacent property owners. C) Based on the level of use, the fire protection system developed by staff and applicant will irovide the extra precautions necessary to maintain the public safety a. -id welfare. D) The use of the facilit-y at a 240 user level will well satiafy the ratio recommended by th-1- irdinance for day use recreation at a 20 user per 1 acre rati 4. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by staff and comments of the applicant and the effect, of the proposed use or! the health, safety ant' -elfar,.� of the community. 5. The City Council finds that granting a Conditional IIs•> Permit to allow the reopening of the property to a day use recree; ten a is will not be detrimental to the health, safety or general welfart: of the public, would not adversely affect light, air - pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring properties, nc,r !ill it depreciate surrounding property values and that the pro•osed level of use of tlia property will be in keeping with the int and objectives of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the C. CONCLUtitiJNS, ORDER AND CONDITM>NS Breed upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Count . hereby grant a Conditional Use Permit her Municipal !._ning Code Sectir,k. 10.31, Subai ision 3 (C) to hermit a Day Use Recreat L.::. area for the Board of Governors, big Islan Vetfrans Camp, Recor(i i_.-lt 1, subiec` to the following conditions: 1. Prior to opening the day use recreation area to the publir. th Orono staff mue' _aspect the facility tc insure the following r! ired imLr vements have bee- completed: ) All detsir-, trees, and tree trimmings t f disposed of as approved by the Orono :.taff, either by rei%oval, nury, burned; or stored in an approved area for removal whe► e i s in. H) All 11 remaining buildi.n, must he se: .ed as directed by the Orono bui ldi-_� inspections .!eparf.mersi_ Th- caretaker calbin must be completed Zor legal occranc.y. r' All designated fire st> : - is mu:at be complete •, installed. Toilet facilities (Pean4,t %.)w and South Nil I facilities; in a,, nppr(,ved conW t ion for pu►. A c use. >E) Fencing installed along tol• of enb&nkment at South Hill (Point Charming'. F) Ground r-over ma l . r enance coo-ar let ed. rage 2 City of ORO.N. 0 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. G) Trespass/private property signage installed, this should also i.,clude the signage for the rules of operation of the facili hat is to be installed at the dock area. H) S, 1'y lighting to be inspected by staff prior to opening. I) I -ea for helipad use should be staked out and kept clear. licant should Erovide a written statement regarding emergenc; t ••cedures to be followed in cases of emergency. a for J) Subm:_ a copy of the current liability p g the Big Island Veterans Camp operation. 2. The approva 1 of the day use recreation area has been based on a site plan submitted by the atp 1 icant. This final site plan has been included as page 6 of this resolution. 3. Non-combustible (i.e. crushed rock) ground cover is required 4' in width arGund the fire rings and the charcoal grill a.-eas. 4. Fire station qround area must be kept clear of weed coveraye, chains instead of wires to be used for holding the triangle and appropriate signage defining the triangle for alarm use only. S. Signage plans (Exhibit C, Council packets 6/27/88 meeting) have been approved except for camp sign by dock that is 8' by 8' must be reduced to no greater signage area than SO s.f. 6. Approval of the joint use dock licence b5 the LMCD for a dock to be installed at the day use recreation area providing an increase in boat units. 7. Applicant must apl.ly for the legal combination of th, three separate parcels that make up the 57 acre facility 8. Authorities granted by this resolution run with the property not with the owner, but are Permissive only and must be exercised within one year of the date of Council approval or the special conditions of this Resolution will extire on that date (June 27, 1989). 9. Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and condi- tions of this resolution shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 10. The undersigned applicant has read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of the Board of Governors, Big Island Veterans Camp their heirs, successors and rage 3 of 6 City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. assigns, hereby agrees to the recording of th-.s resolution in the chain of title of the property. Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 27th day of June, 1988. ATTEST s Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk James R. Grabe , Mayor Property Owner(s) Page 4 of 6 v a •, � :^ ^:Y • L'N '� f R' ISL .... �{ SC. AL lee001 :•:�, �, STORAGE .i.•L.... {' \ SECURED FI E TATIO • CAR }f �ves� 000 T Ft�MaII CAI/ d 5aC.LIR PLAY AREA GR s IRE STATIC 1 `a\CMtilrto� ToRA6 \ \ \ GAIT AGED \\\ nsN ``♦ a BOAT •tACNIIy n�r�r�, • IRE S Ok rt :Y :i';. •''{{ : {. rr,: • :.r }fir •{{ v,., }X. }i }':•{ti:::::}. 1 ,/ y{; ::? ::::::"{ f:$y:}: ::$::%{{•};:i' .L . r.. r{ ;j•J:•iN •L:a•. Yf.a L . ':•}: {ti•i : i :':•i i i'•i i is{•:•::•. ':{•::: i :•: .{ :: .....:•:':':• •::::':::•:•: .a !:• 1 1 .y •:ti : •r. •} rr. � D 1 1 1 .fy": .#ti . ✓ L•:"' _'•�1• �'c- vrf'C•`7 • 1 � ;.}•5 ";L• . .:•}:{•r:::}L:•y:•<:•:':•; :•};. :;;; •r. :r:•:,''•:•:�•.,•••,Lr•tr},;L..r..a. :r:: .;tti. •::}:�' f; : .r.. / •:SLY:.•. � •. 1 :h. ..•L ••ri.•: r '•i:{•: Flat RINGS- . Ki FIR ST T oN 0:fiiii:•}: }'r:•:•:: ?i.. ............ / Alta (. ......Y: ••:••••{•:{• 1 TABL c l , i TAT • o :• .. ?: {r:,tiLj:}ti;}�4yL •. •�.CG LL .�; .:ti; ;:tiff r}{•w V�i^1 Y 'L;,. } 7.v. ` PICNIC.rC7: ;r. ti a - •. L :a{ a} 0 {, ��: 'h �}Lti� Lafir "-:y'{ L �yti7 s •,{ L L• L•fiiZ• .��•t;, fr S�� /��ake Zoning File #1277 Page 3 Once again, this phase of the application will be presented for Council action at their May 23, 1988 meeting. If Planning Commission has any other comments or concerns regarding the operation of the camp under this temporary permit please advise staff. Day Use Recreation - Conditional Use Permit - In the applicants addendum information, they asked for special consideration regarding a comprehensive permit approval that would provide direction to staff so that if specific conditions Ore met, staff would have the authority to allow either the day use recreation or overnight camping uses, rather than apply for seperate permits. As staff noted above, if the application that was sch`duled to be reviewed at present was to include overnight camping, that a survey would have been required so that setbacks and improvements could be locateclowith the setbacks confirmed per RS and NFPA standards. For the current review, the applicant has submitted preliminary comments and submittals but that your final review of the day use recrea ion phase of the application will be at your June 6 meeting. If Planning Commission members accept the applicants request to establish appropriate guidelines for further staff approval then staff must ask for the survey at this point. As staff noted above, the site plan on file that has been used for all previous reviews was accepted just for he day use recreation permit. In preparation for the June 6 meeting, staff requests the following additional information and submittals: I. To expand the site plan submitted for day use showing: A. All existing structures, even though not in use. B. Picnic shelter and information or elevations on the picnic shelters, the number and locate then on the site. C. Designate the two toilet/lavatories structures for use. D. Provioe more information on fire stations/fire ring. Applican- has advised that all cooking would be done with stoves/grills located within the picnic shelters, fire stations were to consist of 55 gallon drums with buckets located somewhere in the area. E. Locate new 20 slip dock and locate area for informal mooring of boats along shore for additional guests arriving via boats. F. Future location of helipad on island. G. Designate area to be subdivided at some future date. (Note approximate area of lands.) H. Locate small/fishing boats on land storage area. I. Other improvements for day recreation use that Planning Commission feels should be located and designated on the ite plan. 2. Applicant is advised to apply for an T,MCD permit for the expansion in dock use. In addition to the 8 for camp use and 20 transient slips for visitors. The City will also require a joint use dock license. 3. Signage Tf signage is proposed for the island the City must approve the signage and the 1 ocat ion of the signage on the island. This does not H�- Zoning File #t1277 Page 4 include the normal location and designation signage that the camp would have to 1--ovide for the users of the facility. 4. Provide information on employees. Mark Peterson is the caretaker for the season. Please advise how maiiy other employees will be working for the camp this season. In addition. provide information on a telephone and additonal telephone service for the day use recreation area. 5. Site gargabe - The site plan reveals an area or location for the garbage retention. Provide information as to the pick ur and the schedule of that pickup. 6. Control of the number of visitors to the facility - how will the caretaker/manager control the number of visitors daily. A maximum number should be established based on the limits of the septic facilities and RS district standards. 7. Fencing - Fencing may be required along the high sharp cliffs. This fencing need only be a 3 1/2' high cylone fence. Th�s should be reviewed with staff. For sometime staff has mentioned this concern amongst ourse 1 ve but we have never approached the app 1 icant with thi s concern. Fencing and an appropriate warning sign may be necessary. 8. Septic needs shall be per tables setforth in the State Health Department regulations 4630.0900, see Exhibit I. Dependent site shall be determined by the number of picnic tables proposed and an agreed upon number for possible boat picnicers and others who picnic on grass areas. The Peanut Row and the South Hill facility have been confirmed as acceptable by Michael Gaffron. 9. The system serving the caretaker unit must be replaced early this suclaer season. Staff would suggest by mid July. Planning Commission should add any other information that they fee'_ is necessary to complete the review. Staff should note that Michael Gaffron and Tom Jacobs have made a recent inspection of the facility and the applicant has submitted an updated site utilities map of the camp, review Exhibit J. Staff approved the well and the water supply and now offical state certification will be sought. Staff sees no problem with the camp receiving that certification. Fxisting buildings not to be open to the public shall remain boarded u1 as approved by the inspector. The applicant has asked if the Planning Commission or possibly members of Council would like to make an inspection prior to the June 6 meeting. If Planning Commission feels this would be approlriate and helpful in completing their review, [lease advise both applicant and staff. Applicant would be well advised to start the process of obtaining a survey of the facility if it is there F Ian to include tenting in the activities for this year. Wr•�.% Oil / Beautiful Lake Minnetonka P.O. Box 598, Excelsior, Minnesota 55331 THE BOARD OF GOVEhNORS BIG ISLAND VF,TERANS CAMP 19 SEPT 1987 OFFICERS (ELECTED 16 SEPTEMBER 1987) EDWARD S. MORROW CHAIRMAN JOSEPH M. BACKES VICE-CHAIRMAN KEITH E. AAKRE SECRETARY STUART H. GORNEY TREASURER BOARD OF DIREOTORS KEITH E. AAKRE (H) 474-6877 DAV 4270 CIRCLE ROAD (W) 931-7084 TONKA BAY, MN 55331 JOSEPH M. BACKES (H) 591-9035 AM. LEGION 1916.YORKSHIRE AVE SO (W) 339-8047 MINNETONKA, 1•.N 55345 NORB BOSIGER (H) 476-6245 PURPLE HEART 2945 FAIRCHILD AVE WAYZATA, YIN 55391 LEONARD A. CARLTON (H) 473-3147 PURPLE HEAhI 19260 AZURE ROAD DEEPHAVEN, MN 55391 STUART H. GORNEY (H) 588-8677 3240 INDIANA (w) 522-7138 ROBBINSDALE, MN 55422 EDri ARJ S . EORRO'W (H) 926-4053 VFw 4127 DREW AVE SO MINNEAPOLIS, t:N 55410 ROLF OLSON (H) 822-6937 DAV 5748 16th AVE SO (W) 726-9591 M111NEAPOLITS, 10 55417 ALAN WISDORF (H) 890-4379 AM. LL I01; 1809 N"). SEYLINE DR. (W) 890-4180 MN 55337 C AMP RuLEI. 3 5 6 - -- - I ciior �,y Ao,- k G N 5 BIG ISLAND \/LTE RAMS CAMP pn. Snx .599 Excels'n. NlN S,X4 51'1h by 6e4c� BIG ISL AND VETERANS CAMP i - -,X 'i! E_ xCCIS,0, MN Project Plans 0 v a Trash Can Bin Clever way to hide the ugliness of a trash can with this good-looking wood container and also keep it available for deposits and collector Hinged lid lifts up for trash deposits and the can Is easily removed from front Build bash: frame Of 2" x 4"s (Overall frame drmenf ions should be approximately 35+i4' tall x 26" wide x 27+a' deep ) Use t" x 6"s to form sides, back and deck Assemble lidand '- door with i" x 6"s nailed to a supporting frame cleat — recessed to clear — and attach each with hinges as specified below All hrno• s should be surface �y� a1,4 mounted on, .ur i ,islen a handle to Ird and doe .or easy opening and per- A.,-! haps even install a small gate latch on �, '• front access door to help keep It closed Overall Drmr r,sron Use metal handles for lid and door 26" Framej'e`' �-�� Lid F_ 5pcs I x6'x29 1 pcs 1 ■ 6 x 25 , H.:a•:: : ikatb I fj from edge of I,d on all s+des Beek I / 1 x 6 it 34' 22 r. ? � ( L r:{ I t r+ E l r O Notch Out r I, j..x 3+,a• I 1 rr ' + Door ' 4 pcs I'm 6 x 54 2 Dca it 20 t 2 � � �J `~ Deck .� 5 rc.s i x b"x 27 Sid" s pcs t ■ 6"x 34 / 7` 1 pc t ■ 6 ■ ?,. i ripped in h,Nf • • e�•O,q ,.r 2 x4 e Frammg Attach lids and doors •°� � . �.. Now. Use PINtwolowZinc coarse with strap hinges oswdw oowAuea• mounted on ex!erw, What to Buy Lu~ Hard Watt' and Other Mate+ieH Molsuffe ►loMtMlart frame 3 pcx 2 ■ 4 a 10 l NarnCoat' water re1*0ent It, help mrrarn,, r F'Ont Back $ des Deck L+d and Dom All olhe:, I ►Aalr = ,+: 4rl Nail .r , c;, , +ell cratkrnq warprnq tw*%frnu mid r}+a+n rarsang tg me I ■ A'■ 4 t rr1 I pr ,u +t; l r r Orw galron cr+wrty a{ fominaately ?OF) sq It 1AS 1'■8'111 1 5 Han!ar pu++r 1 yr . olr.rV N nyrb 1 - s ►landm 1 %mall Gale LaKh •n BIG ISLAND VETERANS CAMP On Beautiful Lake Minnetonka P.O. Box 598, Excelsior, Minnesota 55.3.31 Conditional Use Permit Application A,C�- " F IL 1 a -1 -7 - sf t, �� �ttivn �1nEw� DAY USE RECREATION: Notes and Special Conditions: 1. Site plan: attached. Also attached: May 27, 1988 0 �~t 64.�: Fire station's detail, fire ring detail, cooking grill detail 2. Dock application to LMCU: attached. City of Orono, Joint use Dock License: application attached. 3. Sign locations are shown on site plan. Sketches of signs are attached. 4. Mark Peterson is the caretaker. We intend to hire a part- time person to help Mark Peterson when the camp is open. we are also establishing a roster of volunteers for camp main- tenance and visitor registration at the island. The telephone number at the camp is 474-1958. This will also serve as our emergency telephone. We are currently eval- uating actions for additional phone service but we feel that the present phone is adequate for near term operations. 5. Garbage and trash will be retained in the fenced garbage area shown on site plan. It will be held in covered garbage cans and carried to the mainland a few at a time each time our ferry goes to the mainland. Once a week we will make a special trip to the mainland to dispose of any and all remaining garbage. 6. Control of the number of visitors will ")e accomplished as follows: A. Big Island Veterans Camp is not open to the public. It is privately owned by the veterans of Minnesota. By state statute only veterans, veterans' families, widows, orphans, veterans groups, veteran -supported charities or other veteran -related activities .nay use the camp. F' , B. "Private Property, No Trespassing" signs will be posted along the shore line and at all entry point, to the island. C. .All users will be required to register. During high use periods we will have a volunteer dedicated to signing in guests. The care taker will ask all unregistered trespassers to leave. D. The water patrol, many of whom are veterans them- selves, have been very watchful and frequent visitors to the island during this vacant period. They are very eager to respond in an instant's notice if needed to control trespassers. We propose the following maximum numbers of day -use visitors: E. Normal Daily Maximum: 240.Accordinq t- tate Health Department Campground Regulations, Chapter 4630.0900, the eight toilets and urinals we have will support 30 overnight camping groups or sites. For toilet usage, if we consider one camping group equivalent to two picnic groups, then we could have 60 picnic groups. If there are four people per group then the total would be 240 people. F. Special event maximur+: number of users allowed by Subdivisicn 3, Paragraph [:, acres. 1140 which is the maximum the Orono RS Zoning Code, 20 users per acre X 57 G. Any crowds over 1140 will require a special crowd permit from City of Orono. 7. Fencing: 100 lineal feet of 3 1/3 feet high cyclone fence wil he provided at top of embankment at Point Charming. 8. The Hennepin County Health Department has now said that since we no longer have any food ser•:.,ice and no guest rooms that they no longer have jurisdiction in our case. The State Health Department governs campgrounds and we will get a license and inspection from them when we open for overnight camping. Howe,6c•r, we do intend to follow Hennepin County Health Guidelires for our toilets and they have requested we ;send them interior elevations of he toilets for their infcr- mation, which we will do. 9. We will qui` using the caretaker septic system by July 15, 1988. If a replacement is not complete by that time then the caretaker will use the facilities in the approved Peanut Row Bathroom Building. - 2 - v ATTACW4-.NT BIG TSLAND VETERANS CAMP GENERAL LAND USE APPLICATION 1. Legal Description of Property Government Lot One (1), Section Fourteen (14), Township One Hundred Seventeen (117), Range Twenty-three (23); and Government Lot Two (2), Section Twenty-three (23), Township One Hundred Seventeen (117), Range Twenty-three (23); and That part of Government Lot Three (3)► Section Twenty-thre (23), Township One Hundred Seventeen (117), Range Twenty-three (23), commencing at the Northweast Corner of said Government Lot —iree (3), Section Twenty-three (23); thence Southwesterly along the lake shore to the Northeast corner of Lot A, Morse Island Park; thence South 350 feet to Lake Minnetonka; thence East along the shore of Lake Minnetonka to the East line of said Lot Three (3); thence North to the place of beginning, (hereinafter "property"). 2. Certified Property Owners List See attached document. 3 A.. Clean Up and Renovation Plan Schedule Approval to allow over.iignt tent camping for work parties accom- plishing cleanup and renovation activities necessary to allow camp opening is needed immediately. Approval for openinq of the Camp for day camping as well as over- night tent camping uses by owner -veterans is souqht for June 1988. Due to the short season, if problems are encountered in completing requirements for overnight tent camping, an opening limited to day camping with later expansion of overnight tent use wn uld be pre- ferred. Scope The cleanup and renovation activit.iea required to allow the camp to be opened include the following key projects: a. Renovation and refurbishment of latrines to allow use by campers and workers. (possible interim use of Satelites for day camping) b. Cleanup and burning of brush and w^r-d product scrap. C. Provide water at each picnic and latrine site. d. F.stabl ishment of fire alarms and r-� sponsv stations at Poi r,c Charminq and playground areas. a Page 2 - Big Island Veterans Camp General Land Use Application e. Approval of water supply systems for use by campers and workers. f. Siting of picnic tables, grills, benches and other camp furnishings at Point Charming. g. Continuation of brush cleaning required for establishing tent camp sites. h. Construction of approved dock capable of supporting camp and transient use. i. Establishment of a helicopter landing area for use by camp and emergency response personnel. j. Lstablishment of a fenced garbage consolidation aroa. k. Securing to the satisfaction of Orono staff any building or other areas considered hazardous. 1. Development of a new renovation requirements baseline plan for the remaining buildings after re -inspection by Orono staff. 1 k. Other Relevant Issues and Needs a. Worker tent camping to begin immediately with a maximum of fifty -sever. (57), one (1) per acre. b. Adequate fire protection and fire extinguishers will be provided for overnight campers and during burn activities. C. New construction and burn permits will be separately secured from Orono. d. The cam, manager is Mark Peterson, who began his duties on April 1, 1988. Mr. Peterson has had years of experience in camp operations and will prove to be an excellent resource for ensuring plan goals are met. fie can be reached at 474- 1958. Mr. Peterson is chartered to supervise work crews and contractors as well as scheduling and coordination of activi- ties. His presence on the Island will also ease coordination and inspection responsiveness. e. All buildings will remain secured until approval is gained for their use. f. septic, latrine and water supply elements will require inspection, renovation and approval by Orono and State inspectors. g. A current certificate of insurance will be provided. h. Two permanent sli,,ls will be required for use by camp -owned boats prior to camp re -opening. Approval f-r six permanent slips for camp use and up to twenty transient ships will he Page 3 - Big Island Veterans Camp General Land Use Application needed after openini. An extensive `Neaching area is also available to the we-t of the site o the present dock. i. Boat storage of camp boats during the summer months will be in permanent slips, or in case of fishing boats, beached west of the existing dock site. Winter storage will be dry stacking near the beach with .larger boats, such as the pontoon, beached at the clock area. j. Proposed overnight camping density for workers accomplishing activities is fifty-seven (57). Proposed density for day camping during 1988 is one hundred fifty (150) with one hundred (100) allowed for overnight tent camping. Events involving large numbers of attendees (eq. 500) would be subject to a separate request for an event permit. k. A license will be required to allow for sale of soft drinks and other like packaged goods by the caretaker. �. Site Plan Narrative Cleanup and renovation activities will cover most of the Island, however, near -term day an:.; tent camping wi�l be focused on the Point Charming area. Renovation and refurbishment of existing latrines at Point Charming and the Peanut Row area are a key priority. a. Tent areas of approved design and layout will be established at Point Charming. b. The beach area utilized for Point Charmi!.: would be the beach directly east of Point Charming. C. The overnight cabin accomodation in this phase will be the caretaker's cabin. d. Picnic and cooking activities will be centralized at Point. Charming in this phase. e. Docks will be constructed in the current location subject to Orono and CMCD approval. f. No specific formal recreational areas will be designated in this prase. a. Latrines at Point Charming and Peanut Row will be renovated serially with a minimum of one required to be operational for cramp opening. ! t. Future Plans The overall objectives of the Camp is to renovate for permanent retention the following bui ldin(ts: Page 4 - Big Island Veterans Camp General Land Use Application a. Caretaker's cabin. b. Visitors center (dining hall). C. Two (2) concrete blocx storage buildings and one (1) wood storage building located west of the visitors center. The following buildings are to be renovated for interim use pending construction of r-placement buildings in the next several years. a. Three (3) latrines. b. Three (3) wooden storage buildings on North Hill area. The following priortized list sets forth new building priorities for the Camp. New structure siting priority is as follows: Southeast quadrant (Point 'harming), Northwest Quadrant, Northeast (Quadrant and Southwest Quadrant. BUILDING [QUADRANT SITING 1. Picnic and CooTinq Shelter SE 2. Picnic ar..' Cooking Shelter NYW 3. Toilet and Shower Building NW 4. Toilet and Shower Building SE 5. Handicapped Accessible Cabins SE (6- 12) The approximate time frame for accomplishment of the above construction would be three to five years. Construction of each building will proceed upon full funding and all appropriate approvals. Additional expansion will be proposed if justifir-d by user requirements. WATER ANALYSIS 7AOS 119th Lam North • Champlin, Minnesota 55315 Telephone: 427-OM Approved Minnesota State Board of Health, Bacteriological Laboratory 42766.000 Wisconsin Dept. of Health & Social Services Licensed Laboratory FED. ID #411443773 TO: DRILLCO BOX 290 EXCELSIOR. MN. 55331 Re: Water test at: Big Island, Vet Camp, Gentlemen: 30 April 1988 TEST NO: 41398 TIME: FROM: Well The undersigned personally tested the water that was drawn at the above address on 29 April 1988 and the results were as follows: Nitrate Nitrogen -per Cadmium Reduction Method- 0.6 mg/l (Maximum allowable limits, less than 10.0 mg/1) Coliform Bacteria -per U.S.P.H.S. MF Method 0 per 100 ml (Maximum allowable limits, less than 1 per 100 ml) This water DOES meet FHA, VA, and U.S.P.H.S specifications. Field Engineering, Inc. is authorized to perform these tests by th% Minnesota Environmental Health Division, Well Department. Sincerely Yours, Marvin Wenze Detach below and return with payment Field Engineering, Inc. WATER ANALYSIS 30 April 1988 1M 119111 Lane North • Champlin, Minnesota 5531• Telephone 4274M TO: D R I L L C O FED. ID 0411443773 B O X 290 EXCELSIOR, MN. 55331 Re: Water test at: Big Island. Vet Camp, Test No. 41398 Amount $20.00 This Not was done on a work order for you. We have nothing to the ftn 00V of the sal:. Our bill is for the test — not the We be Poki . .4uera. Wr.x-r l--+n (-.Tivl M W Nn / ren ne 1 E , y 1,� nr d WMi l�n..1 rucl tl el.n or ..It ,n om,w Ir.d • \ •• brl n%�r�y//,A .rl� lu'al-orJ 1 Ca _.- 2 ►!OP[RTY UWNER'S NAM 1 iORlIATR7NLOG COLOR �"'�',''Ir.�.,• Fl" TO n r i _ ll�= ,1 /A 9 ,I I A, fir . await .lr.r toof eadel 1T LAVA1(R'1 NILNCCE OP DATA er , a / �,. .odor IAAPON T A N Tf A MILLING METHOD 10 Cable Yal 40 Rrewr Z7 IN.." I.E7 IMd D Hdb. nd UAu K3 W..d 110__. 10 Rory 60).11rd 'IO Pura A.V' IO Ibllrnl. e0 M-.,—n/ NO Hrr, Puny 30 Irrrelan 'u Pyblr 90 Induelr\ 30 TM Wrll 10 M.—tal 100 cal.lnnnsl ,TJ A,, t —d.l.— it 110 e L AIA%(, H()tl DIAM HFI(,H7 Ab,r.e;14k,. 10 FIUI 40 Tn., bard 1„r1Nr _ It 20 Grl. SO Wrhlyd 10 Plau. m 1. _. Il *.Who -- IbLA ten. I, ---------- ,n W ---- .. WrWhj __-_ Ite.nl _J.1 14 x to W'Vm lleril _le Ito —_It v 'C BEEN Or tow heir Iran h 1s — h Matt --- — - - --_— .. T ryr __.—_--- _ DO _ Sla bear _. I -- MI Il sml Il 11 O bob.. O etr*r Del, Mrewrrd_--_— land ►wtrr 11 PUMPING LEVEL Itrba, land u Imorl It ellw _- _. hre punwm __--_— 0 o m 12 HLAII WTU (OMPI.F TiON 10M1nb.d p— --fenwer 4D bsr . dlrrr D At heel Ill" ehwe penM 40 Maui (p.p erUN 1— 1I W ELL GROUTED' 0 1'w 0 w 10 Arel L rr.b.l 23 tv im,tr D - Grw...anui It ev Fdl IA NEAREST SOURCES Of PO%SIILE L(1NTAMINATMIM ---- two — --_ d.nrua. --Ine W.R dle.nlerlyd uyn renM"am, O Yn 0 fee -._. I% VI'MP UN ONO 'MA.1 d Medrl mlmen _.—. - - --- - - -----. lip _,-- \dr. .._ L.rld•llddnr'PPr ... .- - 1. ,rpa-.Y _.._ _ so.n Ms--' d d,,* Ppe- Type lLi 4,,h f,bY ULS T.:•bnv :i]R«,dr,ul,rld lot FASTING WILLS Uwerd —41 ew siowp y' O Tw O He Ab. ,& O P•eerwlll O T.a111ren 0 Nr WSW 10 *AII.R WFiI ((1lrTRA(T(*SCERTVICATH)N Toots cell .'er d0bd arWr at prldlere+ W 11.• q0- a 111& N 111of leel 91 dr bro 44V rM Mld VAA: 71.Cs&- _ _ _ act -- • ,.u... Amo m Mw ,...r.. , M ,�!M11r1�d Rgne�Ar.w eb.e. • •w wr G To: v Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator From: Michael P. Gaffron, Asst. Zoning Administrator Date: April 27, 1988 Subject: Comments on Big Island Inspection - Septi; Systems - Inspection of 4/26/88 On this date, Tom Jacobs and I met with Mark Peterson, Caretaker/Manager for the Big Island Vet's Camp. We inspected each of the known septic systems on the vet's camp property, and also looked at the well. I would make the following comments regarding the various systems inspected: 1. The septic system serving the old caretakers house at the west end of the property is under rubble and was not inspected. When that rubble is removed, any tank that existed at that site must be caved in and filled with dirt. 2. The old dormitory building on the west side of the property has been reduced to rubble. The old septic tank that served that building has been located and was uncovered. Since this system would not meet current codes and is not anticipated for future use, the tank should be caved in and filled with dirt. 3. The old Spanish -style shower building likely contained plumbing, however the septic system location is unknown. As the remains of that building are cleaned up, the tank should be located and caved in and filled with dirt. 4. The toilet building on the north hill has a single septic tank of 4' diameter and approximately 6-7' deep, of self -curbing block construction and with no solid bottom. This tank is located a few feet to the northeast of that toilet building, and discharges through a 10' long pipe to a presumed deep bed -type drainfield (no rock was encountered diring probing) and located approximately 30-40' from the steep cliff edge, and only 50 or 60' horizontally from the lake. Although there was no evidence that this systc-m discharges to the surface, its location near the lakeshore is extremely substandard ana any regular use of that system will hav,: a High potential for discharge of untreated sewage to the lakeshore. I would recommend that this system be abandoned permanently. 5. Ballantyne Cabin, north hill. This cabin is currently occupied by the caretaker, Mr. Peterson. This cabin has a 6' diameter septic tank with approximately 5' liquid depth, located about 10' to the north of that cabin. The septic tank has a discharge ripe heading to the north, but no drainfield rock was encountered by probing. The tank itself is only about 15' from the cliff bank. Based on the same concern I have with the north hill toilet building, it's my recommendation that this system also be permanently abandoned. There is a high potential for t;iis to seep to the surface in the cliff area and ultimately discharge untreated sewage to the lake. Because the building is occupied by one person, wc, may wish to allow his limited use to continue for a period of time, say 45 days, until they can construct a new system. 6. Toilet building below Peanut Row. The septic tank for this building is located 10-15' south of thi building. The tank is fairly large, however its design and constru,..tion is questionable and the baffle system (which is rotting) allows for a very limited detention time within the tank. Although no drainfield was found by probing, we believe there is drainfield located to the west and northwest of the toilet building. In looking further north, we found no evidence that the system discharges to the surface and it is located at least 200' from the lakeshore. It's my recommendation that this system be allowed to continue in use until such time that it is found to be failing. The property owners would be advised to retrofit that tank with a new baff le system and rework piping near the tank so that the detention t me is maximized (the outlet of the tank should be directly across from the inlet, not a few feet to the side of it). It is my opin'on that use of thiz system will not cause any damage to the environment, however, we have no way of determining the actual maximum capacity or capability of this system for accepting sewage. 7. The Cook's cabin (westerly of the block buildings). This building has a cesspool -type, self curbin,- block tank located directly behind it. Some of the cover sections r using and/or caving in. This tank needs to be covered immediat } -revent accidents. Since this building is currently intended for e only, no use of this system is anticirated. Since the exist: dt% +. nk is not a sealed tank, but merely a cesspool with no visib.c ,_scharge pipe outlet, it is of questionable value and certainly doesn't meet any current codes. We would not allow it to be used in the future in its current state, but might be suitable for future retrofitting. 8. West block and east block cabins. Both the block buildings had toilets, and in the west building, just to the west of the building is a pipe that we expect probably leads to some sort of a cesspool ype tank. However, this tank has not been located. The east block building probably contains the same type of system. Since these buildings are to be used for storage, it is not a great concern at this time that the systems be located. However., it would he appropriate to find those systems and presuming they are merely cess- pools, fill them in so t0ey will not be a hazard. 9. Dining Hall. The dining hall is served by two systems, one of which is connected and one of which probably is not connected. A very large septic tank is located approximately 40' east of the dining hall building, and the manhole was uncovered during our inspection. It is not known where this tank discharges, although the caretaker surmises that a pipe heads to the south and surfaces near where Berg cabin was looated. This system needs to be looked at in more detail, perhars even having the tank uncovered in its entirety and the discharge location verified to determine whether or not the system should remain in any type of use. The second system for the dining hall is to the north of the kitchen area and consists merely of a dry 1200 gallon capacity cesspool -type tank that was, intended to be connected to a dishwasher which never was installed. At all cast inspections, this tank has been totally dry, and probably never has been used. 10. South hill toilet building. Septic system serving this building is approximately 10' east of the northeast corner, with discharge pipe from the tank heading to the northeast. There is no evidence of any pipe discharging to the surface to the northeast and this system is located approximately 150' from the lakeshore. It is my opinion that this system should be allowed to continue in useuntil such time that it fails to accept the waste load, or at such time that it is found to be discharging to the surface. It's my opinion that the system in its current state can be used without causing any pollution problems. Again, we do not have any idea what the capacity of this system is, hence we don't know whether it will function adaquately under sustained use. 11. Anderson cabin, west of the south hill toilet building. This system is located about 30' from the lake. The Anderson cabin has been removed. The septic tank was uncovered. This system should be caved in and filled with dirt. SUMMARY The toilet building below Peanut Row and the toilet building on the south hill would appear to have septic systems that are substandard in design, but in location would not appear to pose a threat to the lake, nor do they have any indication of discharge pipes to the surface. The capacities and capabilities of these two systems are unknown, and their design is certainly substandard compared to what would be installed today. It is my opinion that we could allow use of these systems until such point that they can no longer handle the flow discharging to them. The system to the east of the dining hall needs be look,- at more closely to verify whether or not it will cause a surface discharge. I would not want this system to be used until we have more information on it. All septic tanks or cesspools serving existing cabins or buildings that have been removed and/or are serving buildings which will be used only for storage, should be caved in and filled with dirt. so that they are not a hazard. The systems serving the toilet building ,nd Ballentyne cabin on the north hill should be discontinued, and I would recommend that if -he intent is for these cabins to remain in place, that a new system serving both buildings be constructed, perhaps on the south slope and located at least 75' from the cliff. Site evaluati-gin would be needed. Other brief comments: A. There is still a lot of rubble from buildings that were burned or demolished, and many of these rubble files pose a significant hazard for campers. It's my opinion that we should at least have all of the rubble moved to one location, before any caml ing is allowed on the island, and we may want to go so far as to have all the rubble removed or buried (as appropriate) prior to issuing any permits to allow the camp to open. A. About a 150' north of the Peanut Row toilet building there is an old foundation about 6' Fquare covered with logs. :hip; found.;ition hole could be a hazard and should be filled in. C. Tom Jacobs asked me to note that the Cook's cabin needs to have skirting installed around the pier fou,idation so rnat people and animals can't get underneath that building. D. We inspected the extention of the well casing, which has been brought to just below the floor level of the dining hall. It appears that there is a pit approximately 20' deep surrounding the casing extention, and the well head is now extending a least 12-18" above grade and just below floor level. This is a 6" diameter casing extention, and the 20' or so section that was extended appears to ha -re been attached by the use of a 6 bolt coupling. The installation would appear to meet code requirements, and we should verify that with Jim Nye of the Health Department that it is allowable to fill in this pit (that would Lf required anyhow) upon his approval. ? would also note that the well appears to be located at least 75' or more from any known septic system or portions of septic systems. S. MILL S y.fLl' Cb iA• r L� 1 �ec�L/INEst— e.LaCf %ac �-•' �S I'e c< N Ift "it %� -..T Fir T° 1_. - ( ICJ /M L I '_ O'! � ►i C• r�♦ .� f !.� �.� �'�i��' / - Z / W ATt'A w1 /i dr1'M� k'LA-A"T" Y N f ro' 15 ? P , N 1 L.L. -ro!L S r1 io' c -� . �� r• 1 C P! rl cju T (Z0 ) 76/ L P7-1�1. 7"�►�1 "�� dl►�F c !► S � NoT n r� `�'"" �' / S Z�Oo + fir• ��J AVP t r,e. S SltO v t,-D f c J k" {_ _ Ar 1,3 CAPA-e4 r" J &t ^*NOwr'l , CN O N P R p LA T-?-ta't-" -r :l -r IJEC- `,,o S rVN ON::-) Fec.F r sr SNou Nc11— a e �s- PA-Z Arr G I A T c c A -' OLD Gee-rK R-- b^J /�wiecKf/-d A ✓?, tAND%:ti WCAAdCL.lr O L. C� Dort r— -rAw � A 4 Ou Dv/-C,0^, W-./rv) S, '- `rLL IN T�.tJK ���t�--C. CAE'N CGO►yF', Gl+��-IC- Gta� c��T�. T'�r��C(�„`wr"''ru\ , ft j. Bull F r IL I �1 MAY 2 6 I99B 44<11V1%.41P �' \^ Need fireplace with wood storage and work counter and picnic tables. wcetk it"/ Wo JAXA dtortags ,,u-, 3ut �-' .�utt p�nu. AU16iAh C CC"_t0jA%M 0 P:u'Mic. 5hc4#m SANITARY FACILITIES 1. Distance from restroom to picnic tables - 300 feet maximum. Sani- (g0 m)- optimum; facilities 400 feet (120 m)- should be located in relation to tary the ;'5--' area, not the parking lots (14, 28). 2. Sanitary Fixture Requirements (16) No. of Males Females No. of No. of No. of Toilet Seats Lavatories Urinals* Weir ema a** FlabejFerna a Male- emale** 50/50 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 2 100/100 1 3 4 2 2 2 250/250 2 2 3 3 500/500 3 6 3 4 4 750/750 4 8 4 5 6 1000/1000 5 10 5 6 7 2000/2000 6 14 *Urinals should be provided for men. "Urinals may be provided for women in lieu of one-third the toilets but may not exceed number of required toilet seats. Rubbish Disposal Desirable: One rubbish can per four units located within 150 feet (45 m) of the picnic tables. They should be easily accessible to motorized equipment for easy pickup. Due to operation costs this type of rubbish disposal is being replaced by dumpsters. 110 HENNEPIN COUNTY PARK RESERVE- DISTRICT ROUTE 1, Box 32 MAPLE PLAIN, MINNESOTA 55359 MEMORANDUM PLANNING S ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT - 473-4693 DATE: MARCH, 1977 SUBJ: RECREATION FACILITY DESIGN CRITERIA 1. SWIMMING: IMPORTANT FACTORS ARE SUITABILITY OF SHORELINE, WATER QUALITY AND WATER LEVEL FLUCTUATION. STANDARDS FOR MEASUREMENT ARE 1 FOOT OF SHORELINE, 50 SQUARE FEET OF WATER AND 100 SQUARE FEET OF LAND PER SWIMMER. 2. PICNICKING: FAMILIES AND GROUPS, ROADSIDE PULL -OFFS, PICNIC GROVES FOR LARGE AND SMALL GROUPS, TRAILSIDE PICNIC SPOTS. STANDARD USED IS A PICNIC GROUP (UNIT) CF 4 OCCUPYING 1/10 ACRE, OR 40 PEOPLE PER ACRE. 3. BICYCLING: STANDARD IS A GROUP OF 4 BIKERS ASSIGN.) TO 0.2 MILE OF TF4IL, OR 20 BIKERS PER M';_E. TOTAL MILES REQUIRED INDICATES THE NEED FOR COUNTY -WIDE SYSTEM OF TRAILS. 4. NATURE INTERPRETATION: THE OUTDOOR CONSERVATION -EDUCATION PRO- GRAM TO BE PRIMARILY VIS-A-VIS NATURE CENTERS AND INTERPRETIVE PROGRAMS. BUILDING SITE, PARKING, PROGRAM AREA (TRAILS) ETC. DAILY USE AT NATURE CENTERS EXPECTED TO RANGE FROM 100-500 USERS. 5. HORSEBACK RIDING: AGAIN, IS WITH BIKES, THE TOTAL MILES REQUIRED ARE BLYOND WHAT CAN BE VET BY PRD. STANDARD IS A GROUP OF 4 RIDERS ASSIGNED TO 0.2 TRAIL MILES, OR 20 RIDERS PER MILE. 6. FISHING: FROM BOATS, DOCKS, SHORELINE AND WINTER ICE FISHING. MANY 14ABITAT IMPROVEMENTS NEEDED TO ASSURE WATER QUALITY, DEPTHS, ETC. STANDARDS ARE 1/6 SURFACE ACRE OF WATER, OR 200 LINEAL FEET OF SHORELINE PER USER. 7. OTHER BOATING: THIS INCLUDES ALL FORMS OF PO4E=R BOATING EXCEPT WATER SKIING. HIGH SPEED liND LOW SPEED MOTORBOATING. DEPENDANT 0 WATER SIZE, QUALITY, DEPTH AND CONFIGURATION. STANDARD IS 3 PERSONS PER BOAT ASSIGNED TO 3 TO 6 SURFACE ACRES OF WATER. 6. CAMPING: TENT CAMPING, TRAILER CANING AND CANOE CAMPING. FAMILIES AND GROUPS. DENSITY STANDARD IS 4 C14-VERS PER CAMPING t)NIT ASSIGNED TO 1/6 ACRE OF LAND AS A MAXIMUM DENSITY. A MORE DESIRABLE DENSITY WOULD BE 4 CAI-lPLRS PER 1/4 ACRE. SOILS ARE A MAJOR FACTOR. , z MARc►1, 1977 RECREATI("J FACILITY DESIGN CRITERIA PAGE 2 9. HIKING: HIKING TRAILS (FOOT TRAILS; SHOULD NOT BE CONFUSED WITH NATURE TRAILS. MANY OF THE HIKING TRAILS ARE MERELY PART OF OR INCIDENTAL TO MANY OTHER ACTIVITIES. THE STANDARD IS A GROUP OF 4 HIKERS ASSIGNED TO G.1 TRAIL MILE, OR 40 HIKERS PER MILE. 10. CANOEING: WOULD OCCUR ON CERTAIN LAKES, CREEKS AND RIVERS. ONE STANDARD USED IS 2 PERSONS PER CANOE ASSIGNED TO 3 SURFACE ACRES OF WATER. THE OTHER WOULD MEASURE IT IN TERMS OF TRAIL -MILES. 11. WATER SKIING: WATER SURFACE REQUIRED FOR THIS ACTIVITY IS MUCH LARGER THAN OTHER BOATING. THE STANDARD USED IS 3 PERSONS PER WATER SKIING UNIT ASSIGNED TO 6 SURFACE ACRES OF WATER. A MORE DC-SIPABLE STANDARD WOULD BE 20 SURFACE ACRFS PER WATER SKIING UNIT. 12. SAILBOATING: POWER BOATING WOULD POSE A DIRECT CONFLICT WITH THIS ACTIVITY. AS WITH OTHER BOATING, SAILING WILL DEPEND ON WATER SIZE, DEPTHS AND CONFIGURATION. STANDARD IS 2 PERSr)NS PER SAIL- BOAT AND 3 SURFACE ACRES OF WATER PER BOAT. VEHICLE PARKING AREAS: CURRENT PRD STANDARD IS 4 PERSONS PER VEHICLE. REVISED: JANUARY, 1988 13. VEHICLE PARKING AREAS: CURRENT PRD AVERAGE STANDARD IS 3 PERSONS PER VEHICLE. FIR E AL A RM STATION 3 Bucke+: , tied ds�h I Sl�ovcl 1 RI�h 4(e'�, feed 4,�f1, refit. / c,Ugttr gc►rrtl , X16.. poi;e ' AI^vW% T114%q'f-, 14" X is "% !Y', /"Y%I' SYcc�, i b L�Q IM W 1 Y C ��" iov�q StJtt�, f ,qe%" I e V. 8 %,•► c kcf 2' X 2" X V' Aw'le �•�� ,-1Qljtj is pos, / 4x4 p'5:1, ?, f 1. �.,'ie y .. a �. •.. d paI.f 0,11 Rad FIRE RING Spa✓k 0,V"S elyv �S = ex PaM d eeWOVC%A 30" X IT' eOVA heavy CLAIVv. %,'f b4N4 i sef 6.. it IveuMd Sex% ov V43CK ;V� 6effow. t to CHARCOAL GRILL 30 9A I StCG1 b4rrel cwt Ih AaIf', 3 holes in be tto W% Ex P4..�e Ex p4MJeJ S +e-0 JC Lo..c- ( . IV.^ 'e , v e y► ave4 i/e 1 x .0.5It I'll oN 10 G%a►co.1 5X$ "X W, Steel Plate welded 'to P;P Sit. J * Wfel t,- 6a,vvel %1" ,. 2" steel Pi'e., txtea ds X is+o 4re�Aual 10" v.+aSS of Gowcvtte 4VOvwd Pipe S%,*%AK level �Nd 4+ bofforH o(' Pi Pe, vic o o-c Sr;il 51, WvN ;h da►s4 1iAes ISL XN ea C A L l L TOR A E SECURED ---- ------- F1 E TATIO • c 4 ot p os► S. T LMLLIPA I Co SILL IA PLAY AREA ILItt L I FAb, STOR GAR AGES elan "SOAT MILACNIN FIRE S 04, tiers skl�1�1 III Im 0 pr 0 Pic m . ... .... ... CONE JUH 27 1� TO: Mayor Grabek Orono Council Members City Administrator Bernhardson FROM: Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator DATE: June 21, 1988 SUBJECT: Annual Joint Use Dock License, Big Island Veterans Camp LIST OF EXHIBITS: �J Exhibit A - 1988 Joint Use Dock License Application Exhibit B - Proposed Dock Layout Exhibit C - 1988 LMCD License Exhibit D - Proposed Resolution The Big Island Board of Governors have applied for a 1988 Joint Use Dock License in conjunction with their operation of the camp in 1988. The Lake Minnetonka Conservation District has licensed the Board of Governors for 2 docks, each with 4 slips, for a total of 8 slips for 1988. The dock plan submitted by the Board of Governors shows the 2 existing docks, and notes that for future use, they nay wish to construct additional docks as needed, up to a total of 28 slips. For 1988 they are initially requesting 4 transient (day use only) slips, and 4 permanent moorage slips, the permanent slips being located at the permanent dock. The existing permanent dock is 50' in length, the adjacent seasonal dock is 30' in length from the shoreline. The Joint Use Dock License submitted indicates that the proper insurance is in effect and the proper security and safety measures have been taken. The application in all respects appears to meet all applicable City requirements. Since the LMCD has licensed 8 slips for 96, staff recommends that the City also license 8 slips for 1988, noti, that the property contains adequate shoreline to support additional slips should tFe applicants request them in the future. Those future additional slips would be reviewed with the annual Joint Use Dock License application during the year they were proposed. Note that our standard format Joint Use License has contained the language "....and in accordance with resolution #938, in no case shall the number of authorized boat slips, lifts, or buoys exceed the number permitted in :_:ie prior years license." in reviewing Resolution 0938, the provisions of that resolution apply only to commercial units, and do not apply to joint users. Staff has been able to find no resolution or document that specifically limits expansion of a joint use dDck area when that expansion is allowable under LMCD shoreline length requirements. This anomaly in our license form was only discovered during the review of this application, since the camps ultimate request is for more slips than have eirer been previously licensed for the camp. riven the 6500' length of the shoreline claimed by the Vets Camp, the LMCD regulations would technically allow as many as 130 slips for this property based on the required 50' of shoreline per sliE- Big Island Veterans Camp June 21, 1988 Page 2 of 2 Staff would recommend that language which prohibits expansion past the 8 slips approved for 1988, not be included in the resolution, but that language be included that would allow their increase to the number of slips that this or a future City Council concludes is appropriate for the approved level of camp activity occuring. A proposed resolution directing staff to issue a Joint Use Dock License to the Board of Governors, Big Island Veterans Camp for the period of January 1st to December 31st 1988, is attached for Council review. �CITY OF ORONO LICENSE YEAR 19 g P.O. BOX 66 CRYSTAL BAY, MN 55323 473-7357 association r 'i ANNUAL JOINT USE DOCK LICENSE APPLICATION Pursuant to Orono Municipal Code Section 5.42 Datg Form Sent by City Staff Date Application Returned to City 9 crb Fee Recived $ 5 7•- 82, By Employee Section 5.42 Subdivision 2. LICENSE REQUIRED - It is unlawful for any (group or association of persons or families, more than two in number, whether incorporated or not) to engage or participate in ... joint use (of any lakeshore property) without first having obtained a license therefor from the City. PLEASE COMPLETE AI.L ITEMS AND SUBMIT SIGNED APPLICATION, REQUIRED ATTACHMENTS, AND LICENSE APPLICATION FEE TO THE CITY CLERK BY FEBRUARY 1 OF THE LICENSE YEAR. ASSOCIATION INFORMATION 1. Association title or name (if any) '-% 4e ac'' 2. Lake I •1 Nh� ��.�a. Bay Lxs%,� 3. Person responsible for this application: Name Ke %*y, e Ao .K-Y'L Phone L4 Mailing Addressga70 C:rcle__ Roo.�� Ttv"�� r/IrJ 5�331 Relationship to association_PCr�ry Page I of 5 0 5 Association is (check applicable itetrs): unincorporated homeowner's croup. incorporated Homeowner's Association. _ unincorporated club or recreation grour. Principal puxpose of joint use dock is (check arplicable items): provide boat mooring and lake access for residential property. provide swiauning access, beech, or offshore dock. provide a club or association gathering place for activities. Ac3S 6. Dock is located on (check applicable item): one member'e private property. _ easement or outlot owned in common. ` property leased by the group/associet'__%. property owned by the group/associatio::. 7. List Dock location and ownership information: street address &1, legal property descri, t,ion (1��� �..ro PID�3-���-Z3-��-ve�o� �. _ i arPd ^mrPz-t•oa er(s 1 pi �,� � 11l-.�C llama r1 C, l v� wUio B. Names of abutting lAkeshote p�ogerty (North/West) (Name + Addres (South/East) [�w�tior.wt►s 5533� (Name + Address e.zu, {-C�, �I 4) Zz ►.� eii r�� tom— L2 ajL s' , ja �+.•. TL.wLj l k+u.� l Z3� . (L3) 5a ► ►n e r s : °�''S iti.. (o�st.n� � �.i �,.ti,r ta+3t e ew,q UL ^ Er�t- Names of other affected property owners: (Name + Address) (attach sheet if necessary 2 of' 5 ,9. Insurance Coverage - The jointly used dock is insured by one of the following: property owner's homeowner's policy. separate group/nrsocintfon owned policy. list the following information: name of insured v name of insurance carrier name of insurance agency . D l 33--Zgn) policy no. Oct as effective date of coverage `O 71 g7 amount of coverage; Public liability, per person, per occurence $ 1, ONd&Q Public liability, per occurence $ 11060, 0ilrj 10• Security and colicing of the Jointly used dock and property is provided by - (check applicable items): fencing. _& security lighting. X property owner's presence. contract security service. other (specify) DOCr INFORMATION 11• List Dock Use Area Specifications: t A ex. 3 O � Width of sm.:reline; ? pO f"t. Length of main dock from shore; fOG' ft. Dock setbacks from side y , DO ft. and ft. pmper-t lines at shore 12. Dock Constriction (check alplicable items): seasonal doc: (relocated or replaced each year;. permanent ni l ine wl tr. senscnal ieck. 1-1-1 per•:nanent piling and deckin wooden decking. metal deckirg. 13 List Dock Accessories: Number of fire extinguishers available at the dock a Number of ii_`'e preservers available at the dock �- 14• Liat member of stirs in Aecli categgry ("alias" includes boat :Lifts): Transient (day use only) sF'i4 !u Transient(dey use) off -shore buoys ul+"� 4 Permanent moorage slips _sn4 14L I•erwanent moorrige off -shore buoys dry storage �rAck) 6111s Maximum number of boats at the dock 15• List number of off-street Narwing space; r,vaiiable for users of the joint use dock. Parking, !f provided must not be separated from the dock by any public road. N /q spaces. EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION CONTROL 16. Shoreline _a protected by (check applicable items): stone rip rap. _ wood seawal _ metal seRwall. concrete seawall. grass and vegetation only. other (specify) 17. Depth of water at shoreline is O ft; at 50 ft. out is ; at 100 ft. out is 10 . REQUIRED ATTACHMENTS The following must accompany this application: A. DOCK PLAN - ALL APPLICATIONS A dock plan, drawn to scale, showing the shoreline width of this property, the side property lines and the location, layout and dimensions of all docks, slips and buoys. If off-street parking, dry storage or other on -land functions are intended, these also should be shown on the plan. B. UNINCORPORATED GROUPS OR ASSOCIATIONS 1. A list of the names and mailing addresses of all members and/or slip users. 2. A certified copy of the by-laws or agreement for joint use. Note: This copy is not required if the applicant initials and certifies the following statement: "This is a renewal application and our joint use dock is to be operated under the same by-laws or agreement origir,ally made in (state year) and on file with the City." Applicant's initials C. INCORPORATED CLUBS CAR ASSOCIATIONS 1. A list of the names, mailing addresses and titles of all corporation officers. 2. A statement as to the total number of members in the club or association. (o00r6C0 member. 3. A certified copy of the articles of incorporation and by-laws of the corporation. Note: These copies are not required if the applicant initials and certifies the following statement: "This is a renewal application and our joint use dock is to be operated under the same articles of incorporation and/or by-laws as original,y made or last amerdeO in _1gg?(state year) and on file with the cit 4�,k",,�t;licant'sy11 initials Pace 4 of S 0 D. ANNUAL LICENSE FEE - ALL APPLICATIONS Joint Use Dock License Application fee according to the current City Fee Schedule. MINIMUM JOINT USE FEE, per year $ 50.00 _ PLUS SLIP FEE for each permanent moorage slip, lift, dry stack, or buoy slips @ $2.00 each $ o- TOTAL DUE THIS APPLICATION 0-0 LATE FEE - Renewals Applications for renewal of licenses shall be made no later than February 1 of the license year. The City shall not accep* renewal license applications received after February 1 unless t application is accompanied by a late fee of $25.00. REVIEW PROCEDURE When a complete application is received, the application will be reviewed by the City Council and, in the case of new or unusual applications, also by the Planning Commission and Marina Committee. The Council will pass upon the application after complete review. THE SUBJECT DOCK MAY BE INSTALLED AND/OR OPENED FOR USE ONLY UPON APPROVAL OF THE LICENSE BY THE CITY COUNCIL. Pursuant to Section 5.42 of the Orono Municipal Code, the applicant hereby requests the Orono City Council to review this Joint Use Dock License Application, and agrees and authorizes the City of Orono and the City's employees and agents to enter upon the property at any reasonable time to perform safety and code compliance inspections. Signed Date �'l ri 0 8- t" - 6 � �" v Paye 5 of 5 - .. .. �..:::, � �. t +4:.r pryYar�rirr... ` ..-wa,•.�...., •.c•. - ....a.]✓._. 1 I,.....,_... i BIG I S L A N D VETS R A N 1 C A M P BOCK P L A N S EX)ST ING and TUTURE. � J-aNv ! 7?? s<aIe I r= 20' 3ia Q e SNOKr-LINE 3 _ SNA�inw WATER a t7 — � xlsf i M, Joe- r1 •�1 4• K1AtG �. C•.4T T �1 d s, ltCsdT,ovA` SeA340%* uin pP E xiS��My . iA ad e.5 me0's KeeA 5t...d.,,41 U„ai'..c�.ft s+0.4 le'. Pe v.NaM. t t d.ck G r L t 1 5 � O' X i p' rt1 4► �'�:� �" wafer Ear_ irk dock u . �' %14 V t 4 5to t4 ! 5 1 P 5 . 5 t� , a ! tA,�, 1 s C'.-k �e,.'ti, W;I) �o dafit..w;Mtdy 5i�r1 Il. u waft. n o, a 4Lr.4 4ti d cieeP waft. o� et�e� erd . LeM�f1. wiI! w�+ exceed '+� MIMNEt\ v 7� M =I I ni ust�'i' BOARD MEMBERS Hobert Rescop. Chairmen Shorewood JoEllen Hurt. Vice Chairman Orono Carl H Welker. Secretary E ■C elstor Mark Westlund Tt*"Uref Wayzata ti.—n Blurlin 1po�nka Bay Jan BOVA, nkel Minnetonka ©each Richard J Ga wuud Deeph.rvr. n Peter Hill Victoria Ron Kraemer Spnnq Park John Lewmen Mmnelnsta nlChard Nelson Greenwood Hobert K Pillsbury Minnetonka Thames W Reese Moved Flobarl E Sl-- Woodland LAKE MINNETONKA WNSERVATION DISTRICT 402 EAST LAKE STREET V)A�.'ATA MINNESOTA "j,1I1 TELEPHONE 6121473.7033 FRANK MIXA. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR April 26, 1988 Board of Governors, Big Island Veterans Camp c/o Joseph M. Backes P. 0. Box 598 Excelsior, 11N 55331 Dear Mr. Backes: The LMCD Board of Directors has approved your 1988 dock license application, subject: to your meeting village requirements on the matter. A license may be issued upon receipt of a completed zoning certificate from the City of Orono. Sincerely, LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT Frank —i a I.. x ec utivv Dirr c1,or sl enc: site plan c/enc: City of Orono LMCD Inspector L -,LpI t c (10 �7l Lhci:=+4ticl�.,iSr-,l.�JtvO•' S,e /Dock racl: u12 — /-)eA ..a�hl•�.a 6�: � 5�rf/o) r dry Ifj A) u 9 { Cci [)EC 0 3 1986 L.M.C.C) T MIN ,4 H-ds - / V 0 -:,p , if; - /v0 /Its,- /,Vo —T.M �w �o /Jo a41: �� � �s Ad 0 A RESOLUTION DIRECTING STAFF TO ISSUE A JOINT USE DOCK LICENSE TO BOARD OF GOVERNORS, BIG ISLAND VETERANS CAMP SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS NOTED HEREIN FOR THE PERIOD OF JANUARY 1, 1988 TO DEMMBER 31, 1988 WHEREAS, the City of Orono, hereinafter "City'' is a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota and has the authority and responsiblity under Minnesota Statutes, State Statute 412, et. seq. and State Statute 462, et. seq., to protect the health, safety, and general welfare of the citizens of the City and other members of the public within the City; and WHEREAS, the City shares concurrent jurisdiction over the primary harbor limit of the City of Orono with the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District and the Department of Natural Resources of the State of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, the regulation of the navigable waters involves an exercise of police power of the State, LMCD, and the City of Orono, all of which have adopted rules to ensure to all equal enjoyment of the public rights and equal protection from activity on or near the public waters and on the land within the City which, if unregulated, may be detrimental to the public health, safety and general welfare; and WHEREAS, the regulations of the DNR, LMCD, and the City of Orono regulate the property rights of the riparian owners both as to residential owners and the commercial marina owners, to the extent prohibiting any interference with the public waters adjoining their property. The LMCD, DNR and City of Orono Rust fulfill their trustee- ship over the public waters by protecting against interference by anyone, including those who assert the commonlaw rights of riparian owners, whether or not they be commercial marinas or residential owners; WHEREAS, as to Lake Minnetonka, a mutual right of enjoyment exists between and is shared by riparian owners and the public generally, no one riparian owner has exclusive privileges over Lake Minnetorka. The only additional private right that any riparian owner may have over the public generally is to construct one dock to the navigable depth of the public waters. There can be no dispute but that the public generally and each riparian owner to L-ke Minnetonka has the right to use the entire surface area of Lake Minnetonka for all suitable purposes in common with mil other riparian owners. This right is a right not on? y to members if the public but the right to each riparian owner. Page 1 of 2 This mutual right of enjoyment which is shared by riparian owners and the public generally includes the recreational benefits of the lake such as boating and fishing therein; the riparian owner has no exclusive privileges to these rights; and WHEREAS, Lake Minnetonka is capable of substantial beneficial public use only as long as all riparian users of the lake are regulated in such a way as to ensure there is no ahuse of the limited riparian rights; and WHEREAS, the City has adopted reasonable regulations regarding the construction and use of lakeshore and dock facilities when such facilities are used and maintained by three or more families, which regulations include the annual licensing of Joint Use Docks pursuant to Section 5.42 of the Orono Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, the purpose of this Resolution is to set forth the above noted general conditions and concerns and the following special conditions as they relate to an application for an annual Joint Use Dock License described on Exhibit A attached, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Orono hereby directs the Staff to issue a Joint Use Dock License according to the facts and conditions noted on Exhibit A attached. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono at their meeting on the 27th day of June, 1988. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, city c'erk James P. Grabek, Mayor Page 2 of 2 CITY OF ORONO EXHIBIT A RESOLUTION NO. CONDITIONS OF ISSUANCE FOR ANNUAL JOINT USE DOCK LICENSE I. LICENSEE: Board of Governors, Big Island Veterans Camp Dock Address: Big Island - Record Lot #1 Agent: Keith E. Aakre (Secretary) Address: 4270 Circ�j Road, Tonka Bay, MN 55331 Licensee is: Incorporated club or recreation group and other non-profit corporation. License Period - January 1, 1988 to December 31, 1988 II. BOAT DENSITY The number of in -place boat slips, lifts and buoys shall not exceed the number shown on the attached plan, Exhibit B. Authorized Boat Density per attached plan: Bay Lower Main Lake Transient (Day use only) Slips 4 Permanent Moorage Slips Boat Lifts Sub -Total: Slips at Dock Offshore Puoys Maximum Boats in Wafer Maximum Boats per prior license MAXIMUM BOAT DENSITY, 1988 4 0 8 0 8 16 (14 slips, 2 buoys under previous license) 8 Exceeding this maximum boat density, or exceeding the number of permitted slips, lifts or buoys is a violation of this license subject to revocation a.id/or prosecution for violation of Section 5.42 Subdivision 2 of the .-ono Municipal Code. III. DOCK LAYOUT The dock structure or layout authorised by this license shall be as shown on attached Exhibit B. Any changes in this layout shall be subject to prior review and approval of the City Council. Exhibit A Resolution No. Page 2 IV. SPECIAL CONDITIONS required for compliance with the ordinance of the City and/or the LMCD. The issuance of this license is subject to full compliance with these conditions. Failure to comply with these conditions is cause for license revocation and/or prosecution by the City. 1. Dockage for 1988 is limited to 4 permanent slips and 4 transient (day use only ) slips. Future requests for additional permanent or transient slips for 1988 or future years wi 11 be sub ject to City Counci 1 approva 1 and sha 11 be reviewed and considered in relation to the concurrent level of allowed camp activity. 2. Two of the four permanent slips shall be designated for overnight use by the two camp -owned boats for 1988. Any other overnight use of the licensed dock facilities is specifically prohibited without a Conditional Use Permit allowing such use. V. Nothing in this license shall confer upon any person for the benefit of any property any vested right to use Lake Minnetonka or the premises in a manner permitted by this resolution, but the use of Lake Minnetonka and the premises shall remain subject to such regulations and ordinances as the City and other competent regulatory authorities shall deem necessary from time to time in the public interest. AN27i To: Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members;�y '�+�� City Administrator Bernhardson Prosf: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator Date: June 2, 1188 Subject: i1281 Dennis Meyer 1431 North Shore Drive - Variance - - Public Hearing Pertinent ordinances - Section 10.03, Subdivision 4 Prohibitions - it is unlawful to convert, enlarge, reconstruct or alter any structure or use any structure or land for any purpose or in any manner thbt is not in conformity with the zoning chapter. Section 10.03, Subdivision 9 Accessory Buildings - no accessory building or structure shall be constructed on any lot prior to the time of construction of the principal building to which is accessory. Section 10.03, Subdivision. 13 Garages - accessory buildings which are for the storage of automobiles shall have the doors 30' or more from the property line when said doors face on a public alley or street. Application The applicant is required to file a variance application for the structural repair of a detached, accessory structure located on a lot without a principal residence and located 10' off the street right-of-way instead of the required 30' when doors face out on a street. Zoning District - LR-lB Lot Area - 5,760 s.f. or .13 acres Lot Width - 36' List of Sahibits Exhibit A - Application Exhibit B - Property Owners List Exhibit C - Plat Map Exhibit D - Neighbors Acknowledgement Forms Exhibit E - Jacob's Letter 2/l/88 Exhibit F - Meyer's Letter 2/3/88 Exhibit G - Applicants Engineer's Letter 2/3/88 Exhibit H - Foundation Repair Plan, Site Plan for Subject Property Locating Existing Single Stall Garage Exhibit I - Applicant's Addendum Review of Application The later part of 1987, the City commenced hazardous building proceed: ngs for a detached structure on a property owned by the applicant that did •.ot sustain a principal structure. It was the original intent of the City to hav, detached structure removed. At the January 1.1, 1988 Council Meeting, Denn: 1,efore the Council to ask for an extension in time in order to meet wit', an engineer to determine the possiblity of structurally repairing the at.`nct,-�d garage. Review Exhibits G & IT. Steven W.Jantzen, Professional Engin..ar Zoning File #1281 Page 2 of 4 certifies that the foundation can be replaced without rebuilding the entire foundation. Two-thirds of the west wall are to be repaired approximately one -fifth of the south wall and approximately one-half of the east wall. It would have been staff's recommendation that if the entire foundation were to be replaced, that the garage be removed to the applicants homestead property on an adjacent, but not contiguous property. Review Exhibits C & H. Review Exhibit C. Lots 4, 5. & 6 of Bergquist & Wicklunds Park were under one common owner in the early 1900's. Lot 5, now currently owned by the Henry's, has an established residence. It is unknown the date that Mr. Meyers acquired Lot 6, but the face of the application shows that he acquired Lot 4 in 1970 and sold it in 1971 and acquired it again with a default of a C.D. in 1973. The steep topography of Lot 6, adjacent to the roadway severely limits Meyer's ability to conscruct a garage without the need for excessive amounts of filling. The existing structure on Lot 4 continues to serve as his only garage. Another matter separate from this review involves the gradual filling over time that Mr. Meyers has performed on Lot- 6 for the purpose of expanding a parking area adjacent to his residence. Unfortunately, the grade changes have created major drainage problems for the Henry's. The Henry property sustained major erosion damage from the storm of July 187. Staff is in receipt of a final grading plan to correct the existing grades and drainage between the Meyers and the Henry property. Glenn Cook has reviewed the final grading plan and has approved it subject to extending and making the Swale deeper as proposed by applicant's engineer. This information is merely provided as more background information for your meeting and clearly has no connection between the variance application for the repair of the detached structure located on a lot that does not sustain a principal structure and set 10' off the street right-of-way where 30' would be required. Staff would like to note that the bullding inspector has completed the review and has approved the partial repair of the existing structure. In reviewing Exhibit. I, it would appear that the majority of the Henry's retaining wall plantings encroach into Lot 4. Staff would recommend that in approving this variance application that you also require any damage done to existing plantings adjacent to the structure be re-established by applicant upon completion of the foundation repair. Staff Recommendation To approve a variance application for Dennis Meyer to allow the repair of a detached structure classified as hazardous by the City of Orono based on the following findings: 1. Licensed engineer has confirmed that a partical repair of the foundation would be adaquate. 2. It would not be practical or feasible to relocate the garage on Meyers' homestead lot because of the severe topography and the already documented drainage problems resulti-iy from the additional fill placed by Mr. Meyers. Zoning File #1281 Page 3 of 4 3. The detached garage has existed on the property for over 40 years and at the time of construction part of a commonly owned contiguous homestead lot. This approval is subject to the following conditions: 1. Applicant shall re-establish any ground cover disturbed during repair of the garage foundation. 2. All repairs shall be subject to the standards of the uniform building code. Additional Cossents and Planning Commission Recommendation The Planning Commission did not concur with the staffs' opinion that the proposed repair of the foundation was partial and that indeed the method chosen by Mr. Meyer's engineer was in reality a total replacement. The method to be used involved the pouring of a connected surrounding concrete foundation wall that would be tied into the existing foundation. Staff can confirm that the proposed new exterior foundation wall would support the garage structure independently. As applicant's addendum notes, this method was chosen so that the fill that is contained behind the foundation walls would not be lost during the process of repair and to also protect the existing cement garage floor that remains in good condition. The standard method for partial repair of a foundation would be the razing and temporary support of the existing structure and then the replacement of the various blocks and support ties of the deteriorated sections. once again, the method chosen for repair of foundation was to protect integrity of existing foundation. The City Council may wish to ask the city engineer for his comments regarding the method selected by the applicant and if the method chosen by the applicant reflects more the need to protect the fill and concrete floor area that has not cracked or settled at this point. Staff would recommend that before we consider other alternatives for the need to relocate the structure either on the the subject parcel or on Mr. Meyer's homestead lot that the issue of total versus partial replacement of the foundation he resolved. The city engineer should be able to respond to this question at your meeting of July 11, 1988. If it is the opinion of the city engineer that this is a partial replacement, than Council may direct staff to draft the appropriate resolution asking for the approval of a variance that would allow the accessory structure to remain on a parcel without a principal structure and also located 10' from from the street setback line. If the city engineer makes a determination that this is a total replacement and that the applicants claim that this is the only safe technique to use to preserve the existing fill within the current foundation and cement slab floor that you deny the current variance act lication of Dennis Meyer and per the Planning Commission recommendation ask that the new structure t;e located so that it conforms with all appropriate sections of the Code, Zoning File 1281 Page 4 of 4 which would mean that t;e structure must be moved to the homestead lot. Applicant would then have to provide a survey and a grading plan showing how the structure would be installed within the bank adjacent to the County Road. The City would be asked to also approve hardcover variances within the 75-250' setback area and street and side setback variances. Council should ask the applicant to review the hardships noted in the recent addendum submittal, Exhibit I. It is not clear to the staff what the access from the structure usage pattern is on the properties and applicant should clarify. Staff would add that it would be possible to locate a garage on the subject property that would require only the variance to the section that would require a principal structure for the accessory structure. This may be a valid consideration in light of the historic drainage problems and steep contours adjacent to the County Road on Meyer's homestead property. CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee $150. 00 ($50.00 per each additional variance)04.7., Renewal Variance Fee $75.00 (no change from original application), After -the -Fact Fees (Double application fee) ----------------------------------------------------------- PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) 7co I Please check one - Property V/ abstract or torrens? Attach legal description to applicationif not included on w% required survey. � �`f e CX1 u�fd� + K lob �OG�{, -------------------- g--------------------------------------------- APPLICANT Phone ( home) Name Phone (work) \ re Address: �}7.'� �c�!���!`l�'Gi City: /tiCCGwr tLip:�,''? --- —------------------------------—w --------—r------1 tV. iw if different than applicant) Phone (home) rtANA YOU .��; ray roi% R01 T1::. I Name Phone ( work) r:. ;-• ,e Address: City: Zip: Date Property _A quired►g70-Sdal17?4/ # 7m (month/year) I nhtel (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. ------------ =- W�_--------------------------------------------------------- PRESENT USE OF PROPERTY Present Zoning District Present Use of Property (",27C r am eResidential other (specify) ------------------------------------- ------------------------------------ DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $ Describe request in detail: r` ra . of C'A ctr(o��•'ner ------�cIC�r!S—t— fc--� cIt «I �'./ C'j.� : c� -,t'I ti T-- VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area Lot Width Hardcover Setback Variances ( Front Side Rear) Other r r", cufl�c�, IC�, i� r r�rt��l �:vl jcC' -u'Th .,10 HARDSHIP Describe undue enforcement of hardship or practical zoning regulati_(p�ns:-LL i •n t'nLj7`,,_, {1Ct 7c4o,_7 __� CC., dif iculty resulting from strict V ----- -------------------.--------------------------------------------------- DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code Requirements: ' lr,-F re'tq,e-cr�_rc-wA c,^y' (off` f%f- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -Y- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - RBQUPED SUBMITTALS 1. •fCompleted Application Form 2. Certified Property Owners List of owners within 150' (you must obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Govt Center 348-3271). 3. /Stamped, legal sized envelopes (110) pre -addressed to each of the names on the above iist with no return address (use address labels obtained with property owners list). 4. JCertificate of survey including hardcover calculations as required. 5. Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing grade are proposed. 6. JPlat Map (obtained with property owners list). 7. As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. 8. Additional items as may be requested by City staff. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your variance application is not complete if the above information has not been included. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Certification by Zoning Department that Variance Application is complete. Zoning Official's Signature Date --------------------------------------------------------------------------- APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay all fees and/or unusual expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. Applicant's Signature A-sk // — rc-i Date�7 OWNERS SIGNATURE The owner hereby ackowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents, Commission members, acid Council members for purposes of investiga- tion and verification of this request. / ' Q' owner's Signature •'� �ti d ( r ��— �`" Date J Ii �f 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 6 Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. RUN DATE 04/27188 f4 BATCH 008 38 07-117-23 32 0003 P',OP ADDR 04725 TONKAVIEW LA MlER NAME E i T CHRISTIANSON TA}.PAYER EARL A TERRY CHRISTIANSON KAMEfAGOP 4641 TONKA VIEW LANE M0LR10 r,N 55364 f 38 07-117-23 32 0017 PROP AMR 04725 NORTH SHORE DR OwEP NAME J P HENRY ETAL TAB AYER J P HENRY 4ArE'A0DR 4725 NOPTH SHORE OR M^Ut10 Mtl 55364 38 07-117-23 32 0050 PROP ADDR 04680 NORTH SHORE DR Ot,,NER NAME DEMIIS A MEYER TAXPAYER DENNIS A MEYER NAME/ADCR 4680 NORTH SHCRE DR MOUND MN 55364 PPOP ADOR 01.4NZ-P NAME TL-:PAYER TOTAL BATCH NAME ' A.JDR 008 00009 HENNEPIN COl1NTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNERS LIST 38 07-117-23 32 0014 04739 TONKAVIEW LA LARRY ARNOLD GREENHAGEN ET AL L GREENHAGEN A V GREENHAGEN 4739 TONKAVIEW LANE MOUND MN 55364 38 07-117-23 32 0018 04731 NORTH SNORE DR DENNIS A METER DENNIS A MEYER 4680 ►!CRTH SHORE OR MOUND MN 55364 38 07-117-23 32 )058 C47C5 MIRTH SHORE DR STEVE MAJOR JR ET AL MYRON i STEPHANIE PEDERSON 4705 NORTH SHORE DRIVE MOUND MN 55364 REPORT NO. PI435401 PAGE 19 38 07-117-23 32 0016 04731 NORTH SHORE OR DEI?iIS A MEYER DENNIS A YEYER 4680 NORTH SHORE DR MOL«40 t2i 55364 38 07-117-23 32 0019 04745 NORTH SNORE DR HERMAN CRAWFORD ETAL HERMAN CRAWFORD 4745 NO SHORE DRIVE MOUND MA 55364 � 39 07-117-23 32 0059 04695 NORTH SNORE DR STEPHEN C i JOAN14E A WARD STEPHEN C WARD �. 4695 NORTH SHCRE DR MOU140 MN 55364 I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED APE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENIATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION. THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF` y ` DATE BY Adjacent Property owners' Acknowledgement Form I (we) 1 1 �•'y,,�� �%, le r rt of '�% ^!i •t '/. `►r' �� i v, Ile. [rant name(,,[print address have reviewed the pla_. pr-)posed improvement or proposed use of the located at , � i :1 /�` '� �— /\, also referred to as Lard Use property r '► ___Jc.._ 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 that the proposed neighbor's project or use requires Council approval. l Propgrt Owner Date L t A� roperty Owner Date �� 14 ,S 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 6 Zoning Office at least 10 days prior to the scheduled meeting date. l V A C Vgoy W i •' 'f 4 ,� 4 i 2 •, `1,1 , 3 �1�, �s � 1 .V u � � • .�. F 6%P vA 3 11•a �''i ., 411�_ ,. 0�,1\S' •¢`,f . i or ergo 1r �3 ti'N B �Q �` .+, � ��, 1 � • Ems/ t co li/ �AIETA 4 J �, RB .4 < ry W `NC \�* COY( h ,`i * 74 Kr BSA. f t � f �M s ,�oa♦ �M4 .- \ ' » �5�•b �� � 1+`t� • 12 •_ r Lots 14,10,18,200nd Me alle a oe I "�. \ • API ShO*n , SUB'O OF LOT 14 REST 1 3�•e \ ~� POINT PARK, Nave been vacated Doc 736aVf 2 IRONED F ar Mur") Adjacent_ P o0erty owners' Acknowledgessent Form I (we) _ of w)5- mo.;MALC. UAL- Jpriht nameis)] [print address have reviewed the plans for the proposed impr vement 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 that the proposed neighbor's project or use requirCouncini pprovul. Propeft neY Date Property Owner Date If you have any information that. may assist the City in thf review of this Land Use Application, please s•-ibmit your comments to the Building 6 Zoning office at least 10 days prior to the scheduled meeting date. L Cf'""rof ORONO Post Office Box 66*Crystal ! L. . -wta M323•Municipal Offices On the North Shore of Lake Minnetonka February 1, 1988 Dennis Meyer 4680 North Shore Drive Mound, MN 55354 Res Council ,fleeting Januai� 11, Hazardous Building Action - Lot 4, Block 5, Berg- & 'icklund Park Dear Mr. Meyers At the January 11, 1988 council meeting which you attended, you requev-ed an extension so that you had time to gaither some information to suLmit to the City. The information must consist of -ertiF3.r, in from a structural engineer that the structure is strucc• Sound and safe. This information must be submitted by Fe- , 1988. Failure *o gub-it this information wilt j.bce me no alternative but cortinue with processing the actin. If you Nev-.! - questions, please feel frea to contact me. SLncerely, C oni as J . Jacobs. lding official act Ma- ity AdministratOL ,7- .,iilaing 6 Zoning Administratur MIAtINGatcara`c, 4 'u' 0 A 4 FINANc. - 47i7358 0 rileta,WORKS -47JY7 0 Fa Feb. 3, 1988 To: City of Orono From: Dennis A. Meyer Regarding: Garage on Lot 4, Block 5, Bergquist & Wicklund Park Dear Sir. Attached is a letter and plan which was prepared for me ,y Steven W. Jantzen, P.E. to pr u. ;de the specifications for the repairs needed on the foundation of my garage I have brought these plans to Gene Meyer of Gene Meyer construction at 3830 Sunset Drive, Spring Park MN. He has agreed to do the repairs for me and we discussed the schedule for its completion. Since it involves footings the work needs to be done after the frost is out of the groind. He stated that allowing for the possibility of a late thaw which might result In the frost not being out until May , 5th. he could complete the repairs by June 1, 1988 His plans would be to do It sooner if the weather allowed. I request approval of these repair plans and schedule and the issuance of a permit for these repairs. Sincerely, n C� Dennis A. r1eyer M Feb. 3, 1988 To. City of Orono From Steven W. Jantzen, P.E. I was contacted by Dennis Meyer of 4731 Northshore Dr. Mound, Mn. to examine his garage located on Lot 4, Block 5, Bergquist & Wicklund Park in the City of Orono. On Jan. 27, 1988 1 examined the structure. Attached is a plan and specifications dated 2/2/88. Execution of this Alan will restore the proper support under the f loor and wal is of the garage. I t wi i I reinforce and stabilize the existing foundation. Sincerely, Steven w' 'a.>itzen, P E I hereby certify thnt this pinn, swification or report was impnred by me or under my direct eupen i :iron anfl that I am a duly Registered Profen zonal l:nrtineer under the laws of the State of ylinucxtu. -� J, r Reg. `No. I STiZA(LvW rED OUT ZF-,=O'kE N� v)A(_l_ ISTI ►J V �1 I I {S �.D►�:s ; J:.: c c CAULK- . CON GRt--7&-4000f51 `' STEEL- �aO,OCY� P`�I " DI QE.L-1 O N PLACrED AT ""•;= ter L P- 0t�- E Cq., TH ICKNESS. BKEAK CUTE? r4lC E DF coR6 OF ANC ;:I" A MAIKI 1d14,L.L It, �A DO THIS AT LEA517 E�E'ZY _.. gouIZ-H cz tza VERT. 4 HDRIZ. 13,F&i .! AT TNE, 7bP CURSE. JP T,-iE '•bF �u25E IS ALREAD'-� R L.-LED) C.ac�RSE BEJ-0UJ THE I TOP GC'J1RSE. 6CItTiP1(� vRP.� EXISTI►QG 9:LcO2 Ex K.-I, >-ILV —1 1 E - ROCS cC IS 1 Nl (�W A L-L- r/ — EX (STD P-E=t. E ALL W I CS IN EXISTIN (v FILL LjJITH 1L GpMP.,,CTi� ULP3-c MAT SKI AL O s: LE i— �- DCIS ; I tJC� i11= - 20i grlEAG OUTEZ FADE OF AT LEAST ONE GORE OF =xls; i N(, 9�.p AT E.4G N TI F - Zo P --ANC CAST IN A 4.'K S",c4"-- 4F4 ::Ov, EL �(jlTri MAIN G• 1. R VJALL. CD SAME Gti sc;7H ENDS 0 r= (A JA.— . O�= EX I STI NGT <W06o-it-4. STEP FbCT7 NCB SLOPE -0 BASE OF i=XY W& RcMAINS NO1ZIZpN TAL DUN DATiQ N t2EPiAi Z i-- SIN Lv U�►2AL�E I��!`IE.D R`� LE.Nt�1IS M�� . PLAN Sy 09-vtr), JUNE 17, 1988 TO: ORONO CITY COUNC I t FROM: DENNIS A. MEYER I understand why the planning committee received the impression that my garage foundation proposal constituted a replacement. In my response to them I failed to convey my engineers primary reason for rejecting a proposal to replace some of the block foundation rather than skirting it with poured concrete. The concern was that In the process of doing the work that the garage would not be properly supported while part of the existing foundation was removed and additional supporting fill might spill out. Enclosed s a diagram that I drew for the council meeting in January. By examing this, you can see that the proposal that I have submitted would be using the existing foundation and fill under the floor for the majority of the support of the structure. Only a few blocks will be removed to permit replacing the f it i that has been lost under the floor area and where it has kicked out. The poured foundation is primarily designed to reinforce the existing foundation and stop any additional movement. Only about IOR of the work is needed to provide direct support to the structure. To move the structure back 20 feet would block the only access route for equipment that might be needed to do maintenance to my homestead property or to the Henry's property on the side toward my house. The garage foundation contains the end of the parking area providing a sloped area that equipment is able to use for access to Henry's property and my homestead property. To relocate the garage on this property without blocking this access it would have to be moved further down the hill. The additional hardcover with the extended driveway would result in about 25R total hardcove for the entire lot and over 25R for the 75 foot to 250 foot zone. To relocate the garage to my homestead lot would require a foundation higher than the eaves of my house, and would also require a hardcover variance for the 75 foot to 250 foot zone. The lot and garage wera acquired in 1970 with the purchase of my house as they were sold together and the garaqe was bulit for Mabel Bergqulst, the former owner of the house. She sold the 14 foot portion of the lot along with additional lots she owned to provide a good size building lot for the house that is new owned by Myron Pederson. The 36 foot portion of the lot was retair.ed for the purpose of maintaining z garage. It was such an integral part of the homestead property that when addresses were f Irst assigned to the area both lots were assigned the address of 4719, which is the address of the garage I had the address changed to 4731 after ; reacgAred the homestead property in 1972. I request that the council accept the staffs recomendatluns rather than that of the planning caomission. They had considerably more time to consider all of the ramifications of this project than the planning commission had during their meeting on June 6, 1988. Without the use of the garage on this property, I would need to evaluate whether the lot retains enough use to me to continue paying taxes on the lot or whether 1 woiid be better off to cut my losses and let It go for delinquent taxes and allow the demolition of the garage be charged against the property also. Thank you for considering this variance request with the unique problems and history that are associated with this lot. Sincerely, T0: ORONO CITY COUNCIL FROM. DENNIS MEYER FOUND AT iON GOOD 1 /4 OF LENGTH ON THiS SIDE 2 C SH LIN1 AR IN' KICKED OUT i /2 IN OUT 2 INCHES 1 /2 IN DOWN JAN. 1 1, 1988 FOUNDATION GOOD 3/4 OF LENGTH ON THIS SIDE 'ILL LOST M THIS SIDE IN F ILL ST ILL iN PL ACE UNDER 90-95% OF FLOOR ARE A THE REINFORCED CONCRETE FLOOR HAS NOT CRACKED OR SETTLED The above diagram is my assesment of the structure after a careful personal examination It is being used to house an automobile that I do not plan to use until Spring unless thl: automobile currently being used fails me The garage is therefore seldom being entered I do not believe that the structure constitutes an immediate hazard under its current usage and I will investigate repair alternati• es to rectify the possible future hazard that might develop if appropriate repairs are not made ,incerely, COMM, 10 JUN 27 13i:,3 To: Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members CITY OF ORONO City Administrator Bernhardson From: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator Date: May 31, 1988 Subject: #1283 Gary and Beth Escher, 3556 Livingston Avenue - After the Fact Variance - Public Hearing Zoning District - LR-lC Total Area - 13,200 s.f. or .3 Acres (.5 Acre Required) Pertinent Ordinances - Section 10.61, Subdivision 5 (A) Applicant seeks rear setback variance approval for newly constructed shed attached to existing detached garage, constructed without a building permit. Attached shed becomes part of garage and is not subject to Section 10.03, Subdivision 15 (E) that would allow a 5' setback from rear lot line for all other accessory structures. Rear Setback Variance Allowed = 10' Proposed -.5' or 110% Original Shed = -.5 + or - 110% Section 10.03, Subdivisio1, 15 (F) Side yard setbacks Required-10' Proposed - 10.5' - No variance side setback required. Original Shed - 21+ (8' or 80% side setback variance) (review Exhibit F). Review of Bardeover (500-1000' setback area) Total area - 13,200 Allowed Hardcover - 4,620 or 35% Existing - 4,122 or 31.2% (This includes original storage building 8' by 301, hardcover excluding original shed = 3,882 s.f. or 29.4%. Proposed - 4,122 s.f. or 31.2% (No change in hardcover) List of Rzhibits Exhibit A - Application Exhibit B - Property Owners List Exhibit C - Plat MaE Exhibit D - Addendum Exhibit E - Staff Sketch Exhibit F - Applicant's Sketch Exhibit G - Survey Exhibit H - Ebert Acknowledgement Form Review of Application - The new 8' by 30' shed was constructed by the applicant early this year without the benefit of a building Eermit review. Please review Exhibit D, the applicant's addendum that sites the background and the reasons why applicant did not feel a building Eermit was required in this case. 'rhe original shed that was attached to the rear of the Zoning File i1283 Page 2 of 2 garage probably encroached no clozer than the existing shed over the rear lot line. The original shed did extend to within 2 + - feet of the side lot line (Ebert property, review survey, Exhibit G). The new shed has been placed in line with the 30' rear of the existing garage, review Exhibits E and F, the staff and applicant's sketch that more clearly defines the location of the shed. The survey (Exhibit G) shows the shed as part of the existing garage structure. Staff received a call from an adjacent neighbor complaining that the structure was being constructed close to the lot line. The neighbor never did provide a name, just called attention to the fact that the shed was being constructed with obviously no building permit issued by the City. Staff has heard nothing from Mr. Edwards, the most affected property owner, since the notifications went out regarding the public hearing for this After the Fact variance. The building inspector has confirmed that the only structural modifications that must be made to the existing structure is that he would require additional bracing for the roof/ceiling. As applicant's addendum notes, the roof line has been extended over the existing shed with siding continued along the sides and rear. Escher had - lanned to also provide skirting for the bottom of the structure to complete the aesthetic upgrade of the structure. The applicant asks that you approve the After the Fact gpplication as proposed. Staff has attempted to explain the City's position when dealing with the replacement of existing structures. The zoning phase of the building permit review would consider this structure new and subject to all current setback standards and hardcover regulations for the zo.iing district. There is no hardcover problem as the above hardcover facts would reveal and the new shed location no longer results ir, a substandard side setback. The issue for this After the Fact review is that the Citv can not approve the encroachment over the lot line of a new structure. Staff cannot recommend approval of the proposal as presented by the applicant. Alternatives for Consideration by Planning aission 1. Recommend that the existing structure be altered so that there is a minimum of 3' mairtained by the she.,'garege from the rear lot line. Applicant will have to provide the appiopriete fire protection for the side of the structure that abuts the r,ar lot line because of the substandard setback. The City wculd be asked to approve a 7' or 70R rear setback variance. 2. To recommend against the approval of a rear setback variance because of the location of the principal structure on the property to the north and would recommend that storage shed addition to garage be constructed along the west side of the existing garage that must meet the 10' setback from the rear t,ropeity line. Applicant may olt to construct a detached shed that can be placed 5' from the rear lot line and 10 feet from the side lot line. Additional Cos ents and Planning Cos ission Recos endation Exhibit I - Staff Inspection Report Planning Commision advised the applicant that the structure would have to be altered because they could not approve the encroachment of the structure over the rear lot line. The Escher advised that the existing structure could be altered approximately 21. Escher advised the Planning commisisen that the structure could be altered at least 2' based on the location of the foundation pier. Planning Commission then approved a 1'6" setback from the rear lot line requiring the 816" variance setback for the total structure. Subject to the required installation a fire wall along the rear lot line for being constructed within the structure. Staff asked the Building Staff to go out and confirm the width of the maximum alteration allowed based on the location of the pier footing. Staff confirmed that it could only be altered 1'6". Approving a 116" alteration of the structure would require now a 9' variance or 90% rear setback variance. Staff has reviewed below the various alternatives of action available to the Council. 1. Approval of Planning Commission recommendation - subject to staff confirmation based on minimal alteration required to retain the pier foundation. Required = 10' Proposed - l' Variance = 9' or 90% 2, Alter structure to meet a minimum 3' setback requiring alteration of the existing Fier footing. Structure would now be 416" in width. Required - 10' Proposed - 3' Variance = 7' or 70%. Applicants may not find a shed with 4 1/2' width satisfactory for the proposed use. It should also be noted that the fir, wall would be required along the side of the structure that abuts tte rear lot line (fire wall required for structure legs than 5' from a lot line). 3. To recommend denial of a rear setback variance for an attached storage shed to the existing garage structure and to recommend that storage shed addition be attached to garage along the west side .neeting the required 10' setback from the roar lot line. Applicant may wish to construct a dettached shed that may be placed 5' from the rear lot line and 10' from the side lot line. The required rear setbacks are met there is no need to construct a fire wall a for 4 the rear of the new structure. Council Action To give staff conceptual direction so that the ap, ropriate resolution can be drafted for action at the July 11, 1988 Council meeting. K CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION > Initial Application Fee $150.00 ($50.00 per each additional ..ria Renewal Variance Fee $75.00 (no change from original application) After -the -Fact Fees (Double application fee) ----------------------------------------------------------- PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address / t"lly6 �'"orl ✓it - Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) 17-//7 -.,' 3 y3 00Y Please check one - Property 1/ abstract or torrens? Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. 8 Phone ( home) 1/ 7/ - � 7 APPLICAIIT Name /' '�F�N �SC/(�','' n Phone (work) q.5.2 " f y 77 _ S 5��,- !��%.-�_ rar_ w(---Cityc�, �4J.,C1i�i-----Z1�------- J---- -----Address OWNER (if different than applicant) Phone ( home) Name Phone ( work) F.1N,4*E 7FFICE Address: City: Zips ' "' Date Property Acquired �� �� !') T'i nvnv 1 ! ��1 ( month/Y"' AAWA I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. PRESENT USE OF PROPERTY c", ,� tNECK 'L 1`!%YO Present Zoning District K�tyC: Tc*Q_(�y&A, vt! r- 'f�'GReit i rivl Present Use of Property �F S ��Cl.rl i�C'!- f�0.0%E ✓ r Other (specify) -------------------------------------------------------- _ DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $1 5 , Describe request in detail:/lc'r4�4'i`,�/�'f/"7 s�F ��✓�.�/ ���C��'l���T ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- VARIANCES R®QOIRED Lot Area Lot Width ,iardcover Setback Variances ( Front Side ` /� Rear) Other RARDSBIP Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty a ulting from strict enforcement of zoning regulations: _ �+f ,��j��✓�E �;GL>�/✓ay, 70,6114 F!( 7✓ l��! ��Ji��,F'1 Y GCS �/' CN.cS%� //.' 1Q�1, --------------------------------------------------------------------------- DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAI. PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe unusual propKai& y conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code Requirements : 6. ,o ----- -------------------------------------------------------------------- REQUIRED SUBMITTALS 1. Completes] Application Form 2. Certified Property Owners List of owners within 150' (you must obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Govt Center 348-3271). 3. Stamped, legal sized envelopes ({10) pre -addressed to each of the names on the above list with no return address (use address labels obtained with property owners list). 4. Certificate of survey including hard -over calculations as required. 5. Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing grade are proposed. 6. Plac Map (obtained with pr-.)perty owners list). 7. As an addendum to this application, please attac:i a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. 8. Additional items as may be requested by City staff. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Applicant and Property Owner mist sign this application. Please ramember that your variance application is not complete if the above information has not been included. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Certification by Zoning Department that Variance Application is complete. Zo-.:-ng Official's Signature Date APPLICANT'S SIGNATUILIt The applicant hereby agrees to provia- all informA*'on required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay ill fees and/or unusua' 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 .1 �/�.� Date OWNERS SIGNATURE The owner hereby ackowledges a.id agrees to this application anal further authorizes r^asonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents, Commission mem And Council memb*:rs for purposes of investiga- tion and verification is request. Owner's Signature .< <-_C ,,. DateI Applicant must have �11 submittals into the City offices 25 dayn-before ttie Planning Co i.on Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monda; each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meeti.n" f the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled me^ting, please make arrangements to have an authorised attend in you place and to advise the Pui l('.ing s Office of this change prior to the meeting 11 RUN DATE 04/t0/M r EATC14 "I 34 17-117-21 43 0026 mor AMR 03525 CRYSTAL P�. OWNER NAVE STATE Aw DEf T TAXPAYER GEORGE J A NOLA A EDWARDS NAME/ADD(f 3533 CRYSTAL PzAr WAY' A MINN 553+1 38 :7-117-23 43 0036 PROP Anon 03572 LIVINGSTON AVE OWNER NAME M W A K L CUFF TAXPAYER NARK W A KAREN L CUFF NAME/ADCR 3572 LIVINGSTON AVE WAYZATA MN 55391 36 17-117-23 43 00i•1 PPC" A304 43520 LIVINGSTJH AVE OF, EJ NAME GEW:: iEVE H EBERT TAXPAYER E 'BERT -IAMt: ADC, .3[0 LIVIN6STON AV , * ; •'A.TA MN 5S391 36 17-117-?3 43 0044 ✓POP AODR 034,2S ;i1INGSTON AVE ?WNEP NAME M 6 BOHLEN A P A BOHLEN •AXP,vE: HIC14ALL 6 A PAULETTE BOHLEN "w 40OY! 3525 LIVINGSTGi AVE WAYZATA MN SS391 38 17-117-23 43 0047 SOP AUOR 031S� LIVINGSTON AVE 'A01ER NAME DAVID W REINHOLD A) -PAYER DAVID W REINHOLD NAM A'DR 3351 LIVII'GSTON AVE WAYZATA MN 5539' 38 ,7-117-23 4 0145 PROP ALs4 03"S CRY! TA1 °L OWNWP NAME R M A C J KOST TAXPAYEi ROBERT M K04T r NAft/ADDR 358S CRYSTAL PL WAYZATA MN 55391 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNERS .IST 38 17-117-23 43 00Z7 03S33 CRYSTAL PL G J EDWARDS A N A EDWARDS GEORGE J EDWARDS 3533 CRYSTAL PLACE WAYZATA MN 55391 38 17-117-23 43 0037 STATE LAND DEPT MAR* W A KAREN L CUFF 3572 LIVINGS:3N AVE WAY."ATA MN 55391 15 17-:.7-23 43 0042 3508 IVINGSTOf: AVE HARK A SPALDING ETAL MARK A SPALDING 3508 LIVINGSTON AVE WAYZATA MN 55391 38 17-117-23 43 " 45 03533 LIVINGSTON AVE PETER F St"SE4 JR ETAL MF PETER F NIESEN 3533 LIVINGSTOV AVE WAYZATA MN 55391 38 1?-1. -2; 43 0048 03559 LIVI1tGSTON AVE D LEFEBVRE A L S CARNES DOMINIC LEFEBVRE 3559 WINGSTON AVE WAYZATA MN 55391 i8 17-117-23 43 0148 O1554 LIVINGSTON AVE R A M PETERS PODERT LESLIE PETERS 3554 LIVING,STON AVE NA VARRE MN 55391 REPORT NO. P143S401 PAGE i 38 17-A17-23 43 0026 0355S CRYSTAL PL DEAN YOUNG DEAN Y,^LW. 3555 CRYSTAL PLACE WAYZATA MN 5391 38 17-117-23 43 0040 03556 LIVINGSTON AVE G A B ESCHER GARY A BETH E'1CHER 3556 LIVINGSTON AVE WAYZATA MN 1.i5391 38 17-117-23 43 0043 03505 LIVINGSTON AVE WILLIAM F DOLDER SR A WIFE WILLIAM F OOLDER SF 3513 LYRIC AVE WAYZATA MN 55391 38 17-117-23 43 OU46 03541 LIVINGSTON AV! R A J PICHA ROBERT 1: A JEANNINE H PICHA 5930 SEAMANS DR EXCELSIOR MN 55331 38 17-117-23 43 0140 C3505 CRYSTAL PL JOHN C ROSHOLT )OHN C ROSHOLT 16CO FIRST BANK ^LACE WEST MPLS MN 55402 TOTAL BATCH 001 00017 rw W..�...... • J+Yiri..� rr.�. �►.�.r►.Jr:r ,, . . it ..... .: ♦ NtA1 CxTE p4/29/da i VVOPERT- INFORMATION SYSTEM REPORT NO. PI43S401 PUPiRTY 0WERS LIST PAGE 2 BATCH C0* t 4- r r , r I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPkES£NTED AVE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE CN ThE RECORDS OF THE HENNEPIN CWNTY OEPARTMEaT OF PROPER Y iAXATITQ THE BEST OF NY KNOMLEDGE AM P''IEF By 14 13 12 10 PO NORTffRN ; , -Ac 6c, f 10 9 7 17- 12 13 14 15 ig 4 f 17 Ie to 20, 11 10 pal cr to 14 Is 16 17 1e 19 20 21 22 t 23 24 13 le17 &A, 83 24 25 26 27 ie LYRIC AVE 5 4 44 13 12 11 10 9 5 • 4 7F .; 14 19 zo at 22 231 Z4, -Sie V is it, to 21 Alt 0% to 114) LZ HCSAH NO iS PLAT e, 4k. 17-23 3) 4 IV 1. April 15, 1988 Gary L. Escher 3556 Livingston Ave. Wayzata, MN 55391 Phone: h 471-9871 Phone: w 932-8479 Orono City Council Orono Building Administration City of Orono a P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 .•n Council Members and Building Administrators, I am enclosing this letter with the attached sketch as an addendum, to better explain and describe my variance request. I also have a couple of questions regarding the need for, and the cost of, the variance. The application involves the refurbishment of an existing structure (addition) attached to my garage. This addition was present previous to my purchase of the property in 1981 and was obviously originally constructed many years prior to that. The structure as seen is no larger in area or closer to lot boundries than before I started. I didn't realize a variance or building permit were required under these circumstances. It still seems that a variance is not appli^rhle in this instance, however I am applying for one as instructed. What I Did; I wanted to make this addition sound again (parts of t!,r floor and roof were rotton) and did so with new materials. I removed a part of the structure that did not line up witn my garage. I elevated it one (1) foot to raise it above the ground and enable me to square it off with my garage. Rain gutter was added that was not previously Installed on the back side. The addition was sided and painted. I plan to "skirt" the bottom with your approval and will do so after inspection. If you require further information I can be reached at 932-8479 from 8-5 during normal business days or contact Lyle Oman who has been to the site. I want to assure the Council I will be contacting the Orono Building and Zoning Department prior to t';e start of any future refurbishment or building projects. Thank You, _�. Esr_hor CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY FOR: '7M rii t ----- — ------ -- f!f s'. I - /00. 00 - i s<a'�e L419 ' 1 } L � ill -1 1 1Ll LIA 4r I 1-Sto•Y bry II 1-SStory � r Fra,v,e F•e+l� �t ti w jStSir 4•' I r tI I � I •11� •+ Fran1C i sSS2p 1 tv Cl A 9 ,� • ,I � ( A L iv/,v as 70 "v A . -- --— - Aof itr [e,o -i LE AL DESCRIPTICNt Lots 20 & 21 Bl_-ck 3 riAVARRF HEIGHTS o Denotes Von mor., ment Prr,powd lowest flol r elev O Denotes Offset stoke Proposed top of founrlallorl r(Pv x 000,o Denotes existing elev. BENCH MARK ( oo.,o ) Denotes Proposed elev ---+ Denotes s,,rface drainage Proposer] garage floor elev I herebv certlfv that this Is a Ir.i♦ and correct representation of a survev or F.Ir No the boundaries of the above Aoki -tied land and of the location of all tsurlAingti DEMARS - GABRIEL tf snv thereon and all vlsrble encroachments. If anv from or on lard land 58�b LAND SURVEYORS, INC ':- * „ F i 1 t g As s.,rveve t1r rip yhl_---. day 3030 •varbor I. tine No 173- 7L a%oM (4121 / Mrnn -),M No __._Atr F 6 _... / ro- R8%o.mCb G.1 v a CERTIFICATE, OF SURVEY FOR. ���rt. Esther D ss Z f r Nall!, teL Will /1n a.e� �W. 00 Y*.o y "izN i. 4L-•4L - r o� r l-sr.: •y I SLo.rY - N Frarrr 1-skery 1 ` '� Fra-.e F,�dov I M 35f3b t Q. + 1` I i � r• All! EUyC— L /VING STUN AVFNl/E 1-F AL DE SC RIPTIrN: Lots 20 C ?1 Block 3 NAVARRE HEIGHTS o Denotes iron mor,iment Proposed lowest floor elev = 0 Denotes offest stake Proposed top of foundation elev. x 000.o Denotes existing Slty ( oz o ) Denotes Proposal Slav BENCH MARK - Denotes surface drainage Proposed garage floor Ste,; I hereby certoly that !h s is a tr,,e and correct representation of a survey of file No the boun.Jan�s. es of the abo%e described land and of the location of all brridrn DE:MARS - GABRIEL any thereon and au visible enCroachment$, of any, frorts or On sod band LANI) SURVEYORS, INC. ? e t April 19 Ej P Brook - Oaq As 1..r�•ve�. r� •ne this _- day �3o Arbor Lane No A 1 73- 7G photo ie+7) 559-OY00 - -- - ._-- _.-- - --- — Sreh. Adjacent Property Owners' Acknowledgement Form I (we) Ce4,!A/1,ffV �,���� of[print name(s)l 1print addressi have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the property located at �,,� �(/i,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 that I (we) am (are) aware of the improvement plans and that the proposed neighbor's project or use requires Council approval. roperty Owner Date Property Owner Date If you have any information that may assist the City in the review of this Land Use Application, please submit your comments to the Building 6 Zoning Office at least 10 days prior to the scheduled meeting date. On I t: TIME F� W Q Q z I-. J W z z 0 W a O cc 0 W Cr Q W W J d W cc W Q O v CITY OF ORONO CALLED IN INSPECTION NOTICE SCHEDULED (D �7 ' _DPEA%_� PERMIT NO. COMPLETED (,p_-7 -.d;i ?_ _ __ ADDRESS -s=-i�1;-, L., If v , # -o •..j OWNER L"004/2 Y 6g� TELEPHONE NO. O FOOTING J FRAMING p INSULATION O WALL 6D O FINAL • PROGRESS • DEMOL O FIRE PREV COMMENTS: * PLUMBING RI * PLUMBING FINAL .1 MECHANICAL !13 WATER HOOKUP " METER SET/TURN ON I7 SEWER HOOKUP SEPTIC INSTALL SEPTIC MAINT WELL TEST PUMP CONTR. a'C' SITE INSPECTION ) F XCAV /GRADING/FILLING LAKE SHORE/WETLANDS D LICENSING COMPLAINT j FOLLOW UP U SEPTIC FINAL FIREPLACE/WOOD BURNER 'J WORK SATISFACTORY PROCEED PHOTO TAKEN C':1114AECT WORK i PROCEED CONALCT WORK CALL FOR REINSPECTION BEFORE COVERING CORRECT UNSAFE CONDITION WITHIN HOURS INSPECTOR WILL RETURN STOP ORDER POSTED CALL INSPECTOR INSPECTION REQUIRED CALL TO ARRANGE ACCESS call for the next inspection 24 hours In advance. Owner/Contr. site Inspector - 473-1i7 whiff /In"clo, I I �'@ Canary /Site Notice UN 27 10 ro: Planning Commission Chairman Kelley ,u",";* Orono Planning Commission Members OF OR').i4b City Administrator Bernhardson Press Jeanne A. mmb+isth, Building & Zoning Administrator Date: May ^7, 1998 SubiGct: 1:s84 Douglas Kirchner, 1520 Bohns Point Road - After the Pact Varl.ences - Public Hearing foaisy District - LR-1B A:ee - 35,900 or .62 acre tertisent ordinaaces Section 10.07, Subdivision 6 - Building Permit Required to Erect or Structurally Alter a Structure. Section 10.22, Subdivision 1 (B) - All Structures Must Meet Average Lakeshore Setback within Lakeshore Residential Zoning Districts. Existing principal onructure extends Ill in front of average lakeshore setback. Deck extends 26' in front of average lakeshore setback. Refer to Exhibit K Section 10.22, Subdivisior 2, Hardcover Variance within the 75-250' setback area. Total area (within 75-250') - 17,500 s.f. Allowed Hardcover - 4,375 s.f. or 25% Existing Hardcover Prior to Alteration - 4,529 s.f.* or 25.9• Total Hardcover After Alteration - 3,126 s.f. or 29.3% Variance for New Construction - 597 s.f. or 3.4% Increase in Hardcover *Staf. nas not been advised of hardcover/improvements existing beneath deck arsa. Existing hardcover may have been greater. List of l:hibits Exhibit A - Application Exhibit B - Property Owners List Exhibit C - Plat Map Exhibit D - Zoning Administrators Letter 6/4/87 Exhibit E - Inspection Notice 5/2/8B Exhibit F - Inspectors Letter 5/2/88 Exhibit G - Citations Exhibit H - Applicants Letter 5/5/88 Exhibit I - Lee Letter 5/9/88 Exhibit J - Kalweit Letter 5/9/88 Exhibit K - Staff Stetch Exhibit L - Certificate of Survey Review of Application - In June of last year, staff advised the Kirchners in writing, Exhibit D, that an average lakeshore setback variance would be required to install a deck they �rolosed along the lakeshore side of their Zoning File 11284 Page 2 residence at 1520 Bohns Point Road. In that letter, staff advised of the need for a survey to complete the review/application process. Staff was not aware that a hardcover excess existed within the 75-250' setback area until receipt of the survey confirming the hardcover facts for the property. In May of this year, the inspector discovered the deck noting that a building permit had not been issued and upon review of the file found that applicants had been advised of a need for a variance the previous summer. The inspector issued citations because construction was '.t completed without the required zoning approval and building permit (Exhibits F i G). On May 10, 1988 Mr. Kirchner filed an After the Fact variance application to maintain the existing deck. The Planning Commission should ask the applicant why he didn't file the required variance application last summer? what happened? Each of the effected property owners have submitted letters confirming no problem with the existing deck. The property owner to the north, the Lees at 1500 Bohns Point Road advised that the grade level deck on the Kirscher property created no visual impact for their property because of the higher elevation of their property. The existing vegetation along the shared lot line also tends to screen the deck from the adjacent property. The neighbor to the south, the Kalweits at 1540 Bohns Point Road also claim no view impact by the presence of the structure. In reviewing the Certificate of Survey, note the viewing windows tend to face away from the Kirchner property. The writer of this memo has never met Mr. Kirchner, but did indeed meet with Mrs. Kirchner last summer after the letter of 6/4/87 was sent to the applicants. At that point it was staffs understanding that the Kirchners did indeed plan to proceed with the variance alp 1 ication. In fact, the date of the survey would tend to suggest that they had planned to file the application. Staff has no knowledge as to why applicants did not proceed last year with the necessary variance review. A11 three homes are setback ,approximately 150' from the shoreline with long grassed yards. Review rxhibit K, the drainage break falls at the mid po.nt of the existing house, the majority of tha hardcover is located to the west half with drainage running towards Bohns Point Road. ations of Action Available to the Planning Commission T � Deny the After e Fact variance application for Douglas Kirchner, finding no valid hardships or findings that would persuade this commission to approve the After the Fact application and to require the immediate removal of the illegal structure. 2. To apt rove the After the Fac' variance application for Douglas Kirchner, Lased on the following findings: a. The higher elevations of the property on the north side tend to lessen the impact of the grade level deck on the subject property. b. The l:lantings along the shared lot line on the north side tend to lessen the impact of the structure by providing natural screening. r. The viewing windows for the residents to the south of the subject property are angled away from the structure faciry to the Zoning File i1284 Page 3 south and as a result the deck structure provides no visual imr•tct for the residents. d. Both affected property owners have submitted letters approving the subject structure. e. The west half of the property that contains the majority of the hardcover drains away from the lake toward Bohns Point Road. Approval is subject to the following conditions: 1. Applicant must remove 751 s.f. of existing hardcover within the 75-250' setback area. Hardcover must be maintained at 25% within the 75' to 250' setback area. Applicant must designate the areas to be removed, prior to the staffs scheduling the application for the Counci l's final action. 2. Per the City's fee schedule, applicant must make an additional payment of $150.00 for the After the Fact variance application. In addition applicant must pay a penalty ft with the building permit that has yet to be issued for the new structure. 3. The structure will be inspected by the building inspector to determine if said structure conforms to all required standards of the building code. If said structure is found to not conform with the building code, than required alterations must be made within an appropriate deadline of the approval of the Council. Additional Cosssents and Staff Recosssendation Add Exhibit M - Revised Survey The Planning Commission members listened to the applicant's response regarding the ^ircumstances surrounding the After -the -Fact application. The chairman advised the applicant how difficult applications such as this are for members to deal objectively with, especially since there appeared to be no serious or intense degree of variance sought regarding the existing deck structure. Planning Commission concurred with staff's recommendation that there was definately a need to reduce hardcover if the structure is to remain. Members questioned the applicant on the specific structures that existed within the the 0-75' setback area and asked if they could be removed. Applicant advised that the shed was really a pump house, but that the barbaque area was probably not that important and could be considered for removal or at least portions could be considered for removal. Rather than seeking just a total reduction within the 75-250' setback area, the Planning Commission conditioned approval on a reduction of a total of 3.4% of hardcover within the 0-250' setback area. Review the amended survey (Exhibit I) that designates the areas of existing hardcover recommended for removal. The 6' by 8' shed has been replaced with a low 3' by 4' structure that houses the puwr . Portions of the barbaque area have been also removed except for the stove part. All of these were located within the 75-250' setback area. The majority of removals within the 75-250' setback area are the existing walkways around the house and portions of the bituminous surfacing adjacent to the home. Please note, the app l i cant was not required to remove anything within the 250-500' setback area, but he.s removed soi 380 s.f. of Existing hardcover within the area. The following adjusted hardcover facts ire presented below as follows: Zoning File 17.284 Page 4 0-75' seO%ack area 7,500 s.f. Existing - 466 s.f. or 6.2• Hardcover to be removed - 199 s.f. or 2.65% Proposed - 267 s.f. or 3.56• 75-250' setback area 17,S00 s.f. Prior to construction - 4,529 s.f. or 25.9• Hardcover with new deck structure - S,126 s.f. or 79.3• Hardcover to be removed ` 489 s.f. or 2.79• Proposed - 4,637 s.f. or 26.41 Total reduction of hardcover within the 0-75' setback areas Planning Comsaission requested a total 3.4%. Applicant has provided within the 0-75' area, reduction of 2.65%, 75-250' area, reduction of 2.79% for a total reduction of 5.4 %. Area within the 250-500' setback areas Existing - 4,200 s.f. or 38.5• Proposed - 3,820 s.f. or 35% Total reduction of 3.5• The Planning Commission also asked that the applicants make payment to the City for the penalty portion of the land use app-ication prior presenting the application before the City Council. The applicants have paid the necessary penalty fees for the land use review. Planning Commission advised that the penalty fee for a building permit would be decided upon the final action of the Council. The Planning Comission adopted the approving alto. .native recommendation of the staff referred to as •Alternative 2" and added two conditions of approval. Number 1 is noted above, total reduction of 3.4% of hardcover within the 0-250' setback area and that the City would not approve additions to the deck that would result in an increase in hardcover. The enclosed resolution has been drafted per the finding and conditions of the Planning Commission recommendation. A RESOLUTION GRANTING APM-THE-FACT VARIANCU TO NUMICIPAL =OWING CODE SECTION 10.22, SUDDIVISION 1 (H) AND SWT10N 10.22, AOSDIVISION 2 FILE #12t4 WHEREAS, Douglas Kirchner (hereinafter "the applicant") is the owner of the property located at 1520 Bohns Po+nt Road within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as follows: That part of government Lot 1, section 9-117-23 described as follows: commencing at a point on the west line of said section 9 400 feet north from the southwest corner of said section; thence north along said west line of said section 100 feet; thence east parallel to the south line of said section to the shore of Lake Minnetonka; thence southerly along said shoreline 105.62 feet; thence west on a line parallel with the south line of said section 9 to the point of beginning. (Hereinafter "the property"); and WESRRAS, the applicant has applied to the City for After -the -Fact variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivision 1 (B) and Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 that would allow a lakeside deck constructed without the required building permit to remain that would extend 26, in front of an average lakeshore setback line and would require approval of a hardcover variance within the 75-250' setback area of 597 s.f. or 3.4%. NOW, THEREFORS, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #1284. 2. The property is located in the LR-lB, Lakeshore Residential Zoning District requiring a minimum of 1 acre in area. The property consists of 35,900 s.f. or .82 acres in area. 3. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on June 6, 1968 and recommended approval of the After -the -Fact variances as amended based upon the following findings: A) The higher elevations of the property on the north side tend to lessen the impact of the grade level deck on the property to the north. page 1 -f 4 hp- ,- B) The plantings along the shared lot line on the n3rth side tend to lessen the impact of the structure by providing natural screening. C) The viewing window- for the residence to the south of the property are angled aw ,y from the structure facing to the south and as a result, _ne deck structure provides no visual impact for the residence. D) Both effected property owners have submitted letters approving the subject structure. The west half of the property that contains the majority of hardcover drains away from the lake and towards Bohns Point Road. 4. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicant and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. 5. The City Council finds that the conditions existing this property are peculiar to it and do not apply qenerally to *her property in this zoning districts that granting the variance woul•, not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve ,b a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate a demor,- strable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicant; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive. Plan of the City. CONCLU b I ODS , ORD= AXD C081L' I?I ONS Based upon one or more Lf the findings noted above, the Orono City Council hereby grants After -tile -Fact variances to Municipal Zoning Cod* Section 10.22, Subdivision 1 (B) and Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 to allow the existing lakeshore deck ti remain as constructea without any alterations, subject to the following conditions: 1. Applicant must remo--e specific areas of existing hardcover as set forth in the survey by Mark S. Gronbeiq dated 6/22/87, revised date 6/15/88 setting forth the following removals: A. 0-75' setback area 199 s.f. or 2.65% to be resulting in a total hardcover of 267 s.f. or. 3.56%. B. 75-250' setback area 489 s.f. or 2.79% to be resulting in a total hardcover of 4,637 s.f. or 26.1%. Page 2 of 4 removed, C. 250-500' setback area total removal of 380 s.f. or 3.51 resulting in a total hardcover of 3,820 s.f. or 351. The removal of the hardcover to be completed by July 30, 1988. 2. Applicant is placed on notice that the City will not approve of any further additions to this deck structure that would result in additional hardcover. 3. Applicant must apply for the required building permit for the existing deck and alteration of pump -house shed in lakeshore yard. A penalty fee will be included in the cost of the b,-ilding permit. 4. The existing structure must be inspected by the Orono inspections department to determine if said structure conforms to all required standards of the Uniform Building Code. S. Authorities granted with this variance run with the property not with the applicants, but are permissive only and gust 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 (June 27, 1969). 6. 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. 7. The undersigned applicant have read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms of this reaolution 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 Orono City Council on this 27th day of June, 1988. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk James R. Gra k, Mayor Property Owner(s) Page 3 of 4 CEPtiF ICATE OF SURVEY FOR DOUGLAS E. KIRCHNER INGOVERNMENT LOT 1• SECTION 9-117-23 - +� HENNEPIN COUNTY. MINNESOTA - i a•f o ih I; i Y r �,-� ..'i„ � :'ram+.r• �..... r w •,. �1 plow rp .. I,y W.I 01 1 s•• l l 7 —7 a I herlDy ce•tify that llrls a true an.; o:­ �cL—pretwnl Jtl On _ of a survey or the Doundarles o1 that p,1t �1 ''+crrrnre M Lot I• Secti••i 9-117.27 de'cnDed a•. f;llOws: �n count at a pn1.11tO the wait line of said %Beth+. 9. 400 Feet north f.oe Lite south - SGaIla 1' • 70' wait corner of sold IFeCtlan: tnenc, oo-th ,long %JId weal line of Date 6-i2-d►, n.. J•.PI)+M __, RnN sud Srctlon 101; fret: tn" .• t pa•a:lel t• thr• scut.. ''no + Iron Barter ��`� said Sattion to the •hpr. cf La"e Ml nnetonr"; tn�e,e Scu U.erly o .. along sold shoreline IU5.c2 reel: thence west on a Ilnu parallel with the south line of said S-CIIoe 9 to th+ paint of Deylnhlfpl. and the location of all @.,..tiny D.Kildings thereon. )'lard cover) ppplf and the proposed location ! .• propels— ^e•-t. It does Oct pur60rt to show other leprcleM--.'. ant. o�•Luent .. • COFFIN { GRONNLNG. INC. . ,,, n,.rys • r•N„ r• MARK S. GRONBE RC LIE. N0. 1. /S5 .. +p„ 1•+.+y ,• n r ENGINEERS. LAND SURWORS 6 PLANNERS LONG LAKE. MINNESOTA Now I +A*.4-0 . .. ♦'t1. .. 1.' 3 f. .. iaELI CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee $150.00 .) -* : ($50.00 per each additional va ce) Renewal Variance Fec $75.00 (no change from original appli ionl'°d After -the -Fact Fees (Double application fee) ------------------------------------------------------------ PROPERTY LOCATION a Site Address 1 j e2b Q �+Ns Qw ) Property Identif ication Number (P. I. D. - f f -23 33 0004 Please check one - Property abstract or torrens? "I 1 Y OF t �r�' W Attach -gal description to application if not included on F:" AlfE STFICY required survey. - :,s^^00 ------------------------------- � � �' %5� --- • V APPLICA/TPhone (home) «� 1J4.:)o Name D ut aok s IAO)ed I4Nt7-Z- Phone (work) nt•�i.'v LiY I'1 TVL �JL� Address: 15,11) �l S if • /�� City: Zip: z VL'• AJ"9-1 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — OifiNBR (if different than applicant) Phone (home) FI,,iAM.E C,, FIDE 1,. Name Phone (work) ,. � _ 1ro.00 RECTIPr-7HgA Jt' YOU Address: City: Date Property Acquired (month/year) V. I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- PRESENT USE OF PROPERTY Present Zoning District Present Use of Property Residential Other (specify) --------------------------------------------------------------------------- DESCRIPTION OF RRQOEST Estimated Construction Cost S��-- Describe request in detail: dyt --------------------------------------------------------------------------- VARIANCES RRQOIRED Lot Area Lot Width Hardcover Setback Variances ( ✓ Front Side Other Rear) HARDSHIP Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty resulting from strict enforgement of zoning regulations: --------------------------------------------------------------------------- DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe unusual pro ert1nditions preventing compliance wixh Zing l�iCode Requirements:d �-------------------------------------------------------- REQUIRED SUBMITTALS 1. Completed Application !•.)rm 2. Certified Property Owners List of owners within 150' (you must obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Govt Center 348-3271). 3. St� a p &, legal sized envelopes (#10) pre -addressed to each of the names on the above list with no return address (use address labels obtained with property owners list). 4. Certificate of survey including hardcover calculations as required. 5. Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing grade are proposed. 6. Plat map (obtained with property owners list). 7. As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. 8. Additional items as may be requested by City staff. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your variance application is not complete if the above information has not been included. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Certification by Zoning Department that Variance Application is complete. Zoning Official's Signature Date APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay all fees and/or unusual expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. Applicant's Signature /J N­Ljj,�z9 �.- Date OWNERS SIGNATURE The owner hereby ackowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents, Commission members, and Council members for purposes of investiga- tion and verification of this request. Owner's Signature f ' {d 4 u-r�. Date s - f i' b 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 6 Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting �t RUN DATE 05/09/68 BATCH 002 21 08-117-23 44 0010 PROP ADDR 03:25 BOHNS POINT LA OWNER NAME :' A V SWEATT TAXPAYER HENRY L SWEATT NAME/ADDR 3225 BOHNS POINT RD WAYZATA HN SS391 �► 38 09-117-23 33 0005 PROP ADDR 01500 BOHNS POINT RD DISNER NAME R K LEE A S N LEE TAXPAYER R K i S N LEE NAME/ADDR 1500 BOHNS POINT RD WAYZATA MN 55391 ci PROP ADDR OWNER NAME r TAXPAYER TDTAL BATCH NAME/ADDR r 002 00006 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY GOERS LIST 38 08-117-23 44 4014 01535 SOHNS POINT RD WILLIAM J i MARY A ULRICH WILLIAM J i MARY A ULRICH 1535 BOHNS POINT RD WAYZATA MN SS391 38 09-117-23 33 0006 01520 BOHNS POINT RD DOUGLAS E KIRCHNER ETAL DOUGLAS E KIRCHNER 1520 BOHNS POINT RD WAYZATA MI 55391 REPORT MD. m +1r PASS • , f 36 09-117-23 33 0004 01440 BOHNS POINT RD C BRUCE SOLOMONSON ETAL C BRUCE SOLOMONSON 148r "ONNS POINT RD WAYZATA MH SS391 38 09-117-23 33 0007 01540 BOHNS POINT RD 6 W KALWEIT ETAL GEORGE W KALWEIT 1540 BOHNS POINT WAYZATA MN 55391 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. A i 0A7 I0 BY Z* f om CIT V of ORONO Post Office Boa 66•Crystai Bay, Minnesota 5 32a*Munwipal Officna On the North Shore of Lake Minnetonka June 4, 1987 Mr. Douglas Kirchner 1520 Bohn's Point Road Wayzata, AN 55391 Re: Building Permit Application Dear Mr. Kirchner: An inspection of your property has confirmed that an average lakeshore setback variance will be required for your proposed deck addition. The average lakeshore setback from your property is determined by the location of the principal structures on the adjacent lots. All three structures appear to be well out of the 75 feet lakeshore setback area. A variance application has been enclosed for your convenience. Please review the application and get back to either Jeanne Mabusth or Mike Gaffron at 473-7357 regarding the filing procedures. The deadline date for the July 20, 1987 meeting is June 26, 1987. Please note a survey will be required for the variance application, and, as the building permit application advised, would also have been required to process a building permit. Staff has reviewed the address file for 152U Bohn's Point Road in the hope of finding a previous survey of your property but we were unable to find one. Sincerely, Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building 6 Zoning Administrator JAM/tln Enclosures BUILDING R ZONING - 473-7357 • ADMINISTRATION & FINANCE - 473.7358 a PUBLIC WORKS - 473.7359 ASSESSING CITY OF ORONO CALLED IN I �... INSPECTION NOTICE SCHEDULED I! PERMIT NO. - COMPLETED ADDRESS /.520 60"k-'s 10PLUZ 12 OWNER CONTR. TELEPHONE NO. O FOOTING O PLUMBING RI -SITE INSPECTION O FRAMING -- PLUMBING FINAL O EXCAVJGRADINGIFILLING D INSULATION D MECHANICAL O LAKESHOIEJWETLANDS O LICENSING Cl WALL BO O FINAL O WATER HOOKUP O METER SET/TURN ON O COMPLAINT O PROGRESS O SEWER HOOKUP D FOLLOWUP O DEMOL O SEPTIC INSTALL. O SEPTIC FINAL O FIRE PREY 7 SEPTIC MAINT O FIREPLACE/WOOD BURNER Q :1 WELL TEST PUMP O Z "' COMMENTS: LW& �'� l C.-... C.G •" .T.'t4�rJr1�1� Q Z O h ac W a cc O O a O W cc 2 W W G O W W yR D �00AHOTOTAKEN PROCEED C1 OWWCT WORK CALL FOR REINSPECTION BEFORE COVERING �ORR£CT UNSAFE CONDITION WITHIN HOURS INSPECTOR WILL RETURN. TOP ORDER POSTED CALL INSPECTOR O INSPECTION REQUIRED CALL TO ARRANGE ACCESS call for the next inspection 24 hours in advance. Owner/Contr. on sit* 1 Inspector 473-725-7 MAIM ll.vWw or's File cmury /Situ Notice H t. F C I TY of ORONO Post Office Box 66 • Crystal Bay, Minnesota 5=i a Municipal OPRcee On the North Shore of Lake Minnetonka May 2, 1988 Mr. Douglas Kirchner 1520 Bohns Point Road Wayzata, MN 55391 Re: Deck Construction Without Permit Dear Mr. Kirchner: On June 4, 1987, this office notified you that an average lakeshore setback variance was required •:or a deck you proposed to build. Since sending you this notice and a variance application, we have had no response f-rom you and assumed you decided not to proceed with the project. On 4/27/88 while in the area, staff noted that a deck had been constructed on your property. Building without a permit in in violation of Uniform Building Code Section 301(A), and encroachment of the average lakeshore setback is in violation of Orono Municipal Code Section 10.22, Subdivision l(B). This letter is to notify you that since you were told you needed a variance, and a building permit, but chose not to do so and because our records show work has been done in the past on your property without a permit, the city is cititing you for the above violations. The City requires that you remove the illegal deck to correct the above violations within 7 days or citations will be issued for each day you are in violation. If you have eny questions, or we can assist you on this matter in any way, fael free to contact the Building & Zoning Department. Sincerely, Thomas J. Jacobs, Building & Fire Inspector cc: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator Michael P. Gaffron, Assistant Zoning Administrator Lyle Oman, Field Inspector Enclosure: U.P.C. Subdivision 1B BUILDING! ZONING - 47 3.7 35 7 • Ayrih 301(A) Orono Municipal Code Section 10.22, ADMINISTRATION A FINANCE. - 473-7358 • PO`BLIC WORKS - 473.7359 on I I I I I f1yy Ll YOU A.( CHARH(0 WN►M THO - = ma - — - s z — o — vm _ MT __ Q ! s (❑j m - — - - zz .- -- - ZT 5/5f68 Mr. Thomas Jacobs Building and Zoinq Department City of Orono P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 59723 Re: Deck on 1520 Eohns Point Pd. Dear Mr. Jacobs This letter is to inform you that we are applying for a--mriance as you have suggested. Incidently, in your letter of May 2nd, you indicated that other work had been done on our property without a permit. You must be referrinq to the reroofing The roofing company apologized to me for their error which occured because of some miscommunication among themselves. Thank you for your help, Doug Kir ner 1520 Bohns Point Pd. Wayzata, MN 5539 1 IIMAY — 6 �U r a 1 t r y�i�C2-•Y�.lt� � U G�-�1� �.Q�1 yc� � LZt�J..y . /sz Li, , d C�I. Kalweit Sales Company, Inc. DIRECT FACTORY SALES- SERVICE 1540 Bohns Pt. Rd.. • Wayzata, Minnesota 55391 • 612/471-7791 �i �� o �1T2ctKCj S --��u 1R�MAJ- ,11 94e'eq;� C� • c.,trt�, { �.� . / ;� •. ` � � � mat'/d-�,,..i.. �/ �� E sr,� a r►T;TT1Z7 i. ���� � /rA f•rw bI� hjZ '}.'" �?J/'ter h1• 3/771 i Y 4. H " � z Lify that this is a true and correct rPpresentatron )f,the boundaries of that part of Government Lot I, 1-23 described as follows: Commencing at a point on ?iof said Section 9. 400 feet north from the south- )f said Section; thence north along said west line of Scale: 1" 30' 100 feet; thence East arallel to the south line of Date 6-22-87,e.w. r-,r to the shore of Lake Minnetonka; thence Southerly o Iron marker ioreline 105.62 feet; thence west on a line parallel .h line of said Section 9 to the point of beginning, .ion of all existing buildings thereon, (hard cover) ised location of a proposed deck. It does not purport improvements or encroachments. .-------,.�-- -10 e - _ tS-C -P 001T732 !-`J TN3MNA300 N! AT023NNIN .Y!.% ._ 0193►tN311 *♦.y ♦gyp M�� \♦ to To: Front Dates Mayor Grabek Orono Council Members City Administrator Bernhardson �J5 • '� niM1i ���� ' Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & zoning Administrator June 22, 1988 Subjects #1288 ward Edwards, 2474 Carman Street - Renewal Variance - Resolution Application - Requesting renewal of variances granted in 1985 for hardcover and lakeshore setback. Zoning District - The building site is located in the LR-1B district. A portion of the property north of the lagoon is zoned LR-IC-1. List of zzLibits Exhibit A - Proposed Resolution Exhibit B - Notice of Planning Commission Action 6/8/88 Exhibit C - Memo and Exhibits of 6/1/88 Discussion Please review the memo and exhibits c.f June 1, 1988. Applicant is requesting the same variances that were granted in 1985 for hardcover and lakeshore setback. This is a unique property, and unique findings were made in the 1985 approval resolution. The Planning Commission at their June 6, 1988 m- ting recommended 4 to 0 to approve the renewal variances as previously granted. Staff ltecossendation Staff recommends approval per the Planning Commission recommendation per the attached resolution, which reflects the findings and conditions of the previous Resolution #1838, which was approved on 8/26/85. A RESOLUTION GRANTING A VARIANCE TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.22, SUBDIVISIONS 1 i 2 AND SECTION 10.5S, SUBDIVISION 8 FILE i1288 WHEREAS, ward E. FC'wards (hereinafter "the applicant") is the owner of the property located at 2474 Carman Street within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as follows: Lot 11, Block 6, Townsite of Langdon Park (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the ap c has applied to the City for a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Sec; _0.22, Subdivision 1 and 10.55, Subdivision 8 to allow the construction ut a new home located partially within the 0-75' lakeshore setback area where no structures are allowed, and requesting a variance to Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 to allow a total of 2,960 square feet of hardcover or 15.8% in the 0-75' setback zone at the building site, where no hardcover is allowed and to allow 3,380 square feet of hardcover or 30.0% in the 75-250' lakeshore setback zone at the building site, where only 25% hardcover is normally allowed, and is requesting a variance to the average lakeshore setback from the lagoon or north side of the building site. rlinnesota : NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #1288. 2. The portion of the property to be used as a building site is located in the LR-lP Single Family Lakeshore Pesidential Zoning District, and the portion of the property north of ti-e lagoon is zoned LR-lC-1, One -Family Lakeshore Residential Subdistrict. 3. Resolution #1838 adopted by the Citv (7ouncil on August 26, 1985 approved the proposed variances boavu on specific noted findings and subject to specific noted conditions. The applicant never started construction pursuant to the variance, and the variance expired on August 26, 1986. On May 13, 1988, the applicant applied to renew the variances previously granted, with no changes from his original request. Page 1 of 5 S. 1 4. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on June 6, 1988, and recommended approval of the proposed variances based upon the following findings: A) No lot width variance is required since the 125' lot width meets 80• or more of the 140' requirement. B) A number of methods can be used in determining the actual percentages of hardcover on the property: 1) Based on crediting only the land at the building site, the 0-75' hardcover proposed is 2,960 square feet or 15.8% and in the 75-250' zone is 3,380 square feet or 30.0%. 2) Based on also crediting the northerly portion* of the property for the hardcover calculations, 0-75' hardcover is 2,960 square feet or 10.5% and in the 75-250' zone is 3,380 square feet or 10.2%. 3) Based on calculating 0-75' and 75-190' from the lagoon, only crediting the building site, and with drainage all directed to the lagoon, 0-75' lagoon setback hardcover is 14.9% (all existing driveway), in the 75-190' lagoon setback is 34.4%, and in the lakeshore 0-50' setback is 0%. C) Applicant should not be penalized for the existing driveway hardcover in the lagoon 0-75' zone, and in fact his driveway proposal minimizes the additional driveway hardcover required. D) The neighbors' request for the lakeshore setback and average setback variances to allow for the least disruptive sightlines, to maintain uniformity, and the capability to direct all drainage over 100' of relatively flat lawn area, justify the granting of a variance to the lakeshore setback. E) The unique characteristics of the property i.e. the proposed building site separated from the rest of the property by a lagoon, constitute a valid hardship to the property. F) The variances can be granted without permanent crediting of lot area north of the lagoon. 5. The City Council in reviewing this parcel finds that the property taken in its entirety, including area north of the lagoon, meets or exceeds the 1 acre lot area requirements for the LR-lB Zoning District. 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 applicant and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. 7. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variance would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate a demon- strable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicant; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. CONCLO£IONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the findings noted above, the Orono City Council hereby grants a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Sections 10.22, Subdivision 1 and 10.55, Subdivision 8 to allow the construction of a new home located partially within the 0-75' lakeshore setback area where no structures are allowed, and grants a variance to Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 to allow a total of 2,960 square feet of hardcover or 15.8% in the 0-75' setback zone at the building site, where no hardcover is allowed and to allow 3,380 square feet of hardcover or 30.0% in the 75-250' lakeshore setback zone at the building site, where only 25% hardcover is normally allowed, and grants a variance to Section 10.22, Subdivision 1, to allow encroachment on the average lakeshore setback from the lagoon (or north) side of the building site, subject to the following conditions: 1. All drainage from the proposed house must be directed toward the lagoon to gain the maximum possible infiltration time and distance. 2. A site grading plan must be submitted for staff approval prior to issuance of a building permit. 3. Applicant is placed on notice that future additions of hardcover at the building site will not automatically be approved and would likely be subject to removal of equivalent amounts of existing hardcover. 4. Lowest floor elevation must be 932.5 MSL or higher. Page 3 of 5 16 5. Authorities granted with this resolution run with the property not with the applicants, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit within one year of the date of Council approval, or this variance will expire on that date (June 27, 1988). 6. 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. 7. The undersigned applicant have 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 Orono City Council on this 27th day of June, 1988. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk James R. Grabek, Mayor Property Owner(s) Page 4 of 5 ZONING FILE 110. 1288 CITY OF ORONO NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 473-7357 Date of Notice: 6-8-88 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- TO: Ward Edwards COPIES TO: 3545 Glenhurst Ave. St. Louis Park, MN 55416 TYPE OF APPLICATION: Variance ----------------------------------------------------------- DATE OF NETTING: 6-6-88 VOTE: 4 For 0 Against Planning Commission recommends the following: Approval as submitted per previous conditions of approval. NOTES AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS: Applicant's next scheduled meeting is confirmed as: City Council June 27, 1988; 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. To: Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson From: Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator Date: June 1, 1988 Subject: #1288 Ward Edwards, 2474 Carman Street - Renewal Variance - Public Hearing Application - Requesting renewal of variances granted in 1985 for hardcover and lakeshore setback. Zoning District - The building site is located in the LR-lB district. A portion of the property north of the lagoon is zoned LR-IC-1. List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Application Exhibit B - Plat Map Exhibit C - Property Owners List Exhibit D - 1985 Letters from Neighbors Exhibit E - Applicants Noted Hardships Exhibit F - Planning Commission/Council Minutes, 6/17/85, 7/8/85, 7/22/85, 8/26/85 Exhibit G - Staff Memo's 6/12/85, 6/24/85, 7/16/85, 8/8/85 Exhibit H - Staff Hardcover Notes Exhibit I - Flood Plain Map Section Exhibit J - Wetlands Air Photo Section Exhibit K - Survey with Proposed Site Plan Exhibit L - Resolution #1838, Approved 8/26/85 Synopsis Applicant is requesting renewal of variances granted in 1985 to allow construction of a residence on this vacant lot. The variances approved in 1985 are as follows: 1. Lakeshore setback of 50' rather than the 75' setback normally required. 2. Average lakeshore setback encroachment to lagoon. 3. Allowed 15.8% hardcover in the 0-75' zone. Allowed 30% hardcover in the 75-250' lakeshore zone. The lakeshore setback and average setback variance were granted based on a proposed grading scheme that would direct all drainage to the north towards the lagoon. The 50' lakeshore setback is consistent with the two neighboring houses. The hardcover percentages were calculated based only on the property portions located south of the lagoon. Discussion Please carefully review Resolution #1838 which describes the findings and conditions under which the City Council approved this variance application in 1985. Also included are staff memos and minutes of the various meetings, which go into great detail regarding the issues which were discussed. Zoning File #1288 Page 2 of 2 Applicant has held title to this property since 1980, however it has been owned by his family since 1955. He intends to construct a retirement home on the property. His brother Richard owns the house on the point to the east. The property is quite unique in that it also includes land north of the lagoon, extending all the way to County Road 15. Staff Reccr dation Finding that the conditions on the property have not changed since the original application, staff would recommend approval of the variance renewal per the findings and conditions of Resolution #1838, as follows: 1. Approve 2,960 s.f. of hardcover (15.8%) in the 0-75' setback zone. 2. Approve 3,380 s.f. of hardcover (30%) in the 75-250' lakeshore setback zone. 3. Approve lakeshore setback of 50' to the main body of the lake. 4. Approve an average lakeshore setback encroachment on the lagoon (north) side of the building site. Conditions of Approval are as follows: 1. All drainage from the proposed house must be directed towards the lagoon to gain the maximum Yosslble infiltration time and distance. 2. A site grading plan must be submitted for staff approval prior to issuance of building permit. 3. Applicant is placed on notice that future additions of hardcover at the building site will not automatically be approved rrd would likely be subject to removal of equivalent amounts of existing hardcover. 4. Lowest floor elevation must be 932.5' MSL or higher. CITY OF ORONO - VAR IAN PLI 1TIO f�-;,; Initial Application Fee $150.00 ($50.00 per each additional project) After -the -Fact Fees MEMO Y PROPERTY LOCATION .1S�#l------------------ F--- T L1 1 I. ►'e Site Address Lot 11, Block 6, Townsite of Langdon Park F."AANCE OFFICE VVON Property Identification Number (P.I.D. ) 20-117-23-12-0027 (Orono #�BF' 0 t` AA Please check one -- Is the property x abstract or totrenz2 nrr Please attach legal description to application if not includld survey. --------------------------------------------------------------------- APPLICANT Name Ward E. Edwards Phone (h) 927-9815 (o) 520-5558 Mailing Address 3545 Clenhurst Avenues St. Louis Park, MN 55416 _ _ i --------------------------------------------------------------------- OWNER Name SAME AS ABOVE Phone Mailing Address Date Property Acquired October 1980 (month/year ) Family owned since 1955. I (do) do no also own the adjacent parcels of land. --------------------------------------------------- PRESENT USE OF PROPERTY Present Zoning District LR-1B Present Use of Property vacant lot Residential Other (specify) ---------- ------------------------------------------ DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $118,993 Describe request in detail: I am requesting a variance from the 75 foot set back at the front of myRroperty to a 50 foot set back. VARIANCES REQUIRED r�---=-------- ------------------------------------ Q Lot Area Lot Width Hardcover Setback Variances ( 50' Front Side Rear) Other --------------------------------------------------- (OVF.R ) CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee $150.00 ($50.00 per each ad variance) Renewal Variance Fe%$75.00 A (7A Ct ( (no change from o application) After -the -Fact Fees (Double application fee) ------------------------------------------------ ---------- PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) Please check one - Property abstract or torrens? Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- APPLICANT Phone (home) Name Phone (work) Address: City: Zip: ------------------- O Km (if different than applicant) Phone (home) Name Address: Date Property Acquired City: Phone (work) Zip: (month/year) I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- PRESENT USE OF PROPERTY Present Zoning District Present Use of Property Residential Other (specify) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $ Describe request in detaA.l: ------------------------------------------------------------------- VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area Lot Width Hardcover Setback Variances ( Front Side Rear) Other HARDSHIP Describe undue hardship or practical difficult esulting from strict enforcement of zoning regulations: A 7M H --------------------------------------------------------------------------- DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe unusual property conditi s preventing compliance with Zoning Code Requirements: it 'T 7-AC4-j --------------------------------------------------------------------------- RHQUIRED SUBMITTALS 1. Completed Application Form 2. Certified Property Owners List of owners within 150' (you must obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Govt. Center 348-3271). 3. Stamped, legal sized envelopes (#10) pre -addressed to each of the names on the above list with no return address (use address labels obtained with property owners list). 4. Certificate of survey including hardcover calculations as required. 5. Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing grade are proposed. 6. Plat Map (obtained with property owners list). 7. As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. B. Additicnal items as may be requested by City staff. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your variance application is not complete if the above information has not been included. Certification by Zoning Department that Variance Application is complete. Zoning Official's Signature Date APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay all fees and/or unusual expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. n Applicant's Signature JUARICCe,'-Jbate OWNERS SIGNATURE The owner hereby ackowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents, Commission members, and Council members for purposes of investiga- tion and verification of this rP�ues Owner's Signature C�.'l�-� C�,� : 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 to advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. to ram{ s I 1 • • ♦ i ! 1. rO 1 I 3 ' 14 I Is Is 20 1jil 2 23 24 Q i!!; is 17 in it.; t0' 21-A.IPA24 ; 2e ! �•t I(5411 �( fie' �111IIOI• 1, It i ! y .� ♦ 3 2. '1 M , 11 10 9 a 7 r e,� ♦ •� 2 1 IV 17 10 I le20'~013,24 : e is is' tc 21 22' �3'. 24'! ts`�2• 27 2e let �Ir• I 100) 1 � • � c\.� ha L1 il�,l I ��1) �`l � �Y 11% � I�y1 K�ti i 1 1 ��'[i ii•1" a 140 Iy� 16464 2 1 ii • 1 -� �w •\0010 i 24 4 11. • • 0..rs F-- ti r �� Y 0 %A 12 `� ,.2 �6 `�4 ?1� tea - • ,`yS ` � K � �..te i':`�� S or to to • � '� 2 f r • t \r ,,j� y - .f • `1ST :A';T 13,0 Rso - s1 a 4 e -`,r►:o.L I COVE�� . 1 1.. 1 (, I c Jj• 2 tc ,�. ,. �•'� M 14 13 f2 La) . W It at ��'1 a - • 116 ;•:, ,�; 11 � �, R.L.Q. - N ice•. b n i .� ~ �!J• A•r.al PAof M 11 'ry . r� • • IO � 1 01 9's RUN DATE 04/29/85 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM REPORT NO. PI435401 PROPERTY OWNERS LIST PAGE 1 BATCH 001 38 17-117-23 43 0091 38 17-117-23 43 0092 58 17-117-23 43 C093 PROP ADDR 03496 SHORELINE DR 03480 SHORELINE OR OWNER NAME DAVID CHARLES BIE ti DAVID CHARLES BIE L lic A Spyc,- Sco4-+ TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR DAVID C BIE �' 1910 SHADYW000 ROAD DAVID C BIE 1910 SHADYWOOD ROAD a $ D^"f4 S Y PO if-Tf WAYZATA MN 55391 WAYZATA MN 55391 38 17-117-23 43 0094 38 17-117-23 43 0113 38 17-117-23 43 0114 PROP ADOR 03472 SHORELINE DR 03502 SHORELINE DR OWNER NAME -GEORGE F_ PIPER JR DAVID 5 PETERSON GOLDEN VALLEY STATE BANK TAXPAYER _BEDRGE_l- PIPER LOWELL R ZITZLOFF .L- LOWELL R ZITZLOFF NAME/ADDR 3470-SHORELINE OR 1805 E WAYZATA BLVD 1805 WAYZATA BLVD WAYZATA MH 55391 WAYZATA MN 55391 WAYZATA MN 55391 c � 38 20-117-23 12 0001 38 20-117-23 12 0002 38 20-117-23 12 0003 PROP ADDR 02400 CARMAN ST " 02416 CARMAN ST OWNER NAME EDWARD T i GLORIA A LEHMAN EDWARD T LEIRIAN ETAL EDWARD T LEHtiAN ETAL ti., `• _ TAXPAYER ECWARO T 6 GLORIA A LEHMAN EDWARD A GLORIA LEHMAN EDWARD i GLORIA LEHMAN NAVE/ADDR 2470 CARMEN ST 2470 CARMAN ST 2470 CARMAN ST r j � WAYZATA MN 55391 WAYZATA MN 55391 WAYZATA MH 55391 fe.� 38 20-117-23 12 0009 38 20-117-23 12 0010 38 20-117-23 12 002i PPCP ADDR 0:4?JP NAME ELLEN M BUTLER v ELLEN M BUTLER WARD E EDWAkOS ✓ TAXPAYER LAVERNE A CUTLER LAVERNE A CUTLER WARD E EDWARDS fry NAHE/ADDR 10685 CTY RD 43 1Ob85 CTY RD 43 3545 GLENHURST AVE ' CHASKA Ml 55318 CHASKA MN 55310 ST LOUIS PARK MN 55416 38 20-117-23 12 0028 38 20-117-23 12 0033 38 20-117-23 12 0040 PPOP ADOR 02480 CARMAN ST 03465 SHORELINE OR OZ41:t CARMAN ST OWNER NAME RICHARD A EDWAPDS ✓ G.P.H. COMPANY T A 0 L1140 TAXPAYER RICHARD A EDWARDS ALECK G OVERSON �� � THO:tAS A LINDr ' NAME/ADDR CTY RD i5 BOX 127 2414 CARMAN ST NAVARRE !41 55392 Miik6-M WAYZATA MN 55391 j)�a11/ tj 38 20-117-23 12 0041 38 20-117-23 12 0042 30 20-117-23 12 0043 PROP ADDR 02470 CARMAN ST OW1:-? NAY.E EDWARD T LEHMAN A WIFE EDWARD T LEHMAN t WIFE EDWARD T LEHMAN i WIFE TAXPAYER EDWARD T LEHMAN EDWARD T LEHIIAN EDWARD T LEHMAN NAME/ADDR 2470 CARMAN ST 2-- 0 CARMAN ST 2470 CARMAN ST WAYZATA MN 55391 WAYZATA MN 55391 WAYZATA MN 55391 at RUN DATE 04/29/85 BATCH 001 38 20-117-23 12 0048 PROP ADDR OW14EP NAME CITY OF ORONO TAXPAYER CITY OF ORONO NAME/ADDR BOX 66 CRYSTAL DAY MN 55323 PROP ! 00p OWNER NAME TAXPAYER TCTAL BATCH 001 00021 NAME/ADDR HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNERS LIST 38 20-117-23 12 0049 E T i G A LEHMAN EDWARD T A GLORIA A LEHMAN 2470 CARMAN ST WAYZATA MH 55391 38 20-117-23 12 0055 Daryle L Uphoff et al Daryle L Uphoff 2497 Kelly Avenue Excelsior, MN 55331 REPORT NO. PI435401 PAGE 2 38 20-117-23 12 0050 RICHARD A EDWARDS RICHARD A EDWARDS BOX 127 NAVARRE MN 5539I i :EPTIFY THAT TFE FACTS REFRE�ENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE RE'RESENTATION OF INFORMATION: AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION. TO THE VEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF. , DATEI v J. c� D' LPG Hay 28. 1985 City or Orono Yost Office Box 66 Crystal Bay, Hinn. 55323 Attn: Orono Lard Use Planning Commission Sub]: Ward Edwards proposed zoning variance Lot 11, London Park Add. Carmans Bay. MAY 31 M Gentlemen: It is my understanding that Ward Edwards is intending to build a hose on the subject property and is requesting a set back variance from 75 ft to 50 ft to comply with existing homes on lots 12 i 10. I would prefer to see the variance granted as requested. The required set back in this situation would destroy the symmetry of the three lots and would also limit my view from the baca of my home. Sincerely. ward T.hsan 2470 Carmen St. Wayzata, Mn. 55391 I y t >, J' I en •' Jew:-� �C�;��., .�.�G.:ce� Cam• � ✓! o, ►•L ��� /fit-�,.�. �i' ' ll�Ll1�•Gc'�Xc�// of ,�j7 % s .�.,.o �f r. ra..c -lT_t � �z. � y►as•�u/a,y.,. 7'.� -� -7 4.7 NMI • � ¢moo �`a. ��xA��` . / Z 7 HARDcuIp This piece of property has been owned by my family since December 1955. In 1967, I began developing plans to build my retirement home on this property. In 1970, part of the property was declared wetlands and in Octol:er 19FO, my mother, Amy Edwards, transferred this property to me. The hardships that will be encountered without a 50' set back are as follows: A water pipe will have to he moved. . A mature pine tree and a large willow tree will have to be moved. Over the years, trees have been planted based on a 50' set back. The trees will screen the house and provide for a more natural setting. . I recently inve ted over $11,000 to have a sewer line brought to the property. . The neighbors on both sides of the property want my home to be at the same sot bacl• line as their homes. My brother, Richard Edwards, is 43' back from the edge of the lake and Mr. Ed Lehman is 56' back. Having my house in line with their houses, provides for more privacy. . I have a very unique view across the lake which is enhanced bv_ the 50' set back. If the set back had to be 75', existing evergreens would block the view. DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CO\'DI7I0IS The back portion of this property, irynediately south of the lagoon, is mostly peat, going down approximately 19 feet. This was discovered when the sewer pipe was laid in 1985. (An old creek bed is said to be in this same area.) The cost of iaying the sewer 'line was increased considerably because of the unstable soil conditions. The back portion of the property, before the lagoon, is the lowest part of the property (932.3'). In addition to the peat problem in this area, water al•c drains to and collects here. The highest point o.` the property (936') is where the best soil conditions are found. If the 75' set back prevails, I would not be able to see the lake from the IDund floor windows unless I re-oved a considerable amount of earth. The driveways on this property are net hardtop, they are mostly dirt with some gravel. I will not be putting is hardtop driveways. This piece of property on which my house is to be located is a very unique piece of land. It has water on both sides -in Front, Like Minnetonka; in the rear, the lagoon. Because of the view, the existing mature trees, and the soil and drainage problems on the back part of the property. it seems logical that the house be constructed in line with the existing hooves. It will also, with the 50' set back, fit in more naturally with the existing terrain. JUNUTES OF THE ORONO PL Wlb'G COMMISSION XMINC HEW JUNE 17. 1985. PAGE 16 ''0932 HARD EDMARDs 2474 CARMAN STRRET VARIANCE PUBLIC R'=ARING 10 s 44-10: 55 PM Chairman Callahan called for the public hearing at 10:44 p.m. concerning the Edward's variance application. Assistant Zoning Administrator Gaffron noted the certificate of mailing and the affidavit of publication. Ward Edwards was present. There was no one present from the audience for this public hearing. Assistant Zoning Administrator Gaffron noted that the applicant is requesting lakeshore setbacw and hardcover variances to locate his new home 50' from the lakeshore. Gaffron explained that tr,:s lot is subjected to two 75, lakeshore setbacks. Gaffron noted that the existing hosres are located an average of 50' from the lakeshore. Gaffron noted that both neighbors have noted that they value the view of the lagoon. Rovegno noted that either way the proposed hose is moved it gets closer to the lake and is subject to two 75 • setback lines on both sides. Assistant Zoning Administrator Gaffron noted that it is an existing lot of record and asked the Planning Commission if they would recommend crediting areas across the lagoon permanently in order to meet the lot area requirement. Kelley felt that there were enough hardships on the property that the applicant doesn't need the credit. Rovegno noted that the applicant would still need a lot area variance even with the credit. Chairman Callahan closed the public hearing at lolSS p,a,- Callahan pointed out in order to keep the develorent down to the north, he would be inclined to require the credit. Xelley Moved, Goettenseconded, to recommend approval of the a lot area variance for Ward Edwards based on the following findingai • 1. The lot width of 125' is greater than So% of the required 140' width, so no formal lot width variance is required. 2. The drainage from the house should all be directed toward y the lagoon in order to gain the maximum infiltration time • and distance. + � f �. eased on item 2 above, the hardcover in the lagoon 75- e 190' zone is requested to be 4,940 of or 34.41A, i requesting a 9.4% variance for a new home. I,; t :a 1 :- MINUTES OP THE OlONO NAMING COMMISSION MELTING dLIJ) JMM 17, 198S. PAGE 17 0932 EDWARDS 4. Applicant should not be penalized for the existing (Cont.) driveway hardcover in the lagoon 0-75' zone, and in fact his driveway propesal minimizes the additiona ldriveway hardcover required. 5. The 75-250' zone on the north side of the lagoon gust stay non -hardcover. 6. The neighbors' request for the setback variance to allow for the least disruptive sightlines, to maintain uniformity, and the capability to direct all drainage over 100' of relatively flat lawn area, would seem to justify the granting of a variance to the lakeshore setback. 7. The setbacks from neighbors both on Lake Minnetonka side and lagoon side are in conformance and both neighbors have indicated their approval. S. This is a unique piece of property with unique characteristics with :akeshore located on both sides of the property. 9. Applicant to submit a grading plan for staff approval so as to prevent erosion into the lakeshore. Motion, Ayes (7), Nays (0). il33 374S VKI M WN SM j r M P TIOML On !OMIT POK,IC Qul= IOz57 - 1105 PM Chairman Callahan called for the public hearing at 10:57 p.m. 4. concerning Ned Butterfield's conditional use permit 4~., application. Assistant Zoning Administrator Gaffron noted; the certificate of mailing and the affidavit of publication.` Ned Butterfield was present. There was no one present tsom the audience for this public heariag. Assiatant Zoning Administrator Gaffron noted that the applicant is requesting to add a 40' x 100' greenhouse south of the existing greenhouses at 3745 Watertown Road. Gaffron �- noted that the property contains ButterfieldIa home, seven greenhouses, and a service building. Kelley asked how many greenhouses can be placed on one piece of property. Assistant Zoning Administrator Gaffron noted that the conditional use application is the only way to regulate how many greenhouses can be placed on a property since hardcover regulations do not apply in rural residential districts. Ned Butterfield noted that he has an operation in Delano, but that this location is more convenient for him s�nce he lives at the sits. 14. MIIJUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MELTINC. ►IELD JULY B. 1985. PAGE 6 'WA.RD E . EDWAitDS 2474 CARMAN STREET VARIANCE RESOLUTION Mr. ward E. Edwards was present. City Administrator Bernhardson explained the issues of the applicants request to build a residence on his lot which is divided by a lagoon. The first issue is the crediting of hardcover from the land north of the lagoon, and secondly, the building of the residence 50'from the lake. Bernhardson noted that the two adjacent neighbors have indicated they prefer the residence to conform with their homes, which would be within the 75' setback. Asst. Zoning Administrator Caffron indicated that there is approximately .70 acre in the south portion of the lot and 1 . 0 acre in the north portion. The lot is zoned one acre. Mayor Butler expressed concern that some restriction be made in taking credit of the north portion in order to prevent a future request to subdivide the lot. Because of the serious concern of a future subdivision, it was moved by Mayor Butler, seconded by Councilmember Frahm, to approve the conceptual concept of the lakeshore setback and direct staff to re -draft the Resolution incorporating the Councils' concerns addressing the hardcover in the north f portion of lot. Motion, Ayes (5), Nays (0). i933 VED BUTTERFIELD 3745 WATERTOW'N ROAD COVVITI011AL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION 11793 City Administrator Bernhardson stated that Mr. Butterfield was not able to attend because cf illness and has requested Council to proceed with his request. Bernhardson further stated applicants request to construct a new 401x100' greenhouse on a 4.6 acre lot zoned 5 acre. A new conditional use permit is required to allow this construction. Bernhardson recommends that because it is a substandard lot, the Conditional 'Jse Permit be granted conditioned upon no further additions or greenhouses are built. Councilmember Frahm recommended that Condition 15 be added to the drafted resolution stating that "Tbe retail sale of flowers on the property will cease". It was moved by Councilmember Frahm, seconded by Councilmember Nammerel, to approve Resolout-on 41793 subject to the two conditions as previously stated. Motion, Ayes (5), Nays (0). ORDINANCE DISCUSSION STOCK FARMS Referring to his report dated June 27, li85 (such report MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD JULY 22, 1985. PAGE 4 It was moved by Councilmember Grabek, seconded by Mayor Butler, to allow the retention of the back-up area and have a second -story screen porch with a patio underneath as long as it is outside the 75' tone. And anything within the 0-75' setbacr must be removed, except the sidewalk, which infringes the 75'sone by 18', be allowed to remain. Motion, Ayes (5). Nays (0). 3444 Eastla.-- St. - Mayor Butler repeated her statement as in the previous lot, and that the City must give a little to gain the results intended when these lots were created from commercial to residential property. Asst. Zoning Administrator Gaffron explained the applicants' wish to install a floating deck in place of the concrete patio. Gaffron stated that the driveway and back-up area is essentially the same as the previous lot. Mr, i Mrs. Dean Monge stated tf.at when they bought the property from Mr. Asplund, they were unaware of these problems. They also stated that the patio and walks are valued at $2500, which is included in their mortgage. Mr. Asplund stated that he was unaware of the problem at the date of closing. However, Asst. Zoning Administrator Gaffron stated that he has documentation contrary to Mr. Asplund's statment. Mayer Butler suggested approving a minor degree of encroachment within the 75' setback to allow a patio. Councilmember Grabek stated that there should be some flexibility because of the shoreline and suggested that a 10'x23' patio be created within the inset of the house. Mrs. Monge stated that by putting a patio up by the house, they would lose the sun until late afternoon. Regarding the floating deck, City Engineer Cook stated that originally it would not be hardcover, but it would create a monitoring problem to assure that it is not changed in the future creating hardcover. It was moved by Councilmember Frahm, seconded by Mayor Butler, to table the matter until the August 12th Council meeting, for Mr. Asplund to put tog*thet a plan for Council Z1932 approval. Motion, Ayes (5), Nays (0). EDMAILDS CARMAN STREET VARIAIICE - RESOLUTION This matter was tabled until the next Council meeting per the applicant's request. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD AUGUST 26, 1985. PAGE S IS30 SHAVER/TEARSE continued It was ruved by •_ouncilmeml,er Aua:s, seconded by Kayor butler, to table this matter until the September 9th Council mectinq. Motion, Ayes (3). Nays (0). 1932 WARD EDWARDS• 2474 CARMAN STREET VARIANCE RESOLUTION 11838 It was moved by Mayor Butler, seconded by Councilmember Adams, to adopt Resolution t1838 as drafted granting a variance. Motion, Ayes (3). Nays (0). 1942 ARTBCR TIIQELSTRIV* 1740 SRADYWOOD ROAD VARIANCE RESOLUTION #1813 It was moved by Mayor Butler, seconded by Councilmember Adams, to adopt Resolution 11bl3 as drafted granting a variance. Motion, Ayes (3), Nays (0). 1944 JAMES LEAR • 3127 CASCO CIRCLE VARIANCE DENIAL RESOLUTION 1183i It. was moved ty N.ayc•r butler, seconded by Councilrember Adams, to adopt Resolution 01639 as drafted denying an after - the -fact variance. Motion, Ayes (3), Nays (0). 1949 GEitALD ANDERSON/RAGE CONSTRUCTION 4495 NORTH SHORE DRIVE VARIANCE RESOLUTION 11840 Mr. Gerald Ar.dursor. was not present for this matter. City Administrator Lcrnhardson explained the application fir a variance of the average lakeshore _!tback. Berrhardson st..ted that staff recommends approval of the variance noting Corditrcn #2 in the new drafted resolution which states that the deck an never be enclosed. Zoning Administratur Mahusth stated that the Planning Commission uvarirruusly recommended approval of the variance. ?0-31,ust h n: r L'd that nci then adjacent neighbor attended thy• PUL'11c t«,111ng to ub3ect to the variance. Councilmember Frahm suggested that in the future neighbors submit written approval. :t was moved by Councilmember Frahm, seconded by Councilmurnber Adams, to adopt amended Resolution 11640 -1pproving the variance. Motion, Ayes (3), Nays (0). TO: Council PRO": Michael P. Gaffron, Assistant Zoning Administrator DATE: June 24, 1985 SUBJECT: i932 Ward E. Edwards, 2474 Carman Street - Variance Zoning District - LR-lB Application - Lakeshore Setback and Hardcover Variances List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Application with letter of request Exhibit B - Plat Map Exhibit C - Property Owners List Exhibit D - Survey with hardcover calculations Exhibit E - Staff sketch (2) Exhibit P - Letters from adjacent property owners Exhibit G - Airphoto ` Hard Edwards is requesting to locate his new home at a distance of 50' from Lake Minnetonka. He has a very urique lot which actually fronts on County Road 15 but extends across a lagoon to the proposed building site which is accessed by a driveway easement over an adjoining i property (see Exhibit E). The dry buildable land area of the building site is approximately 30,000 square feet or 0.69 acre. The dry buildable land north of the lagoon is approximately one acre. Since this is a lot of record, the def init ion of lot area in the zoning chapter excludes the lagoon as dry buildable, but would allow the crediting of dry non-contiguous lands within the same lot. If this was a subdivision application, the dry buildable would have to be contiguous. The question posed to the Planning Commissiosi we should the applicant be required to forever credit a portion of his dry buildable land north of the lagoon toward the buildable area, which :yu would limit his future subdivision capability? He may need or want to ' keep the northerly portion as -is anyway, since it is his only road frontage. Interestingly, the northerly 496 feet of the property, or in effect the entire portion of dry buildable land north of the lagoon, is son" LR- 1C-1, not LR-18 as the building site is. The Planning Cmmission recommsnded that the land to the north of the lagoon not be dedicated forever as credit toward the lot area on the !r building site south of the lagoon; but the Planning Cosoission did recommend that no hardcover ever be al lowed in the 0-75' setback ;one on the north side of the lagoon. i I Page 2 June 24, 1985 Now, looking only at the building site, note that we have to deal with two 75' setbacks. The hardcover numbers presented by the applicant's surveyor take into account only the lake setback, not the lagoon setback. Hence, the total area of the building site within 0-75' of shoreline is actually 18,750 square feet, with only about 11,250 square feet in the 75-250' setback area. This mathesatically raises the 75-250' hardcover percentage but lowers the 0-75' percentage. Technically, considering only the building site, 0-75' proposed hardcover is 2,960 square feet or 15.8%, and in the 75-250' zone is 3,380 square feet or 30.0%. The next point to consider, then, is which direction will the hardcover drain to. It should be directed to the north, so that in the case the variance is granted, drainage from the house and driveway will travel over or through 100 feet of lawn area befo-e reaching the lake. If all runoff can be directed to the lagoon, the following hardcover numbers would apply: 0-75' - 9,375 sf total area 75-190' - 14,375 s.f. total area 0-75' (lagoon) existing driveway - 1,400 sf (15%) 75-190' (190' is the proposed drainage break) iiousar 2,800 + sf Deck 360 + of New Driveway 1,200 + sf Sidewalk 60 + of Existing driveway 520 + sf Total 4,940 sf (34%) 0-50' (lakeshore) 0 ha.dcover - 0% This method of calculating hardcover is unorthodox Nut accomplis►:es exactly what we are striving for in our runoff infiltratiin concern&, i.e. it meets the intent but not the letter of the code. Next, consider the average setback issue. because the r.eigbbos109 owners have stated that they value the views of moth their lake and lagoon yards, they also request that th' new housri conf Oro sa►entially to the setback of the existing Houses. l.lthourlh the average `tina of sight setback' would be about 35' from tha lakeshore due to the curvature of the lake, the mathematical averaq,e ..etbaek is 49.5' . As you can see from the survey, the applicants garige will encroach on site lines toward the lagoon. Based on the above facts and conditions, staff would suggest that: 1 ) The lot is buildable without a lot area variance because we are allowed to credit the non-contiguous dry buildable across the lagoon for a total of 1.7+ acres. 2) The actual area to be permanently credited should be enouqh to bring the lot area up to either 0.8 or 1.0 acre and this crediting become a clause of the final resolution, so that any future development of the northern portion of the property does not negate tnis credit. (Planning Commission recommended no permanent credit required.) *932 Edwards Page 3 ' ne 24, 1985 3) The lot width of 125' is greater than 80% of the required 140' width, so no formal lot width variance is required. 4 ) The drainage from the house should all be directed toward the lagoon in order to gain the maximum inf iltration time and distance. 5) Based on item 4, the hardcover in the lagoon 75-190' zone is requested to be 4,940 square feet or 34.4%, requesting a 9.4% variance for a new home. 6) Applicant should not be penalized for the existing I driveway hardcover in the lagoon 0-75' zone, and in fact his drivway proposal minimizes the additional driveway hardcover required. 7 ) As long as the 75-250' zone on the north side of the lagoon stays non -hardcover, the applicant's overall 75-250' hardcover is less than 25%. Would you consider this ab negating the need for a hardcover variance? Of course, it would mean that if the northerly portion is ever divided off, it suddenly increases the hardcover percent on the lakeshore building site. 8) The neighbors' request for the setback variance to allow ` for the least disruptive sightlines, to maintain uniformity, and the capability to direct all drainage over 100' of relatively flat lawn area, would seem to justify the granting of a variance to the lakeshore setback. , The Planning commission voted 7-0 to recommend approval of the lakeshore setback and hardcover variances based on these findingst 1 ) No permanent crediting of the land north of the lagoon is required. 2) No lot width variance is required since the 125' lot width meets 80% or more of the 140' requirement. 3) Based on all drainage from the proposed house being directed toward the lagoon, the hardcover in the lagoon 75-190' zone is requested to be 4,940 square feet or 34.4%, or a 9.41 variance. (Technically, if all areas on the ec.tire property within 0-75' and 75- 250' of the lake are considered, the applicant would be allowed approximately 8,281 square feet of hardcover, with 75-250' total hardcover requested at 3380 square feet or 10.2%,and requesting 0-75' total hardcover of 2. 960 square feet, including the existing driveway, or 10.51.) 4) Applicant should not be penalized for the existing driveway hardcover in the lagoon 0-75' zone, and in fact his driveway proposal minimizes the additional driveway hardcover required. 5) The neighbors' request for the lakeshore setback and average setback variances to allow for the least disruptive sightlines, to maintain uniformity, and the capability to direct all drainage over 100' of relatively f lat lawn area, would seem to justify the granting of a variance to the lakeshore setback. •yjt Lawards Page June 24, 1965 6) The unique characteristics of the property i.e. the proposed building site separated from the rest of the property by a lagoon, constitute a valid hardship to the property. Planning Commission suggested the following conditions of approval would be appropriate: -ainage from the proposed house must be directed toward th, ain the maximum infiltration time and distance. 2 ) vs.r future hardcover should ever b-� al owed in the 0-75' setback zone on the north side of the lagoon. 3 ) A site grading plan must be submitted for staff approval prior to issuance of building permit. A resolution of approval is attached reflecting the Planing Coomission's recommendation. A. J sx� TO: Planning Commission PROM: Michael P. Gaffron, Assistant Zoning Administrator DATE: June 12, 1985 SUBJECT: 0932 hard E. Edwa-ds, 2474 Carman Street - Jarionce Zoning District - LR-1B Application - Lakeshore Setback and Hardcover Variances List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Application with letter of request Exhibit B - Plat Map Exhibit C - Property Owners List Exhibit D - Survey with hardcover calculations Exhibit E - Staff sketch(z) Exhihit P - Letters from adiacant property cwners Exhibit G - Airphoto Ward Edward-, i s requesting to locate his new hone at a distance of 50' from Lake Minnetonka. He has a very unique lot which actually fronts on County Road 15 but extends across a lagoon to the proposed building site which is accessed by a driveway easement over an r.ljoining property (see Exhibit E). The dry buildable land area of the building site is approximately 30,000 square feet or 0.69 acre. The dry buildable land north of the lagoon is approximately one acre. Since this is a lot of record, the definition of lot area in the zoning chapter excludes the lagoon as dry buildable, but would seen to allow the crediting of dry non-contiguous lands within the same 1 t. If this was 1 subdivision application, the dry buildable would h e to be contiguous. The question to be answered is, should the app :ant be required to forever credit a portion of his dry buildable lar. arth of the lagoon toward the buildable area, which would limit future subdivision capability? He may need or want to keep the _L therly portion as -is anyway, since it :s his only road frontage. Interestingly, the northerly 496 feet of the property, or in effect the entire portion of dry buildable land north of the lagoon, is zoned LR- 1C-1, not LR-lB as the building site is. Now, looking only at the building site, note that we have to deal with two75' setbacks. The hardcover numbers presented by the applicant Ia surveyor take into account only the lake setback, not the lagoon setback. Hence, the total area of the building site within 0-75' of shoreline is actually 18,75U square feet, with only about 11.250 square feet in the 75-250' setback area. This mathematirr-illy raises the 75-250' hardcover percentage but lowers the 0-75' percentage. 1932 Ward Edwards Page 2 June 12, 1985 The critical and rational point to consider, then, is which direction will the hardcover drain to. It should be directed to the north, so that in the case the variance is granted, drainage from the he -..se and driveway will travel over or through 100 feet of lawn arert before reaching the lake. It all runoff can be directed to the logo-n, the following hardcover numbers would apply: 0-75' - 9,375 sf total area 75-190' - 14,375 s.f. total area 0-75' (lagoon) existing driveway a 1,400 sf (15%) 75-190' (190' is the proposed driinrge break) House 2,800 : sf Deck 360 t sf New Driveway 1,200 + sf Sidewalk 60 _+ sf Existing driveway 520 + sf Total 4,940 sf 4t) 0-50' (lakeshore) 0 hardcover - 01 This method of calculating hardcover is unorthodox but accomplishes exactly what we are striving for in our runoff infiltration concerns, i.e. it Teets the intent but not the letter of the code. Next, consider the average setback issue. Because the neighboring cwners have stated that they value the views of both their lake and lagoon yards, they also request that the new house conform essentially to the setback of the existing houses. Although the average 'line of sight setback* would be about 35' from the lakeshore due to the curvature of the lake, the mathematical average setback is 49.51. he you can see f rom the survey, the applicants garage wi 11 encroach on site lines toward the lagoon. Based on thb above facts and conditions; staff would suggest thatt i.) The lot is buildsble without rem variance becou we are allowed to credit the non-conti u buildable se 9 � roe• the ; lagoon for a total of 1.71 acres. 2) The actual area to be permsnontly credited should be 4e enough to bring the lot area up to either 0.8 or 1.0 acre (Planning rt4'' Commission ••- wake a recommendation as to whioh) and thie orediting become a clause of the f inal resolution, so that any future development of the northern portion of the property does not negate this credit. 3) The lot width of 125' is greater then 80% of the required 140' width, so no formal lot width variance is required. 4 ) The drainage from the house should all be directed toward the lagoon in ord-r to gain the maximum inf iltz-ation time and distance. 5) f :n item 4, the hardcover in the lagoon 7S-190' sane In ruyueetud . , 4,940 square teat or 34%, requesting a 9• vari nce for a new home. Your task is to determine whether any hardships justify this isrisnce. 1932 ward Edwards Page 3 June 12, 1985 6) Applicant should not be penalized for the existing driveway hardcover in the lagoon 0-15' : id in fact his driway proposal minimizes the additAonal drive. -drover required. 71 Ae ; ong ms the 75-25( ' zone on ti, n. . aide of the 1 '.goon stays non F«rdcover, the applicant's o"rall 75-250' hardcover it less that.Would you consider this as negating the need for a hardcov vari,n.-e? Of course, it would mean that if the northerly portion is eve. divided off, it sudden.y increases the hardcover percent oi, the Lakeshore building site. 8 ) The neighbors' request for the setback variance to allow for the least disruptive sightlines, to maintain unifors.ty, and the capability to direct all drair.age over 100' of relativ- Iv flat lawn area, would seem to justify the granting of a variance to _ ►s Lakeshore setback. The above it?!ma Jail t<: Iced as findings or conditions in your recommendaticu ..o coi..., , e f i To. Orono Council Members Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator From: Mike P. Caffron, Assistant 'Zoning Administratcr Date: July 16, 1985 Subject: 1932 ward Edwards, 2474 Carman Street - Variance - Resolution Attached is a re -drafted resolu,.on incorporating items discussed during your review of this project on July 8, 1985. The major revisions from the original draft include: Finding No. ,q - Finding that (contrary to the Planning Commission recomin-ndation) area north of the lagoon should b,! permanently dedi:ated to the building 61Le. Condition No. 5 - Requiring crediting cf lot area to the building site as part of any future subdivision. Condition No. 6 - Requiring that the credited land north of the lagoon shall remain as non hardcover. Condition No. 7 - Notifying applicant and future owners that under a future subdivision, the new lot or lots created north of the lagoon will not necessarily be granted riparian lake rights, noting that the intent is to maintain a manageable boat density in the lagoon. In reviewing the discussion that oc•�urred at the July 8th meeting, staff note the concern on the Counc-l's part that a future Council understand the intent of this Council in granting the variances, but Lhat these _cc ons might not Le binding in light of a future Counci l's authority to amend these variances. Staff suggests that ie format presented here, which makes the area credit and hardcover limitations into actual conditions, and which leaves sorewhat open the issue of riparian access, will serve to .lert future Councils and staff of your intent with this action. To: Orono Council Members Prom: Mike P. Caffron, Assistant Zoning Adminiatratur Date: August 8, 1985 Subject: Addendum to 7/16/85 Memo - 0932 ward Edwards, 2474 Carman Street List of Exhibits Exhibit A - 7/16/85 Memo Exhibit B - wetlands Map (Airphoto) Exhibit C - Flood Plain Map Exhibit D - Resolution Draft 7/16/85 As the result of further discussions witn the applicant, two items were brought up which may have some bearing on Council's resolution of this project. Fir_t, Mr. Edwards asks whether you might consider area dedication for Lot 8, Block 1 Navarre, which is a non -adjacent lot used for ward and Richard Edwards' access diveway from Carman Street. The lot is in Richard Edwards' name on the current tax books. The lot is 0.13 acre. Mr. Edwards also brought up the fact that there is a wetland on the property north of the lagoon. A revit of the City's designated wetland maps brought a surprising fact to light - 80 to 90% of the area north of the lagoon is designated wet land, and a major portion is considered as flood plain (see exhibits). We have two topographical surv, -f this area. The USCS quad rich 10' contour intervals shc.: a. ea north of the lagoon as wetland. This map is dated 1912. we also have a 2' contour survey made in 1969 which shows most of the area north of the lagoon below e.evation 934. This survey notes a 'proposed lagoon', hence the dredging may have been done around 1970. Our airphotos taken about 1970 or 1971 show the lagoon completed. we don't have a good idea whether the 1969 tomography is still correct or whether spoils were placed in what area. At any rate, because our maps designate the area north of the lagoon as wetland, the applicant has some built-in limitations to future use of the property. Mr. Edwards feels that the dedication of land north of the lagoon and the limitation on riparian rights for the northern part of the pro- perty is unjustified at this time considering that he is proposing no division at this time and considering that the wetlands will ;ikely become a major issue in any future use of the property. Also, note that the wetlands can be 'credited' as dry buildable in this sewered zone, so that the resolution condition dedicating 'dry buildable' can include 0.3 acre of wetlands on the north side of the lagcon as dry buildable, in order to bring the southerly lot up to 1 full acre. I` I f Zoning File 1932 August 8, 1985 Page 2 i To summarize: f 1. The applicant questions whether it is fair or reasonable to require dedication of land at this time. 2. The applicant is not comfortable with giving up riparian rights for the north property at this time. 3. Most of the area north of the lagoon appears on our maps as designated wetland. Considering the applicant's h,•sit.iace to accept the limiting conditions now when he is not propos_ig .n; subdivision, staff would suggest that Finding 4 and Conditions 5, 6 and 7 be removed and the following wording be added above the Findings on page 1 of the resolution. 'and, whereas, the Council has reviewed this proposal and notes that if a subdivision was proposed under current sub- division regulations, approximately 0.3 acres of wetland north of the lagoon would be required to remain within the boundaries of the building lot in order to maintain the 1 acre area require- ment, leaving approximately 0.7 acres zoned LR-lC-1 north of the lagoon, of which acreage the major portion is designated wetland according to City maps, hence any future proposed development of land north of the lagoon would meet with strict building limita- tions as to the allowable intensity of use.' The resolution can be redrafted as you see fit and brought back to the August 26th meeting. r simommom ti�Z•`-n L� a7 �yF f 30.o Y: _ T 0.77-5' ���^� MI' 1 __ i '\ ! .fir• tl a 1 •�• t� \» 7 i r._ C' r r �js'+' h• • ti1y�w�•tye'4• •',L ••` 'tM 1i' M1 jp / Aft la 1 , ' t y �• �.�j 1 •�' tr •ttir sip 14 44, • 11' � ., � '' , ' ' art , -� �'� � . , �• � :.1 L t , •�41 jc h� f , 11j. T�ii [�,t t. • �r` , ..A��' , .Ali Ak ' Jib, f t �' ftT+.wtl 6/ ^I _ , r .. w •, ! . t 1 +a . 1.. 71 ` .�'� ' � ! � �� , r �. ' 1„ , • �,►: 1. °�. i- • t � ; ` j � _ Wfo.., i IA E�WldIT �-Z . r2t:�. 15 t WAOco 19 1, _a TOPOGRAPHIC suHvEY FOR WARD £. EDWARDS IN LOT II, BLOCK 6, roWNSITE OF LANGDON PARK LAGO�N Stitt nt 1 e�.�, r INpo-•: i I i n•e�,/ro ... •rnr.e / c o•!1� ►Jn r4 �� •/ JL.,, r Noe r .} �, !If � �� ' �� IN PRCPG`.c ' HCUUj, m is, ,M/rrM eJ r ,LAKE M,NNErONKA SCALE: I INCH : 20 FEET DATE . 6- '9-80, .,.,,. ,.,,,e.,, , r J.u•u DArum. NGVD - /929 GORDON R. COFFI, LAND SURVEYOR S PLo LONG LAKE, M/NNESD City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. I�;38 A RESOLUTION GRANTING A VARIANCE TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.22, SUBDIVISIONS 1 i 2 AND SECTION 10.44, SUBDIVISION 8 - FILE #932 WHEREAS, ward E. Edwards (hereinafter "the applicant") is owner of the property located at 2474 Carman Street within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as follows: Lot 11, Block 6, Townsite of Langdon Park (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City for a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Sections 10.22, Subdivision 1 and 10.55 Subdivision 8 to allow the construction of a new home located partially within the 0-75' Lakeshore setback area where no structures are allowed, and requesting a variance to Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 to allow a total of 2,960 square feet of hardcover or 15.8% in the 0-75' setback zone at the building site, where no hardcover is allowed and to allow 3,390 square feet of hardcover or 30.0% in the 75-250' lakeshore setback zone at the building site, where only 25% hardcover is normally allowed, and is requesting a variance to the average lakeshore setback from the lagoon or north side of the building s_• NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as zoning file V32. 2. The portion of the property to be used as a building site is located in the LR-1B Single Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District, a.— the portion of the property north of the lagoon is zoned LR-IC-1, One -Family Lakeshore Residential Subdistrict. 3. The Orono Planning Commission revieweC this application on June 17, 1985, and recommended approval of the proposed variance based upon the following findings: A,' No lut width variance is required since the 125' lot width meets 80% or more of the 140' requirement. B) A number of rrethods can be used in determining the actual percentages of hardcover on the property: ragc 1 of 5 City of OR,ONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 1838 (1) Based on crediting only the land at the building site, the 0-75' hardcover proposed is 2,960 square feet or 15.8% and in the 75-250' zone is 3,380 square feet or 30.0%. (2) Based on also crediting the northerly portions of the property for the hardcover calculations, 0-75' hardcover is 2,960 square feet or 10.5% and in the 75-250' zone is 3,380 square feet or 10.2%. (3) Based on calculating 0-75' and 75-190' from the lagoon, only crediting the building site, and with drainaciu all directed to the lagoon, 0-75' lagoon setback hardcover is 14.9% (all existing driveway), in the 75- 190' lagoon setback is 34. 4%, and in the lakeshore 0-50' setback is 0%. C) Applicant should not be penalized for the existing driveway hardcover in the lagoon 0-75' zone, and in fact his driveway proposal minimizes the additional driveway hardcover required. D) The neighbors' request for the lakeshore setback and average setback variances to allow for the least disruptive sightlines, to maintain uniformity, and the capability to direct all drainage over 100' of relatively flat lawn area, justify the granting of a variance to the lakeshore setback. E) The unique characteristics of the property i.e. the proposed building site separated from the rest u,: thi property by a lagoon, constitute a valid hardship to the property. F) The variances can be granted without permanent crediting cf lot area north of the lacjoon. 4. The City Council in reviewing this parcel finds that the property taken in its entirety, including area north of the lagoon, meets or exceeds the 1 acre lot area requirements for the LR-lB Zoning District. 5. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendatic-s of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicant and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. Page 2 of 5 City of of ONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. The City Counc= 1 finds that th e _%all Lions 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 .or 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 keepinq with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan c.f the City. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon the above f indings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a variance to the Municipal 'Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivision 1 and Section 10.55, Subdivision 8, to allow the construction of a new home located partially within the 0-75' lakeshore setback area where no structures are normally allowed, and grants a variance to Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 to allow a total of 2,960 square feet of hardcover (or 15.8%) in the 0-75' setback zone ai the building site where no hardcover is allowed, and to allow 3,3._. square feet of hardcover (or 30%) in the 75--250' lakeshore setback zone at the building site, where only 25% hardcover is normally allowc 1, and grants a variance to Section 10.22, Subdivision 1, to allow encroachment on the average lakeshore setback from the lagoon for north) side of the building site, subject to the following conditions: 1. 2. ?'.11 drainage from the proposed house must be directed toward the lagoon to gain the Maximum possihl infiltration time and distance. A site grading plan must be submitted for staff approval prior to issuance of a building permit. Applicant is placcc , notice that ` -:! additions of hardcover at the bu ..ing site will nu ,tomatically be approved and would likely be subject to ram. _sl of eouivalent amounts of existing hardcover. Lo ` floor elevation n,:t be 932.5 MSL or higher Aut ies granted uy this variance run with the property not with Li,e applicant, but are permissive only and must be exercised by applicatio for a building permit withi. one year of the date of Council z­proval, or this variance will expire on that data (August 26, 1986). Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions o` this variance shall constitute a violation of the zoning -ode, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. Pacio 3 of 5 ,A City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL Ni• ' 838 '"he undersigned applicant has read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of hirreelf , his heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agrees to th- --cording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 2G th day of August, 1985. . ATTES /bo t'hy M. alliinn, City Clerk Nary C. a&tyr, Mayor (1) Property Uwner Spouse (2) I ropert�T Owner Spouse Page 4 of 5 city of OR,ONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 1838 { STATE OF MINNESOTA ) i ) ss. iI COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) /qgc. on this _l/ d a If �u &t,l , T before me a Notary Public.: within and for said county, personally appeared �j/g ll E F�W,cyQ�S A"—twA 10 Ea; Mknown to me to be the person(s) described it and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (the-" ' free act and deed. "++'"Z �Pr Est *A%1Cv! `�zc•µ vNSY �Art p1N GO �. ,aai TATE OF M114NESOTA ) )ss. COUNTY OF HEi.;:EP1N ) .�� f , L _. NOTARY PUBLIC: MY C MIMISSI N EXPIRES On this day of _ uo '---cfore ^r a Notacy Public within and for said Ccintly, pe•:Fonai�y appeared _ .sown to me to be the persons) described in an who cxe �'•ed she foregoingir.s*rument, and ackiowledged that he (they. xecute6 the same as hi., (their) free act and deed. NOTARY FUbLIC MY MMISSION EXP_RF;; kr ,ge 5 of L) u To: Mayor Grabek Orono Council Members City Administrator Bernhardson From: Tom Jacobs, Building a Fire Inspector Date: June 24, 1988 Subject: #1297 Washington Scientific - 2605 Wayzata Boulevard - Commercial Site Plan Review Additional Comments: nning Commission Recommendation Additional Exhibits Exhibit K - Lettei �m Vogt Corporation - Request to Stock Pile Fill Exhibit L - Memo - :;,,-obe to Planning Commission Recommending Approval of Stock Piling Fill Exhibit M - Letter - WSI to MWCC Exhibit N - Letter - WSI to Orono Requesting to Participate in Loca- tion of Service Road Exhibit O - Memo - Jacobs to Planning Commission Please review the memo by T. Jacobs dated June 14, 1988 that reviews the commercial site plan of this application, Exhibit O. Staff's additional comments will only deal with items left unresolved at the time of Planning Commission. Please refer to Exhibit N. This letter was provided by W.S.I. per the Planning Commission's request at the June 20th meeting. Staff has spoken with the city attorney on the matter, and he has stated the letter is acceptable. Applicant has applied for a MWCC permit. See Exhib4-t M. Applicant has requested at the Planning Commission meeting of June 20, 1988, that they be allowed to stock pile fill from the proposed addition excavation on the property until they can get proper approvals from the City to fill a low area on their property. Staff and Planning Commission recommend approval. See Exhibits K and L. Planning Commission Recommendation Planning Commission recommends approval of the commercial site plans and stock piling of fill based on the following: 1. No variances are required. 2. Staff's memo June 14, 1988. Subject to the following: 1. Applicant makes application for a Conditional Use Permit for Land Alteration. 2. That stock File location be approved by staff and the city engineer. 3. The W.S.I. submit a letter with intent to participate in location of service road (already completed, see Exhibit N). 4. The W.S.I. get approval from MWCC. CITY OF ORONO - GENERAL LAS —ACATI ON ------------------------�- - -------- PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address 2605 West Wayzata Boulevard 38 33-118-23 130009 4A I I �'��TV Property Identification Number (P.I.D. ) 38 33-118-23 130010 fIA'.=.tiL'Ur OFFICE 38 33-118-23 130001 i_fozo t�� Please check one - Property abstract or tozrens? GE,1' ;`v.DO (for Conditional Use Applications only) r,EG; iL : Co. 00 :r:�Elt.T_Tr+AuAYC7l,' Please attach legal description to application if not includeQ';: 1,G'0; .4'0A '&9:: on required survey. OS%'� I'L --------------------------------------------------------------------------- APPLICANT Phone (home) 286-2448 473-1271 Name Joseph Pa.11ansch Phone (work) Address 2605 West Wayzata Blvd City Long Lake Zip 55356 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- OWMIM (if different than applicant) Phone (home) Name �( �r1���r, i. l�J^�� �' Fi)�I , �n C Phone Address (z 4 7 Lt-46-' << City Da roperty Acqu red` More than 10 vears I do (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of ------------------------------------------------ - CONDITIONAL. USE PERMITS - Renewal Fee - 1/2 Current Fee After -the -Fact Fee - Double Current Application $100.00 a) Residential accessory Use Zip 5535(p (month/year) land. ---------------------- Fee $150.00 b) Institutional (church, school, etc.) $150.00 c) Duplex Credit/Bldg $200.00 f) Land Alteration Grading and filling - designated floodplain Grading and filling - 101 cu. yd. Grading, seawall, retaining walls of lakeshore PRD/PID - see fee schedule OTMM APP ICATIONS XX $150.00 $250.00 $150.00 $ 50.00 $250.00 $100.00 Other - wetland or or more within 75' Commercial Site Plan Review (+ consultant fees) Vacation Easement Vacation Easement Vacation With Subdivision Rezoning Appeals see fee schedule PRESENT "SE OF PROPERTY Light industrial Present Zoning District Present Use of Property Residential Other (specify) --------------------------------------------------------------------------- DESCRI PTION OF REQUEST Review site plan of similar construction for Describe request in detail: increase of manufacturing area with sprinkler Protection --------------------------------------------------------------------------- REQUIRED SUBMITTALS 1. Compl ted Application Form. 2. Certi. ied Property Owners List of owners within 350' (you can obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Government Center 348-3271) 3.' Stamped, legal sized envelopes (t10) ore -addressed to each of the names on the above list with no return add,:ess 4. Certificate of survey. 5. Topographic survey (existing and proposed contours) if land alterations involve changes in elevation (grades). 6. Construction plan, if applicable (see staff for requirements). 7. Plat Map. B. As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your application is not complete if the above information has not been included. Certification by Zoning Department that Land Use Application is complete. Zoning Officials Signature Date APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay all fees and/or unusual expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. I' P Applicant's signature Date � ONNffitS SIGNATURE 0 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. f f owner's signature Date ---------------------------------- - -------------- ---- 1 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 i 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 6 Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. l .�_..+r1iWt+i aYlrr►metrt e: 4 anlM�tea;:Y' s 'a; . .. • . .Kr."Mr RUN DATE 05/19/88 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFOlMATIOI SYSTEM REPORT NO. PI435401 PROPERTY OWNERS LIST PACE s BATCH 006 38 33-118-23 11 0003 38 33-118-23 13 0001 38 33-118-23 13 0002 PROP ADDR 02605 WAYZATA BLVD 02687 WAYZATA BLVD OWNER NAME ORONO PLAZA WASH SCIENTIFIC IND VEDA INC TAXPAYER REIERSGORD LAW FIRM WASHINGTON SCIENTIFIC INC VEDA INC NAME/ADDR 4945 HALIFAX AVE S SUITE 7 C/O B E KINNEY P O BOX 115 EDINA MN 55424 LONG LAKE MN 55356 LONG LAKE MN 55356 (+ 38 33-118-23 13 0009 38 33-118-23 13 0010 38 33-118-23 13 0011 PROP ADOR 02765 WAYZATA BLVD OWNER NAME WASH SCIENTIFIC INDUST INC WASHINGTON SCIENTIFIC IND IN VEDA INC ETAL TAXPAYER WASHINGTON SCIENTIFIC IND WASHINGTON SCIENTIFIC IND VEDA INC C► NAME/ADDR HWY 12 P 0 BOX 340 PDX 115 LONG LAKE MN 55356 LONG LAKE MN 55356 LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 33-118-23 13 0012 38 33-118-23 13 0013 38 33-118-2' 13 0014 PROP ADOR 02705 WAYZATA BLVD OWNER NAME VEDA INC VEDA INC VEDA INC r` TAXPAYER VEDA INC VEDA INC VEDA INC NAME/ADDR BOX 115 BOX 115 BOX 115 LONG LAKE MN 55356 LONG LAKE MN 55356 LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 33-118-23 31 0010 38 33-118-23 41 0014 38 33-115-23 42 0001 PROP ADOR 00320 OLD CRYSTAL BAY RD N OWNER NAME GN RY CO GEORGE L 056000 ET AL R 0 MEYER A P M MEYER TAXPAYER GN RY CO GEORGE L OSGOOD MICHAEL HILDELINK NAME/ADOR 365 WILLOW OR N 85 GOLDEN VIEW DR LONG LAKE MH 55356 LONG LAKE MH 55356 1.; 72 33-118-23 14 0005 72 33-118-23 14 0011 72 33-118-23 14 0015 PROP ADOR 00401 WILLOW DR OW.TJER NAME CHURCH OF ST GEORGE LARTCH DEVELOPMENT CO LARTCH DEVELOPMENT CO TAXPAYER CHURCH OF ST GEORGE LARTCH DEVELOPMENT CO LARTCH DEVELOPMENT CO NAME/ADOR LONG LAKE MN 55356 17630 BRECONWOOD RU 17630 BRECONWOOD RD r WAYZATA MN 55391 WAYZATA MN 55391 72 33-118-23 14 0018 72 33-118-23 14 0019 72 33-118-23 14 0020 PROP ADOR OWNER NAME LARTCH DEVELOPMENT CO LARTCH DEVELOPMENT CO LARTCH DEVELOPMENT CO TAXPAYER LARTCH DEVELOPMENT CO LARTCH DEVELOPMENT CO LARTCH DEVELOPMENT CO NAME/ADDR 17630 BRECONWOOD PO 17630 BRECON1000 RD 17630 BRECONd000 RD WAYZATA MN 55391 WAYZATA MN 55391 WAYZATA MN SS391 RUN DATE OS/19/88 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM REPORT NO. PI43S401 ' BATCH 006 PROPERTY 0WNERS LIST PAGE 9 72 33-118-23 14 0021 PROP ADDR OWNER NAME LARTCH DEVELOPMENT CO TAXPAYER LARTCH DEVELOPMENT CO TOTAL BATCH 006 00019 NAVE/ADDR 17630 BRECONWOOD RD !' WAYZATA MN 55391 r 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.lf1c r" OAT S " - BY `J I 1 . q �q I e •t►• ' _s j• E 1 ti� •• » A!• 2c' w 683 41 I - - --- �.- -- -' Al 1208 rllf 1S s •s LON SAKE 'WEST 3 i � 1 ,.� a if• c� •, . 3 1 � i / . e • r :+ t.• ."; _ : volt "#MTMA ;' • ;'.f��g �.iiri♦ 1 / '•,r I Ljs� �• ., �'� A INOUSTRIAL� 3 'PARK ' 60 I i1 � .•f � j v. - - � � / I w u owo■o 1 ii`S 1 S •� .•�f�9:, •••S CAS• _ � •� 1 I 424D ,.. ACRES y � A 1, RV E� C jr ••• S. CAST 3 G U T l n f f A 1• d CERTIFICATE OF HAILING STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN CITY OF ORONO ) I, Jamie Bosma, of the City of Orono, Hennepin County, Minnesota, do hereby certify that a Notice of Public Hearing concerning the matter of 11297, was mailed to the attached list of property owners . In Witness Whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and seal this 7th day of June, 1988. Jam#a Bosma CITY OF ORONO •O"rICE The Planning Commission will hold Public Hearings in the Council !-,hambers at 1275 South Brown Road on Monday, June 20, 1988 at 7:00 P.M. on the matter of reviewing the following land use applications i1269 for a proposed 3 lot residential subdivision of property located at 115 Old Crystal Bay Road. 1. 11290 James A. Lorence of 4460 North Shore Drive seeks hardcover and setback variances and a conditional use permit for landscape improvements and construction of lakeside deck. 2. 91291 Alfred Iverson of 2835 Casco Point Road seeks a hardcover variance to construct of garage addition. 3. #1292 Suburban Hennepin Regional Park District at 2665 North Shore Drive has filed a renewal conditional use permit for an improvement plan previously approved by the City that would allow construction of a new park building and certain landscape improvements. 4. #1293 Grace Baptist Church at 2380 Shadywood Foad have filed a conditional use permit for expansion of the parking lot area. 5. i1295 John McDowell representing the property located at 165 Turnham Road, seeks a lot area variance to construct a new residence on a lot that does not meet the five acre area standard for the zoning district. 6. i1296 Merritt J. Peterson and Rick Stodola seek an area variance to determine the buildability of the property located at 1895 Shadywood Road. 7. 11297 Washington Scientific at 2605 West Wayzata Boulvard has filed a commercial site plan application for the public review of a major addition to the north west side of the existing structure. 8. #1298 Rich^-' J. Johnson of 1304 Elmwood Avenue has filed a vacation application for the remaining dedicated portions of Forest Boulvard as dedicated in the plat of Saga Hill Revised, Hennepin County, Minnesota. This unimproved dedicated roadway can be found along the south east shoreline of Forest Lake within the City of Orono. 9. 01299 Nancy Higgins of 3017 North Shore Drive seeks a conditional use permit for an existing summer guest cabin and caretakers residence so that the existing principal residence can be razed and a new residence constructed on the property. All persons wishing to be heard will appear at this time. Written comments are solicited. Plans are available for review in the City offices. City of Orono By: Planning Commission Jea ne A. Mabusth Building 6 Zoning Administrator To be published the week of June 6, 1988. THE VOGT CORPORATION ARCHITECTURE ENGINEERING June 3, 1988 Tom Jacobs Building Inspector City of Orono P.O.Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN. 55323 JUN — 7 � 988 c I Re: Proposed Addition to Washington Scientific Industries Dear Tom: We are writing with regard to the additional information you requested concerning the height and exterior appearance characteristics of the proposed Washington Scientific addition. The height of the existing building is 16 feet. The new addition will be approx. 23 feet high (including the parapet height). Since Highway 12 rises west of the site we feel this additional height will be a benefit by avoiding an eye -level view of the roof. The materials proposed for the exterior walls will comply with Orono requirements (brick, decorative block or equivalent quality facia panels) and the materials and color will be selected to blend with the existing plant for a unified look. Yours truly, THE VOGT CORPORATION / Edward J. Vogt, A.I.A. EJV/jp cc: J. Pallansch 1 SUITE 260 CARLSON CENTER • ONE CARLSON PARKWAY N • MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55447 • (612) 415-2826 Sonestroo v Rosene Anderlik & Associates Engineers i Architects June 2, 1988 City of Orocio Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Attn: Mr. Tom Jacobs Ono G 11onemb PE KRRh A. Gordon. PE Thomas 'JV Peterson. ►E ChW*S A EfKkNO ob Rert W Rome . PE Rkhard W Foss". ►E MKeaet C. Lynn. /E Leo M. Pa.s'euky Joseph C MaerYk. ►E Donald C w+r'Ora, ►E James R Masrld. PE K~ M Olson aradbrd A. Lwnbr% 'E Jerry A. Bourdon. PE. Kenneth ► Andenon. ►E Susan M. Eberrrs RKhard E Aerrr. ►E Mart A Manson. PE Kefl'� A. BKhmannE M , Pirk A Setp James C otson. PE Tea K Freld. ►E Mark R Rolls. ►E Glenn R Cook. ►E MKhaer T RaWsarrr. ►E Robert C Russet. A IA. Thomas E Noyes, PE Robert R P1ett rle. ►E Thomas E Anqus. PE Robert G SchunKtK. PE. Dwrld O Loskda. ►E Howard A Santoro. PE M-'Ltn L Sorvaa. PE I Re: File No. 139 - Washington Scientific Dear Tor, We have reviewed the building plan expansion submitted by Washington Scien- tific. The plan is acceptable with the following modifications. The site drainage should be directed to a swale as bhovn on the attached drawing. The addition of a fire hydrant near the southwest corner would be desirable. The construction of a 20' access road with a turn around to the hydrant would be necessary. If you have any questions, please contact this office. Yours very truly, BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC. Glenn R. Cook GRC:li Encl. 24 2335 West Highway 36 9 St. Paul, Minnesota 55113 • 612-636-4600 • \ ca ' 1 .'x..J red ---!t �Il. t11i�fi Ll �! N if �l l t!�*t-`� - __ �' . - i .: �...�, �t, �I1�i l l i • r. - • Amu"-"_'•/od Ewa-- �.awawwr e.f ...:w•� aw w esz av i e r //}}�� 3 ' •MCI ba✓✓9+•aCM '.a la-nav C. e1iM:V"!. NL�•�.. i• � � �\� •-- �M••.a.4 •.w'.• .•w. rror •u ••eMeu flr p' o.r�n •y ) a THE VOGT CORPORATION ARCHITECTURE ENGINEERING June 15, 1988 Tom Jacobs, Bldg. Inspector City of Orono P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Re: Washington Scientific Industries Proposed Building Addition Dear Mr. Jacobs: Due to poor soil underlying the proposed building addition, it will be advisable to excavate and replace soil to a depth of approximately 7' below the floor. This will result in an excess of approximately 10,000 cu. yards of fill to be disposed of. Along the south 1200 feet of the west property line there is now a rather abrupt slope where the grade drops down about 6' in a short horizontal distance. This appears to us to be a logical location to place the excess fill. The abrupt bank could be made into a more gentle slope and would improve the drainage in the rear portion of the site, which is now poorly drained. Since you pointed out that this would require a conditional use permit, we would like the City to know that WSI intends to apply for a conditional use permit to do this grading. Prior to approval of a conditional use permit the excavated earth would be stockpiled at a location determined and approved by City staff and the City Engineering Consultant. The extra earth could be removed from the site entirely, but we believe that regrading the west edge of the rear area of the site to a more gentle slope would be a good solution and would result in improved drainage conditions. EJV/dj cc: J.. Pallansch, WSI Yours truly, THE VOGT CORPORATION Edward J. Vogt, A.I.A. JUN 151988 SUITE 260 CARLSON CENTER • ONE CAR LSON PARKWAY N -MINN E A POL IS. MN 55447 • 16121 475-2826 To: Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson FA Tom Jacobs, Building & Firi Inspector Date: June 16, 1988 Subjects #1297 Washington Scientific - 2605 Wayzata Boulevard Applicant has provided staff with a letter (attached) requesting they be allowed to stock pile soil on property until they receive proper approvals. : Staff has reviewed the letter and due to the poor soil found in the soil ex^loration, of the addition and the proposed location of the fill, staff recommends approval with the condition that it be removed from the site if applicant does not get approval of the Conditional Use Permit for filling and grading. wsi M June 22, 1988 Mr. Kevin Larson Hickok & Associates 545 Indian Mound Wayzata MN 55391 Dear Mr. Larson: Per ■y June 21 telephone conversation, I am sending you a copy of a survey done by Advanced Survey & Engineering. I'm marking the area on which the Orono Planning Commission wishes to have a more defined swale occur because of the proposed addition. Would you please advise me of the necessary permits for this watershed district. Thank you. Sincerely, WASHINGTON SCIENTIFIC INDUSTRIES, INC. Joe Pa'_lansch Facilities Engineer Contract Services Enc. JP/keb -- ascobs, City of Orono Ed Vogt, JP0019 WASHINGTON SCIENTIFIC INDUSTRIES, INC. 2E05 W Wayzata Blvd • Box 340 0 Long Lake, minneeota 55356fi340 0 Vnone 612JA73-1271 • TWX: gjO-5 .2742 CLIFFORD W. DINSMORE President and Chief Executive Officer June 22, 1988 Mr. Tom Jacobs City of Orono c P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN. 55323 Dear Mr. Jacobs: Regarding the Planning Commision's request for an access road, other than Highway 12, to and from Washington Scientific Industries, Inc. (WSI), please be advised we would be happy to discuss a proposed access road to promote health and safety. In order to determine the location for an access road to iur site, WSI representatives and the Planning Commission t,);;ether must be actively involved in the planning process from the ground floor up in order to locate a site, determine co::ts and receive approvals. Sincerely, r i C. W. Dinsmore fjt cc: J. Pallansch t -A t, WASHINGTON SCIENTIFIC INDUSTRIES, INC. dX lcng lake, Minnesota 5535e a Phone e12"73-1271 a TWX 910.576.2742 J� r To: Manning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson (2) From: Tom Jacobs, Building & Fire Inspector Date: June 14, 1988 Subject: i1297 Washington Scientific - 2605 Wayzata Boulevard - Commercial Site Plan Review List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Application Exhibit B - Property Owners List Exhibit C - Plat Map ibit D - Notice of Public Hearing Exhibit E - Survey Exhibit F - Letter From Vogt Corp., Architect Dated 6-3-88 Exhibit G - Proposed Site Plan, Landscape Plan & Drainage Plant Exhibit H - City Engineer Report With Plan Exhibit I - West Elevation Exhibit J - North Elevation - Details The applicant is proposing to construct a 175' x 187' (32725 s.f.) addition to the existing building (139,000 s.f.). Applicant is requesting no variances for this proposal. PertinentCode Sections Section 10.50 Industrial District Section 10.60 Preformance Standards Section 10.61 Special Provisions In reviewing the proposal,staff has made the following findings. 1. Zoning District - I 2. Existing Use: Fabrication, storage and manufacturing. this is an approved use within this zone. 3. Area: 1,151,567.3 s.f. or 26.44 acres minimum required is 2 acres. 4. Access: Is existing, out to State Highway 12 5. Parking: See exhibit G Required : 4 spaces + 1 per 800 s.f. floor spaces. Existing building - 139,000 s.f. : 800 - 174. Addition - 32,725 s.f. 1 800 - 41 Total Parkinq Required Existing - 174 Addition - 41 Minimum - 4 Required 219 spaces Applicant has provided 328 parking spaces which meet the requirements of the code. Handicapped Parking Stalls 1 space per 560 stalls 328 t 50 - 6.56 or 7 Applicant must make spaces with approved signs. Drainage - The City Engineer has reviewed the plans submitted Exhibit H. The City Engineer feels the plan is acceptable with the modification that drainage should be directed to the swale as shown on plan. building Plans - (Exhibit I & J) Staff has reviewed the plans and found that the material use will blend into the existing building. Also submitted Exhibit F is a letter from the Architect which states that the structure is under the 30, maximum height and will be consistent with the Orono Codes. Signage - Existing - meets requirements of Code - No change Fire Code Review - In the review by the City Engineer he has stated that a hydrant be provided in the south west corner with an access road. Since the applicant has provided a fire suppression system within the last 2 years, it is staffs recommendation that the sprinkler system will provide adequate fire protection. Sprinkler systems are considered an acceptable alternative to hydrant and access. Fire lanes should be maintained at loading docks and along the front of the structure. SAC Unit Charge - This charge will require that applicant complete form MWCC 86B and get Metro Waste Commission approval before a building permit is issued. Landscaping Plan - Applicant is proposing to continue tree planting in the front of the structure with fruit trees (Exhibit G). Staff Recomm endation Staff recommends approval of the Commercial Site Plan based on the following: 1. The propose structure/addition and operaticn is not determental to the public health, saftey and welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. 2. Proposed structure and use meets Orono Municipal and Zoning Code requirements. 3. Drainage is directed to swale as recommended by City Engineer. 4. That applicant completes Metro Waste Commission addition form 86B to determine SAC units. 10 53188.4 i r T WG J U1. 2 7 1:,+ 'j TO: Mayor and City Council `i��° ''. .t FROM: Mark Bernhardson, City Administrator DATR: June 22, 1988 SUBJECT: Zoning Ordinance Amendment - Highway 12 Corridor Attachment: A. Zoning Ordinance Amendment Drafts Prepared by John Shardlow Dated _ B. Council Minutes Exceprt Dated 5/23/88 ISSUE 1. Acceptance of initial draft work by Shardlow as authorized on May 23, 1988 together with referral of these drafts to the Planning Commission for their consideration. IN_TROD_U_C_TION- As noted in Attachment B the Counci 1 authorized contracting with John Shar ".ow to undertake the necessary ordinance amendments to impler ',i Highway 12 Corridor study. Attachment A reflects the wo is done to date and the next step would be submission o: draft ordinances to the Planning Commission for their t .. DISCUSSION - The process for zoning ordinance review as you are fame iar with, requires either initiation of the Planning Commission or referral by the Council. If initiated by the Council, the Planning Commission has a responsibility to review and make a recommendation. If however none is forthcoming after 60 days the Council then has the right to consider it without Planning Commission recommendation. Presently certain property owners in the corridor are interested in submitting their proposals for as least initial review. Any work and approval of these plans would await the completion of the Corridor Zoning Amendments. Development of Zoning amendments or at least the portions that are or would be applicable to their property will be closely followed by these individuals. The structure is such that it provides for an "unbrella" section incoprorating the preconditions for zoning. (Transportation, sewer, water, etc. as outlined in the comp plan amendment) and then incorporates much of the existing districts as the actual zoning with additions of a Highway Business District and PUD. Inclusion of existing zoning standards under this umbrella should m:ni.mize the extent of needed review to the "umbrella" section, ch,e new two zoning sections and any special zoning provisuions applicable to this corridor. ALTERNATIVES 1. Direct the submission of these drafts to the Planning s i I Commission for their review and recommendation. 2. Amend and refer. 3. Table for further Council discussion. 4. Take no action. RLCOMMENDATION - It is recommended that these be referred to the Planning Commission for their review and recommendation. It is anticipated that the Planning Commission will have the opportunity to conduct a work session with John Shardlow on July 6, 1988 to review background on performance zoning and the Corridor Study. It is then anticipated that the Planning Commission will consider further work on this and that a public hearing in relationship to these be held perhaps at the August 1, 1988 meeting if appropriate progress has been made. It is additionally recommended that the Council direct the Planning Commission that their review of this matter is to entail a recommendation on the zoning amendments needed to the Corridor Study. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by , seconded by , that the Council refer the drafts prepared by John Shardlow to the Planning Commission for their consideration and recommendation and that they be directed to undertake the review of the ordinances as to to implement the Comprehensive Plan following appropriate meeting(s) with John Shardlow. Ayes ,, Nays cc: Planning Commission Members John Shardlow Section 10. _ SPECIAL REQUIREMENT FOR REZONING IN THE HIGHWAY 12 CORRIDOR STUDY Ar— A. Minimum Area To insure consistency with the goals and objectives of the Highway 12 Corridor Study, applications for rezoning within the study area must include a minimum of five acres. The plans submitted along with these applications must also include enough information regarding the effect of the proposed development on surounding parcels to insure that the property can be developed in a manner that is both compatible with adjacent properties and consistent with the Highway 12 Corridor Study. B. Access and Circulation Plan The plans submitted along with the application must propose access to the proposed development which is consistent with the Transportation Planning Objectives of the Highway 12 Corridor Study. C. Sanitary Sewer Availabili_y Preliminary Engineering plans must also be submitted that are prepared to a sufficient level of detail to demonstrate that sanitary sewer capacity is available to serve the development. The feasibility of providing this service will also scrutinized along with an improvement financing plan to insure that the costs associated with the provision of this service will be paid for by the development. D. Storm Water Management Site Drainage plans must be submitted to insure consistency with the storm water management objectives of the Highway 12 Corridor Study. E. Available Zoning Districts Due to the unique set of constraints and opportunities that effect future decisions regarding development within the Highway 12 Corridor Study Area, applications for rezoning are strongly encouraged to utilize the planned unit development approach, outlined in Sec. 10. of the Orono Zoning Ordinance. However, applications will be accepted for rezoning requests for any of the following existing zoning districts within the City, consistent with a finding of consistency with the Highway 12 Corridor Study and subject to compliance with all of the additional requirements established in this section: HC Highway Commercial District PRD Planned Residential Development R1A One Family Residential District R1B One Family Residential District M6 Multiple Family Planned Residential District F. Rem irement of Development Agreement All development permits authorized within the Highway 12 Corridor Study Area shall be subject to the execution of a development agreement. Said development agreement shall clearly identify the timing of all of the public improvements associated with the development and the developers' finanr.ial commitments related to these improvements. The agreement shall also include any and all other conditions of approval deemed necessary to insure compliance with the Special Minimum Requirements for Rezoning the Highway 12 Corridor Study Area, as well as the goals and objectives of the Highway 12 Corridor Study. SECT. 10.45 B-6 HIGHWAY COMMERCIAL DISTRICT Subd. 1. Purpose. The purpose of the HC Highway Commercial District is to provide a commercial district specifically tailored to accomplish the commercial development ofjectives fo the Highway 12 Corridor Study Section of the Orono Comprehensive Plan. Subd. 2 Application. All applicants for a building permit in any "B-6" Highway Business District shall be reviewed by tiie Council and referred to the Planning Commission for re-,cw. ' Subd. 3 Permitted Uses. Within any "B-6" Highway Business District, no structure or land shall be used except for one of the following uses or uses deemed similar by the Council. A. Retail Shopping Centers. B. Banks. C. Libraries. D. Offices. E. Health Clubs. F. Bakery goods sales and baking of goods for retail sale on premises. G. Auto Accessory Store. H. Delicatessen. I. Photographic Studio. J. Automobile and other vehicles of transportation gales when conducted entirely within a building. K. Boats and marine sales when conducted entirely within a building. L. Furniture sales. M. Interior decorating studio. N. Motels, motor hotels and hotels. O. Newspaper and publishing office. P. Optical and jewelry manufacturing. Q. Photographic supplies and processing of film and prints. R. Picture framing. S. Printing shop. T. Restaurants (Class I). A restaurant where food is served to a customer and consumed while seated at a counter or table, or a restaurant where food is selected by a customer while going through a_line.and taken to a table for consumption, and where the restaurant does not serve intoxicating liquor or provide live entertainment. Subd. 4 Conditional Use A. Within any "B-6" Highway Business District, no structure or land shall be used for one of the following uses except by conditional use permit: 1. Restaurants (Class II). Fast Food, Convenience, Drive-in, and 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 regaraless of how it is served, or restaurants which serve intoxicating liquor or have live entertainment. 2. Any business that includes a drive-thru function. 3. Motor fuel station. 4. Liquor Store. 5. Theaters. L.. 6. Bowling alleys, electronic game rooms, skating rinks, gymnasiums, night clubs, fraternal organizations (provided the structure in .jhich the use is situated shall not be located within 100' of any "R" District). 7. Funeral homes and mortuaries. 8. Car wash. 9. Building material sales, provided it is conducted entirely within a building. 10. Commercial greenhouse provided it is conducted entirely within a building. Subd. 5 Accessory Uses. Within Any "B-6" Highway Business District, the following uses shall be permitted accessory uses: A. Any accessory use as regulated in the "B-1" Business District. Subd. 6 Area, Height, Lot Width, Setback Requirements and Design Requirements. A. Area. The minimum lot size shall be one acre. 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 feed- from such lot line. F. Fencing. Wherever a "B-6" Highway 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, 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. No building or structure of a temporary character, trailer, basement, tent or shack shall be constructed, placed or maintained upon 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 .hose 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 regulation; 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. J. At least twenty five percent (250) of the land area shall be landscaped with grass, approved ground cover, shrubbery and trees. At least three percent (30) of the land area within a park-ng area shall be landscaped. The following minimum sizes shall be required at the time of planting: Overstory Deciduous Trees 2-1/2 inches in diameter Ornamental Trees 1-1/2 inches in diameter Coniferous Trees 6 feet tall Major Shrub Plantings 5 gallons K. All trash and trash handling equipment shall be stored within the principal structure, within an attached structure accessible from within the principal structure, or totally screened from eye -level view from public streets and adjacent residential properties. If accessory structures are proposed, they shall be constructed of the same building material as the principal structure and be readily served through swinging doors. L. Garages, accessory structures, screen walls and exposed areas of retaining walls shall be of similar type, quality and appearance as the principal structure. M. The ground level view of all mechanical utilities shall be completely screened from contiguous properties and adjacent streets, or designed to be compatible with the architectural treatment of the principal structure. N. External loading and service areas must be completely screened from the ground level view from contiguous residential or commercial properties and adjacent streets, except at access points. O. The light from automobile headlights and other sources shall be screened whenever it may be directed onto adjacent residential windows. SEC. 10._ PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) SECTION: 10. .A: Authorization 10..B: Allowed Uses 10._.C: Required Standards 10._.D: Coordination With Subdivision Regulations 10. —.F: Phasing and Guarantee of Performance 10._.G: Control of Planned Unit Development Following Completion 10._.H: Procedure for Processing a Planned Unit Development SECTION 10._.A AUTHORIZATION: Planned unit development authorization may allow: Subd. 1. Variety: Within a comprehensive.site design concept a mixture of land uses, housing types and densities. Subd. 2. Sensitivity: Through the departure from the strict application of required setbacks, yard areas, lot sizes, minimum house sizes, minimum requirements, and other performance standards associated with traditional zoning, planned unit development can maximize the development potential of land while remaining sensitive to its unique and valuable natural characteristics. Subd. 3. Efficiency: The consolidation of areas for recreation and reductions in street lengths and other utility related expenses. Subd. 4. Density Transfer: The project density may be clustered, basing density on number of units per acre versus specific lot dimensions. Subd. 5. District Integration: The combination of uses which are allowed in separate zoning districts such as: A. Mixed residential allows both densities and unit types to be varied within the project. B. Mixed residential with increased density acknowledging the greater sensitivity of PUD projects, regulation provides increased density on the property if a PUD is utilized. C. Mixed land uses with the integration of compatible land uses within the project. SECTION 10. B ALLOWED USES Subd. 1. Used w:.thin the PUD may include only those uses generally considered associated with the general land use category shown for the area on the official C^.nprehensive Land Use Plan. Specific allowed sues and pe•formance standards for each PUD shall be delineated in an ordinance and development plant. The PUD development plan shall identify all the proposed land uses and those uses shall become permitted uses with the acceptance of the development plan. \ny change in list of uses presented in the development play will be considered an amendment to the PUD and will follow the procedures specified in Section 10. .F of this Title. SECTION 10. .0 REQUIRED STANDARDS Subd. 1. The City sh&.11 consider the proposed PUD from the point of view of all standards and purposes of the Comprehensive Land use Plan to achieve a maximum coordination between the proposed development and the surrounding uses, the conservation of woodland and the protection of health, safety and welfare of the community and residents of the PUD. To these ends, the City Council shall consider the location of the buildings, compatibility, parking areas and other features with respect to the topography of the area and existing natural features such as streams and large trees; the efficiency, adequacy and safety of the proposed layout -f internal streets and driveways; the adequacy and location of green areas; the adequacy, location and screening of parking areas; and such other matters as the Council may find to have a material bearing upon the stated standards and objectives of the Comprehensive Land Use Plan. SECTION 10. D COORDINATION WITH SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS Subd. 1. Subdivision review under the subdivision regulations shall be carried out simultaneously with the review of the PUD. The plans required under this Chapter shall be submitted in a fcrm which will satisfy the requirements of the subdivision ordinance for the preliminary and final plat. SECTION 10. .F REVISIONS AND/OR CHANGES Subd. 1. Minor changes such as the location, placement and height of structures may be authorized by the Development Review Committee if required by engineering or other circumstances not foreseen at the time the final plan was approved and filed with the Director of Community Development. Subd. 2. Changes in uses, any rearrangement of lots, blocks and build ng tracts, changes in the provision of common open spaces, and all other changes to the approved final development plan may be made only after a public hearing conducted by the Council. Any changes shall be recorded as amendments to the recorded copy of the final development plan. Subd. 3. All of the provisions of this Title applicaole to the original district within which the Planned Unit Development District is Established shall apply to the PUD District except as otherw..se provided in approval of the final plan. Subd. 4. Review: If sntial development has not occurred within a rea e time after approval of the PUD Zoning District, ity Council may instruct the Planning Commission to ).nitiate rezoning to the original zoning district. It shall not be necessary for the City Council to find that the rezoning was in error. SECTION 10. .F PHASING AND GUARANTEE OF PERFORMANCE Subd. 1. The Planning Commission shall compare the actual development accomplished in the various PUD zones with the approved development schedule. Subd. 2. Upon recommendation of the Planning Commission and for good cause shown by the property owner, the Council may extend the limits of the development schedule. Subd. 3. The construction and provision of all of the common open space and public and recreational facilities which are shown on the final development plan must proceed at the same rate as the construction of dwelling units, if any. The Development Review Committee shall review al? of the building permits issued for the PUD and examine the construction which has taken place on the site. If the\ find that the rate of construction of dwP "_-..g units is greater than the rate at which common open spaces and public and recreational facilities have been constructed and provided, they shall forward this information to the Council for action. SECTION 10. _G CONTROL OF PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT FOLLOWING COMPLETION Subd. 1. After the certificate of occupancy has been issued, the use of the land and the construction, modification or alteration of any buildings or structures within the planned development shall be governed by the final development plan. Subd. 2. After the certificate of occupancy has been issued, no changes shall be made in the approved final development plan except upon application as provided below: A. Any minor extensions, alterations or modifications of existing buildings or structures may be authorized by the Development Review Committee if they are consistent with the purposes and intent of the final plan. No change authorized by this Section may increase the cube of any building or structure by more than ten percent (10%). B. Any building or structure that is totally or substantially destroyed may be reconstructed only in compliance with the final development plan unless and amendment to the final development plan is approved under Section 10._ .F. C. Changes in the use of the common open space may be authorized by an amendment to the final development plan under Section 10. _.F. D. Any other changes in the final development plan must be authorized by an amendment of the final development plan under Section 10. _.F. SECTION 10. _.H PROCEDURE FOR PROCESSING A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT Subd. 1. Application Conference: Upon filing of an application for PUD, the applicant of the proposed PUD shall arrange for and attend a conference with the Director of Community Development. The primary purpose of the conference shall be to provide the applicant with an opportunity to gather information and obtain guidance as to the general suitability of his proposal for the area for which it is proposed and its conformity to the provisions of this Title before incurring substantial expense in the preparation of plans, surveys and other data. Subd. 2. General Concept Plan A. Purpose: The general concept plan provides an opportunity for the applicant to submit a plan to the City showing his basic intent and the general nature of the entire development without incurring substantial cost. The plan shall include the following: 1. overall maximum PUD density range. 2. General location of major streets and pedestrian ways. 3. General location and extent of public and common open space. 4. General location of residential and nonresidential land uses with approximate type and intensities of development. 5. Staging and time schedule of development. 6. Other special criteria for development. B. Schedule: 1. Developer meets with the Director of Community Development to discuss the proposed developments. 2. The applicant shall file the concept stage application and preliminary plat, together with all supporting data. 3. Within thirty (30) days after verification by the Director of Community Development that the required plan and supporting data is adequate, the Planning Commission shall hold a public hearing. 4. The Planning Commission shall conduct the hearing and report its findings and make recommendations to the City Council. Notice of the hearing shall consist of a legal property description, description of request, and be published in the official newspaper at least ten (10) days prior co the hearing and written notification of the hearing shall be mailed at least ten (10) days prior thereto to owners of land within three hundred fifty feet (3501) of the boundary of the property in question. 5. The City may request additional information from the applicant concerning operational factors or retain expert testimony at the expense of the applicant concerning operational factors. 6. The Council may hold a public hearing after the receipt of the report and recommendations from the Planning Commission. If the Planning Commission fails to make a report within sixty (60) days after receipt of the application, then the r Council may proceed without the report. 'ouncil may approve the concept plan ano i such conditions as it deems reasonabl. .,pproval shall require a four -fifths (4/5) vote of the entire Council. approval, if given, the applicant shall submit the development stage application and final plat. The application shall proceed and the acted upon in accordance with Section 10. _ .F for zoning district changes. If appropriate because of the limited scale of the proposal, the concept stage and development stages may proceed simultaneously. D. Applications: Ten (10) copies of the following exhibits, analysis and plans shall be submitted to the City: General Concept Stage: 1. Preliminary plat and information required by subdivision Title. 2. General Information: (a) The landowner's name and address and his interest in the subject property. (b) The applicant's name and address if different from the landowner. (c) The names and addresses of all professional consultants who have contributed to the development of the PUD plan being submitted, including attorney, land planner, engineer and surveyor. (d) Evidence that the applicant has sufficient control over the subject property to effectuate the proposed PUD, including a statement of all legal, beneficial, tenancy and contractual interests held in or affecting the subject property and including an up-to-date certified abstract of title or registered prop, y report, and such other evidence as City Attorney may require to show the status of title or control of the subject property. 3. Present Status: (a) The address and legal description of the property. (b) The existing zoning classification and present use of the subject property and all lands within one thousand feet (1,0001) of the property. (c) A map depicting the existing development of the property and all land within one thousand feet (1,0001) thereof and indicating the location of existing streets, property lines, easements, water mains and storm and sanitary sewers, with invert elevations on and within one hundred feet (1001) of the property. (d) A written statement general describing the proposed PUD and the market which it is intended to serve and its demand showing its relationship to the City's Comprehensive Plan and how the proposed PUD is to be designed, arranged and operated in order to permit the development and use of neighboring property in accordance with the applicable regulations of the City. (e) Site Conditions: Graphic reproductions of the existing site conditions at a scale of one inch equals one hundred feet (1" = 1001). 1. Contours; minimum two foot (2") intervals. 2. Location, type and extent of tree cover. 3. Slope analysis. 4. Location and extent of water bodies, wetlands and streams and flood plains within three hundred feet (3001) cf the property. 5. Significant rock outcroppings. 6. Existing drainage patterns. 7. Vistas and significant views. 8. Soil conditions as they affect development. All of the graphics should be the same scale as the final plan to allow easy cross reference. The use of overlays is recommended for clear reference. (f) Schematic drawing of the proposed development concept including but not limited to the general location of major circulation elements, public and common open space, residential and other land uses. (q) A statement of the estimated total number of dwelling units propcsed for ti.e PUD and a tabulation of the proposed approximate allocations of land use expressed in acres and as a percent of the total project area, which shall include at least the followinc: (1) Area devoted to residential uses% (2) Area devoted to residential •use by building type. (3) Area devoted to common open space. (4) Area devoted to public open space. (5) Approximate area devoted to streets. (6) Approximate area devoted to, and number of, off-street parking and loading spaces and rela7-ed access. (7) Approximate area, and floor area, devoted to commercial uses. (8) Approximate area, and floor area, devoted to industrial or office use. (h) When the PUD is to be constructed in stages during a period of time extending beyond a single construction season, a schedule for the development of such stages or units shall be submitted stating the approximate beginning and completion date for each such stage or unit and the proportion of the total PUD public or common open space and dwelling units to be provided or constructed during each such state and overall chronology of development to be followed from stage to stage. (i) When the proposed PUD includes provisions for public or common open space or service facilities, a statement describing the provision that is to be made for the care and maintenance of such open space or service facilities. (j) Any restrictive covenants that are to be recorded with respect to property included in the proposed PUD. (k) Schematic utilities plans indicating placement of water, sanitary and storm sewers. (1) The City may excuse an applicant from submitting any specific item of information or document required in this stage which it finds to be unnecessary to the consideration of the specific proposal. (m) The City may require the submission of any additional information or documentation which it may find necessary or appropriate to full consideration of the proposed PUD. 4. Development Stage: Development stage submissions should depict and outline the proposed implementations of the general concept stage for the PUD. Information from the general concept stage may be included for background and to provide a basis for the submitted plan. The development stage submissions shall include but not be limited to: (a) A final plat and information required by the City subdivision Title. (b) Ten (10) sets of preliminary plans drawn to a scale of not less than one inch equals one hundred feet (1"=1001) (or scale requested by the Administrator containing at least the following information): (1) Proposed name of the development (which shall not duplicate nor be similar in pronunciation to the name of any plat theretofore recorded in the county where the subject property is situated). (2) Property boundary lines and dimensions of the property and any significant topographical or physical features of the property. (3) The location, size use and arrangement including height in stories and feet and total square feet of ground area coverage and floor area of proposed buildings, including mobile homes, and existing buildings which will remain, if any. (4) Location, dimensions of all driveways, entrances, curb cuts, parking stalls, loading spaces and access aisles, and all other circulation elements including bike and pedestrian; and the total site coverage of all circulation elements. (5) Location, designation and total area of all common open space. (6) Location, designation and total area proposed to be conveyed or dedicated for public open space, including parks, playgrounds, school sites and recreational facilities. (7) Proposed lots and blocks, if any and numbering system. (8) The location, use and size of structures and other land uses on adjacent properties. (9) Detailed sketches and provisions of proposed landscaping. (10) General grading and drainage plans for the developed PUD. (11) Any other information that may have been required by the Planning Commission or Council in conjunction with the approval of the general concept plan. (c) An accurate legal description of the entire area within the PUD for which final development plan approval is sought. (d) A tabulation indicating the number of residential dwelling units and expected population. (e) A tabulation indicating the gross square footage, if any, of commercial and industrial floor space by type of activity (e.g. drug store, dry cleaning, supermarket). (f) Preliminary architectural "typical" plans indicating use, floor, plan, elevations and exterior wall finishes of proposed building, including mobile homes. (g) A detailed site plan, suitable for recording, showing the physical layout, design and purpose of all streets, easements, rights of way, utility lines and facilities, lots, block, public and common open space, general landscaping plan, structure, including mobile homes, and uses. (h) Preliminary grading and site alteration plan illustrating changes to existing topography and natural site vegetation. The Plan should clearly reflect the site treatment and its conformance with the approved concept plan. (i) A preliminary plat prepared in accordance with the Subdivision Ordinance. (j) A soil erosion control plan acceptable to watershed districts, Department of Natural Resources. Soil Conservation Service, or any other agency with review authority clearly illustrating erosion control measures to be used during construction and as permanent measures. 6 PPLI / NIL PEETING JUi1 27 19' 3 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark Bernhardson, City Administrat DATE: June 22, 1988 SUBJECT: 1987 Financial Audit Attachment: A. City of Orono 1987 Financial Report (Previously distributed) B. Pannell Kerr Forster Letter Dated 5/18/88 ISSUE - 1. Present the Council with an opportunity to review the financial report for 1987 with the City's Auditors. 2. Determine if the Council wants to accept the 1987 Financial Report. 3. Determine if the City wants to authorize the expenditure of funds to the Auditor to do the appropriate cash flow projections for the City's special assessment funds INTRODUCTION - The City is annually required to have an audit either_by th_e State Auditor or an outside auditing agency. For the past five years Pannell Kerr Forster has performed that function for the City. The City must submit the audit report by June 30, 1988 to the State. In July the City will submit for Council approval the required summary sheets for publication. DISUCSSION - As you have probably noted the 1987 Financial Report is _sU slantially larger than past reports, primarily because of the City's attempt to meet the Certificate of Achievement from the Government Finance Officer Association (GFOA). The additional information, however, while included to meet the requirements should be very beneficial to all readers of the statement to better understand the financial position of the City. In the transmittal letter contained in Attachment B the Auditor has detailed two issues of comment. The first one is related to special assessment funds and the cash projections. The City has been delaying doing an updated cash projections pending the close-out of the Crystal Bay appeals. However, at this time appropriate projections can be undertaken to determine the City's position of the funds without the appeals being fully completed. The cost of this to be done by the Auditors is $750.00. The primary reason for the up -date in addition to determining the cash flow projections are for the City to determine what, if any, it has for tax levies within each of the catagories. The reason cash up -dates have to be done on a periodic basis is because of variations in pre -payments and investment interest rates that may 1 have a decided affect on the amount of money needed for payment of a particular fund. These were last done in 1984. The other issue discussed was the changing of the City's fixed asset accounting from an outside firm to an in-house computer application. The Auditors outline what they feel are appropriate items for consideration and the City will be incorporating that in its fixed asset accounting. The_ Auditors are_ scheduled_ to come to the meetin(I if C ouncilmembers would desire their prestLlce. In the past two years however, there have not been questions regarding the report that the Councilmembers have desired to have them present. It_ would be helpful if you could indicate to us by Monday morning, if you would like them present. ALTERNATIVES - A. Opportunity to discuss 1. Raise issues related to the Audit Report 2. Table for further discussion B. Acceptance of the Audit Report 1. Accept 2. Table C. Authorization for cash up -date 1. Authorize 2. Choose not to undertake 3. Table for further consideration RECOMMENDATION - It is recommended that the Council, following any questions they may have, accept the financial report and authorize the up -dating of the cash flow projections for the special assessment funds. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by , seconded by , that the Council having reviewed the 1967 Audit Report accepts the report and authorizes the City to expend $750.00 to contract with Pannell Kerr Forster to do the necessary cash flow projections for the City's five debt funds. Ayes Nays __ May 18, 1988 City Council and Residents City of Orono Orono, Minnesota The following comments relating t with the financial planning for accounting records. Special Assessment Funds PANNELL KERR FORSTER Certified Public Accountants 410 Park National Bank Bldg 5353 Wayzata Boulevard Minn :apohs. MN 55416 Telephone (612) 545-0421 o your 1987 audit are provided to assist you your City and continued improvement of your We would encourage the City to project the cash flow needs of the Special Assessment Funds, especially for the 1985 ?mprovement Bond. Because of the large reduction of special assessments dedicated to debt service due to settlements on appeals and the related cost of these appeals, it will be necessary to prepare projections for future general property tax levies and other financing sources in both the 1985 Improvement Debt Service and Capital Project funds. The City should consider performing cash flow projections prior to the settlement of the one remaining appeal, in order to assure adequate funds will be available to meet required payments. F1YPrl ACCPCR The City is in the process of converting their fixed asset records from an outside service bureau to an irr-house automated system. Because asset records will be maintained on an internally developed spreadsheet system, it is extremely important that the operation of the system created be adequately documented. Such documentation is necessary to assure that account records are not lost or made inaccessible should the person who developed the system become unavailable to maintain the system. In addition, a careful analysis of information requirements should be made in order to assure that the system designed provides such information. The City should also consider performing a physical inven— tory of its property and equipment to ensure the accuracy of the asset records. City Council and Residents GFOA Award Certification May 18, 1988 We are pleased that the City has taken the necessary steps to apply for the Government Finance Officers' Association (GFOA) award for the first time with the 1987 financial report. The award, referred to as "Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting," is a national program which is highly recognized by the governmental sector, the accounting profession, and related associates such as bond con- sultants and financial advisors. The benefits of such an award are dif- ficult to quantify, yet we consider them to include city pride (citizen, council, and staff), recognition of quality performance, and the creation of a historical comprehensive financial document. To participate in the program, the City will be submitting a Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR). We have made certain changes in the City's financial statement format and contents in order to incorporate the additional schedules and formatting suggested by the accounting profession in compiling the CAFR. This report now includes a letter -)f transm'- tal by the City's Finance Department (which discusses the report, fini position, future plans, etc.) and also several new statistical tab recommended by the program. We believe the City's Finance Department and City Administration are to be commended for taking the initiative to achieve this award. While there can be no guarantee that this certificate will be awarded to the City for the 1987 financial report, we believe that a reasonable attempt to meet the criteria for the award has been made. Gravhic Information Micro computers are utilized extensively while performing audits of City records. A beneficial result is that certain trend analysis and analytical relationship information can be obtained. The following pages contain certain generalized graphs produced from our electronic workpapers which may be of interest to you. Some of this information ______ _L_ ---dules of the City' nancial statements i other sources wh.•i, may not have been 1.3 1.2 1.1 1 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 TAX LEVIES CITY OF ORONO 1962 1983 1984 1965 1986 YEAR LEVY COLLECTI ® GENERAL REVENUE YEAR DEBT SERVICE MILL RATES CRY OF ORONO 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 YEAR LEVY CULLECTI� ® GENERAL REVENUE � DEBT SERVICE 1987 1987 GENERAL FUND REVENUE/EXPENDITURES Cm OF ORONO 2.6 2.5 2.4 2.3 2.2 2.1 2 1.9 ,.e 1.7 1.6 1.6 1.4 198I 2.6 2.5 2.4 2.3 22 2.1 2 1.9 1.8 1.7 1.6 1.5 1.4 1283 1984 1965 YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31 0 REVENUE + EXPENDITURES GENERAL FUND REVENUE CITY OF ORONO 1986 1987 1982 1983 1984 1965 1986 1987 FOR YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31 0 ACTUAL REVENUES + REVENUE BUDGET GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURE CITY OF ORONO 2.3 2.2 2.1 2 1.9 c g 1.8 1.7 1.6 1.5 1.4 1982 1983 1�14 1985 1966 FOR YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31 0 ACTUAL EXPENDITURES t EXPENDITURE BUDGET 3.1 3 2.9 2.8 2.7 2.6 2.5 GENERAL FUND CASH & FUND BALANCE CITY OF ORONO 1983 1984 1965 1986 1987 AT DECEMBER 31 k INVESTMENTS t FUND BALANCE City Council and Residents May 18, 1988 We would be pleased to discuss these reco-mendations with you and to assist with any changes you wish to make. We also wish to express our thanks for the cour- tesy and assistance extended to us during the course of our examination. Sincerely, PANNELL KERR FORSTER Kenneth W. Malloy, Partner KWM/sel 6148R.2 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark Bernhardson, City Administratocr DATE: June 14, 1988 SUBJECT: 1988-89 Strategic Goal Setting Attachments: A. 1987-88 Strategic Goal Setting Session Memo Memo Dated 9/21/87 B. 1988-89 City Administrator's Goal Setting Dated 4/20/88 (5/31/88 UEdate) ISSUE - Determination by Council as to the process they desire to undertake to establish their goal setting for 1989. IN_TRODUCTIO_N - For the past two years the Council has undertaken a informal goal setting process in advance of each year to help guide itself and the staff on priorities it is deemed appropriate to work on. Staff has found this very helpful in understanding what items are important to the Council and to work toward these goals for the City as an organization. DISCUSSION - Goal setting for 1987 and 1988 were done following completion of the budget cycle. It was indicated last year that this would be attempted to be moved up so that there was some coordination of the strategic goal setting with the budgeting cycle as the City budget is an implementing document of City policy when it requires financial resources. In addition this year to both the strategic goal setting and the budget process, is the 1988-1999 capital budget which attempts to provide a long range financial framework for important financial costs that may be upcoming both in the succeeding year and the foreseeable future. This year the staff is requesting that the Council set aside a date in late July or early August to do a preliminary goal setting for 1989 which would include a work session on the capital budget. This item is presente(4 at this time in order to establish a date that is available to all Councilmembers together with requesting input on desired goals or objectives for 1.989. ALTERNATIVES 1. Establish a date 2. Provide suggestions for goals for 1989 3. Delay consideration of strategic planning to later in the fall. 4. Choose not to undertake. RE_COMM_END_A_TIO_N - It is recommended in addition to the Council submitting its desired goals and objectives for 1989 that August 3, 1988 be established as a date for initial strategic goal setting session for 1989. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by _ , establish Wednesday, August 3, meeting to establish goals for on the capital budget proposal seconded by , that the Council 1988 as the date for its initial 1989 together with a work session for 1989-90. Ayes 2 Nays 92287.5 4- TA0 tom el-rt- A TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark Bernhardson, City Administratorw�}� DATE: September 21, 1987 SUBJECT: Council Strategic Planning - October 7, 1987 Attachment: A. 1988 Strategic Planning Memo Dated 8/31/87 ISSUE 1. Presentation of materials for the Council in advance of the October 7, 1987 meeting. 2. Suggestions of possible strategic goals or issues that individual Councilmembers would like addressed as part of the strategic planning process on October 7, 1987. INTRODUCTION - At the Council's September 14, 1987 Council meeting Council established Wednesday, October 7, 1987 as the Council's strategic planning meeting. DIS_CUS_S_ION - The following is a suggested agenda for the October 7, 19E" meeting. - 1. Review of the general strategic planning process. - 2. Discussion of the 1987 materials including review of the mission statement, external and internal analysis, key strategic objectives and the key short term objectives. - 3. Progress on those strategic issues. - 4. Strategic planning for 1988. - Alteration in key strategic issues - Alteration of key objectives - Establishment of short term objectives Should Councilmembers have other strategic issues that they ,could like to address at that meeting they may be presented either in conjunction with the regular Council meeting on September 28, 1987; at the October 7, 1987 meeting or anytime in between. i a PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by , seconded by that the Council y give staff any issues that they would like addressed on October ' 7, 1987 and accept the agenda as established for that meeting. I Ayes , Nays f 9187.6 IC-2— TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark Bernhardson, City AdministratotT� DATE: August 31, 1987 SUBJECT: 1988 Council Strategic. Planning Attachments: A. 1987 Council Strategic Planning Preliminary Information B. 1987 Strategic Planning Document Dated 11/5/87 C. 1987 Stretegic Plan Dated 12/29/86 D. 1987-1988 Council Administrator Goal Setting Dated 4/22/87 E. 1987 Strategic Planning Progress to Date ISSUE 1. Establishment of a meeting to undertake the 1988 Council Strategic Planning. 2. Requestfor Council to identify issues not already contained in the 1987 Strategic Planning Document and they would be interested in taking a look at for 1988. IN_TROD_U_CTIO_N - In October 1986 the Council initiated its strategic planning process which utilized Attachment A and resulted in Attachment B. This was done fully realizing that a majority of the Council would not be present for the actual execution of those objectives. The short term objectives timetable actually was adopted by the present Council at the January 12, 1987 Council meeting. DISCUSSION_ - Attachment D lists the progress to date on the 1987 ob—jectives. While progress has not been as great as desired, it is felt by staff that it is appropriate vehicle for Council -staff communications on major objectives and does serve as a useful means to keep the Council apprised of issues they consider important. Since the City's strategic planning process is in its developmental stages it is rnt an attempted at this point to make the strategic planning process either in concert with or ahead of the next years budget process, however this is something we will be looking at in 1988 for 1989. RECOMMENDATION - It is rec,)mmended that the Council establish October 7, 1987 at 7:00 P.I.I. as the date for its next strategic planning date. It is anticipated that there will be a brief review at that meeting or the process and each of the steps with the Council either adding or deleting items from that list that are appropriate or do consider appropriate for 1988 and that based on that will work towards the short term objectives for 1988. Any ideas as to issues you have in advance of that meeting would be appreciated for inclusion in that discussion, as would any issues identified that evening. a PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by , seconded by , to establish October 7, 1987 at 7:00 P.M. as the special meeting of the a Council's strategic planning procer;.s for 1988. Ayes Nays __ .0'dl, TO: Mayor and City Council ,lC� FROM: Mark Bernhardson, City Administrator�l, v DATE: October 2, 1986 SUBJECT: Strategic Planning Meeting - October 6, 1986 - 7:00 P.M. - Council Chambers Attachments: A. Strategic Planning Process (2 articles) B. City of Orono/Staff Strategic Planning Dated 1/86 C. City of Orono - Administrator Goal Setting 5/86-4/87 INTRODU'7TION During November and December 1985, the department heads and myself spent two days at Spring Hill. A portion of that time was spent developing the attached strategic planning document for the City of Orono organization. This was initially presented to the Council for their information at the February 10, 1986 Council meeting. Upon receipt of that document, Councilmembers indicated their interest to engage in a similar excercise which led to the meeting set for Monday, October 6th. Strategic planning for an organization requires the involvement of the key decision makers, which in the case of. the City of Orono is the City Council. STRATEGIC PLANNING Some of you may be familiar with the concept of strategic planning. The process has an organization taking a long term look at itself and the environment within which it works. Through the process the organization focuses its direction. In the private sector this has led to several organizations doing a total restructuring of their organizations. In some cases organizations have entered in new markets based on their expertice. In other cases, organizations have sold off substantial portions of their business as they felt that those businesses were not related to their principal missions. In attachment A you will find two presentations of the strategic planning process which provided the background for the staff's development in Orono. ORONO COUNCIL STRATEGIC PLANNING PROCESS The basic objectives for "abbreviated" process are as follows: A. Review of staff strategic planning 1 B. Define, amend, alter staff's planning as Council sees fit C. Select key short term objectives for 1987 In order to make the process effective in the short period of time allotted Monday night it is requested that review be done ahead of time, in order to make it go as effectively as possible. Steps for the meeting in light of the above stated objectives are as follows: 1. Organizational mission 2. External analysis 3. Internal analysis 4. Strategic issue identification 4 5. Objectives for key issues 6. Short term objectives 7. Review/Amend Administrator's Council's goal setting Based on the progress of that meeting and the desire of Council to further the process, appropriate steps will be taken following the October 6th meeting in order to bring the process to a successful implementation. If used appropriately this is a process that has no conclusion but is of an ongoing means for the organization to determine its direction through a long term view. 2 { j ' ' The Strateny Planninn Process The attached diagram identifies the major component steps of the strategy planning process, and outlines the flow of logic which must underlie the development .of a sound strategic plan. 1. Statement of Company Mission and Objectives The statement of company mission and objectives is the basic . starting point for strategic planning. The statement of mission - defines the Operating Company's essential nature and character. It describes the Campany's role in the Corporation, how it will contribute to the Corporate Strategy, its market position in terms of target customer segments and geographical markets, its major M1 strategic appeals to these customers, and its current performance objectives. The statement of mission, in short, defines what the • company is now and what it is to become. 2. External Analysis The external analysis involves an assessment of major environmental trends and their likely impact on the company's future. This incliles an analysis of long term economic trends, *consumer market trends, competitive trends,'public policy treads, and other key external forces impacting on the business. The result of the external analysis is the identification,of a limited number (2-4) of key external threats and opportunities: That is, the one•or two major -1- factors which may threaten the company's future success, and the one of two major trends which the company might exploit as potential opportunities. 3. Internal Analysis The internal analysis is a situation and trend assessment of the company's key performance capabilities and resources. This analysis should include at a minimum an assessment of the company's personnel resources and organizational structure, its physical facilities, its major operating policies and procedures, and its financial position and performance. The internal analysis results in the identification of a limited number (again 2-4) of key internal strengths which can be leveraged, and weaknesses to be corrected. 4. Key Strategic Issues By comparing the company mission and objectives, the external threats and opportunities, and -the interna. strengths and weaknesses, the key strategic issues facing the company can be identified. These key issues again must be limited in number to only those core issues which will have a major impact on the future of the company. Examples of key strategic issues might be: New competitive threats against which a company is not currently well defended; emerging ne%q market opportunities which a company either is not currently well positioned or does not currently have the resources to exploit. These key issues provide the focus and direction for developing sound strategic plais. 3 -Z- t Strategic Plans ( Once the key issues have been identified sound, action -oriented strategic plans must be developed which will resolve the issues and help the company fulfill its mission and accomplish its objectives. Individual strategies may take a'variety of forms reflecting the unique capabilities and resources of individual companies. In any case. however, the strategies must be a response to the key strategic issues facing the company. These strategies may involve an aggressive expansion program, they may indicate ( reintensified merchandising programs to regain a dominant but threatened competitive position, or they may suggest a program of short term retrenchment and internal rebuilding in anticipation of future growth and improved profitability. The critical point is that the' strategic plans must be consistent with and be -based on the company mission, its external threats and opportunities, its internal strengths and weaknesses, and be addressed to the ey strategic issues deterninivo the company's. future vitality. 6. Time and !Action Schedule and Strategic Objectives Even the most rigorous and well -considered strategic plan will be to no avail unless it is implemented with commitment and precision. Consequently the next step in the planning process is to develop a realistic but challenging Time and Action Schedule for the execution of the plan.. This schedule would also include a sta temunt of specific objectives or milestones for the coming year - control -3- i points for monitoring the company's progress. Even though. the strategy reflects a long run plan, it -is still exezuted in a series of short run actions. 7. KeX Strategic Decisions The final step in the strategic planning process is F-)ssibly the most crucial component - id-itifying and forcing the resolution of the key decisions which have to be made before the plan can be j implemented. Most of these decisions are the responsibilities of the i Operating Company, but some, most notably those involving major capital expenditures, are dependent on corporate management approval. i These decision points must be explicitly identified, and it is encum- bant on corporate rranaye^,ent to respond to these points in a direct and timely man-ier. The results of these decisions can then be incor- porated in the Operating r�o.mpany's financial goal planning. I THE Si-RATEGY . PLANNING PROCESS EXTERNAL ANALYSIS: KEY THREATS AND OPPORTUINlTIES STATEVENT OF CO;IPANY MISSION AND ' OBJECTIVES KEY STRATEGIC ISSUES STPAT;:GIC PLANS INTERNAL ANALYSIS: KEY STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES y i ACT ON SCHEDULE f kr) S 7 �..�,'EGIC OBJECTIVES 0P C011ING YEAR _.. k ip KEY STRAFEG'.r DECISIO11S OPERATING CO.iPAN1ES -CORPORATE IlLANAGEI.IClIT p� 1 ST1;A'Trc,lr PrVIEWS Effecti a management of a businecs concern requires a clear understanding of: o Who are. we? o What are we trying to accomplish? o How are we doing and why? o What do we need to do better or differer..y to meet our objectives? o How are we going to do it? A strategic review is simply the Process one goes thru to get answers to these questions. Step One Mission Write a clear and concise description of your business that answers the •b Y� e What industry are we in? o What is our special or unique niche In that industry? o Who are our customers? o What is our special appeal to these customers? • What are our performance standards or objectives? e How do we measure Lt.:r performance? Step Two - Assessment Sit back and take a good hard look t your busineca and the environment within which it operates. Write down what you believe to be: the four most important circumstances you see occurring or about V occur externally (customers, suppliers, public policy, competitors etc- ) that re most t! reatening to your business o the four r, ost important external circumstances that are having, or could have a positive impact on your business • the four most important internal strengths of your business (sales force, vendr�r relationshins, cu^tomer service, control systems, etc., o the four rr- t imoortoct i--crnal weakne.saed of your businesm Step Three Key issues Now review the impact of the items lists:: in your assesoment on your.-abiliiy to achieve your business mission and extr, -t the four issues that you belWvo -ard,m:ist critical to your business's future • iccesa. Could be either: e external the , . that must be counte rcd, and/or e external op inities that should be pursued, and or e internal e- .hs to build on, and/or o internal wet,Knesece that must be corrected. I ( ,ver)� STItATYG,IC REVIT;- WS Step Four - Plar.s For each of the four identified key iasuce. write down: o what e.Yactly you plan to do about it e when it is going to get done o who is going to be responsible for getting it done o how arc we going to know when it is done? Step Five Review At the end of each year prepare a written report on: e what plans were fully completed • what plans were not completed and why _ • a critical assessment of the proctor, and product (see Note) • a list of "do's" and "don'ts" for next year Step Six Year Two Return to Step One. Note - Here are some criteria to utilize in making your assessment. e Was our strategic review process regarded by the owners /managers of our business as essential and valuable? Were they truly committ to it? Were they directly involved? • Were we able to clearly focus on the really core :slues facing our business ? e Was the strategic review process characterized by order and system? o Was our assessment of internal and external factors truly critical. comprehensive and•the product of rigorous analysis? o Were our plans realistic in the sense that they focused on objectives l that could be achieved? o Were the plans decision oriented? Did they serve to influence the outcome of our major business decisions? ' o Did the strategic review process receive the monitoring and - reappraisal necessary to make it a constant presence in the conduot of our business throughout the year? GCH 5/21 /81 11586.2 CITY OF ORONO MISSION STATEMENT OUR 11:SSION is to provide appropriate services to persons within the community of Orono together with contract commun.'_.ies utilizing available resources in an effective manner accomplished through - A continuous process of objective analysis of past, current, and future trends considering the specific events and unique physical surroundings that shape the mode and structure of. the organization - A positive, forward looking management of personnel and other resources in a business like, customer oriented d, livery of services A select, well trained, expert group of customer oriented employees individually motivated and informed as to their t responsibilities together with the organizations overall purpose and direction for delivering a quality product The aggressive utilization and maintenance of all organizational resources l - The contracting of services both in and out, to achieve the appropriate efficiency of service 0 CITY OF ORONO EXTERNAL ANALYSIS - Increased private businesses delivery traditional public services - Selected demands for service increases - Increase communication and information links - Increased duplication of authority in selected areas - Increased development pressure due to transportation link upgrade and saturated second ring development - Fluctuating state and growing .,,etropolitan economi^s - Pressure for jurisdiction increase by multiplicity agencies (County, LMCD, Metro Council, etc.) INTERNAL ANALYSIS - Expertise in Contracting business both in and out with other entities both public and private Strong history and orientation of responsive- ness to local citizenry/ - consumers - Need to explore and develop altered delivery systems - Strong environmental commitment - Need to strengthen continuity of staff through training and ongoing information manage- ment system - Need to Ltrengthen the organizational image both inside and outside the organization CITY OF ORONO KEY STRATEGIC ISSUES 1. Ensure appropriate continuity and development of organizational members. 2. Determination of community development direction for the next five years. 3. Appropriate utilization of contracting entities. 4. Provide for the effective marketing and delivery of services. S. Ensure appropriate communications and information provision. 6. Develcpment of an appropriate financial policy. : 7. Complete facilities assessment. 11586.1 CITY OF ORONO 1986 STRATEGIC PLANNING KEY ISSUE OBJECTIVES 1. Continuity and Staff Development - Maintain High Level of Continuity - Department Head Teamwork - Selective Hiring/Targeting/Flexibility - High Level of Staff Competency - In House Training - Targeting Development - Overlap/Continuity - Policy Body - Staff - Management Information System 2. Community Development Direction - How should we develop - Change around us - Storm Water Management - Commercial vs. Residential - Navarre - Highway 12 - Rezoning ■ 1. 3. Utilization of Contracting Entities Provider Recipient Police Fire Building/Zoning (Police/Mutual Aid) Utility Attorney - Public Works Engineering Backup Planning Inspection Private Consultant Assessing LOGIS Contractual Service Provision Review - Financial - Legal - Service Capacity Administration Market 4. Market/Delivery Potential Administration Assessing Garage Street Maintenance High Leve_/Service - Realistic/Palatable Cost Market - - Where - Other Communities - Within the Community - Means to Market - Alternative Delivery System - Targeting 5. Communication and Information - Effective Delivery/Identity - Type of Information - Required - Compliance (State/Local) - Desired - Media Cable Newspaper Newsletter Brochure (Parks etc.) - Market - Available - Access - Information and Referral - Image - Means for Current Information KEY SNORT TERM OBJECTIVES (NO ORDER OF PRIORITY) 1. Completion of Facilities Assessment (Bernhardson 3/87) 2. Completion of Comprehensive Storm Water Management Plan (Bernhardson/Mabusth 11/$7*) 3. Completion of Community Development Direction - General - Navarre (Bernhardson/Mabusth/Gerhardson 6/87j - Highway 12 (Bernhardson/Mabusth/Gerhardson 5/87) 4. Develop Improved means for Information and Referral (Bernhardson/Mabusth 4/87) 5. Implement Staff Development/Teamwork Program (Bernhardson/Gerhardson 5/87) 6. Implement Contractual Service Review (Bernhardson/Department Heads 8/97) GOAL SETTI1G Cr1T (IF am= AND MAW B. BeW [rial tt Crrr ABROUSINUM I NA! 1988 - 39 APRIL 1909 187 9ro - 1987 Council Strategic Planning Short Term Objective 188 STo - 1988 Short Term objective AFM GOAL ARG OBJBLTIVPS 1. COMMUNIV iX PUUJP .W Highway 12 187 M A. Compreher ive Plan Amendment 12 (5/87) Receive back from Met Council Final plan approval zoning Amendments - Draft - Planning Commission consideration - Council consideration Negotiations on utilities (Long take -Medina) 188 STD B. Corridor Select on Study Ad Hoc Task Force Complete Phase 1 DRAFT 4/29/88 5/91/88 5/31/98 DR7M SB1TlBj 5/15/88 Extension to 5/15 granted to Metro Council following 4/8/88 meeting re: Urban lard demands 5/12/88 approved by Metro Council Metro Council 6/15/88 Final Council approval 5/23/88 6/15/88 Currently being drafted 7/1/88 Contact Shacdlm regarding assistance in development 8/10/88 Contracted with Shardlow 5/23/88 18/1/88 Ad Hoc Task Force - 1st meeting 5/19/88 5/19/88 meeting held GM 3 1 CL Moo a10 AM ORAL AREA GRALTNES 1MTES 9VAM I 41n. DEVELDR4TJP Cent. HL edevel-rpment let blo Engage consultants 3/25/88 requested quotation - Planning Tb be determined from J. Shardlw regarding cost to - Legal do master plan develoEmient for Initiate Goal/Objective 10/1/88 area. Expect proposal to be received for Setting process 7/11/88 consideration '88 S:3 Consider HRh formation 6,'I5/88 2/88 Request Attorney outline Solicite ideas/proposals process required to establish Co wnce if Decide to do 9/1/88 3/1/88 received outlines for establishment of HPA. Staff reviewing for cement 187 SM County !D Development leg 5':n Determine desired 5/30/88 Issue of lighting to 2/22/88 local a<r_cmoan-ing Council meeting improvements 2/27/88 Council considers lighting 5/23/88 Council approves lighting Financirr plan 5/39/88 Conceptual approval 12/14/87 Financial revision proposed 2/22/88 3/28/88 tabled to 5/23/88 5/23/88 approved financing Complete construction 12/1/88 To cosnence 4/15/88 187 5'U Coaranity Tranaportat.an -Ian Refine capital improvement 7/1/88 '88 S;o program prior to 89 budget Determine bridge replacement 8/l/88 program Continued anal7sis Public/Private ongoing Evaluate Cty 116 7/1/88 3/17/88 received request from Medina 4/25/88 Cow-cil elects not to support Resolution 187 S70 Storm Water Management Plan '88 STo G ORL AMR )PMErrr cant. ORTM sn►M ion and progress Review advisors/Policy bodies 7/88 role/Repscnsibilities Review i revise as necessary 9/Be staff/advisory/policy body process for development review i execution working towards service a re.;ults oriented 'No Surprises' process Enhance eff--ctive control on 8/88 marinas 2. ENVIROtMRMI. PRtYrE TON 187 S!O Stubbs- Bay '86 Solid ia:;te Management Complete needs assesseent 2/88 Project feasibility -commence 5/88 Determine assessment area a/88 interest Financiru. options 18/88 C Tsider development moratoria, 10/88 If AWr_opr_iate ---initiate project 19/88 - project bid 10/88 Commence project 12/88 - Assess project 8/89 - Complete project 19/89 Assess recycling effort` to goal 6/88 Assess other avenues to meet -,o,_: 6/88 including local composting Review regulations regarding 9/88 solid waste Explore organized collection 0/88 4/1.1/88 presented to council. 1b be reviewed by Planning Ccmiszion Anticipate needs assessment completion 2/88 2/22/88 information presented Submitted request for feasibility update cost Feasibility study update to 6/13/88 Council meeting Presently exploring options with City Attorney's office 3. QtMNIZATInNAL t)LVFU)PMM 1989 Council Goal Setting Camience CMplete 1989 Budget Process Assessment Board of Review Capital budget Adoption Budget Adoption 1�" Legislative Program Complete Team Building Staff Cc Consoler Formats Undo ...e if A• a 1 red 4. SERVICE r,c.LIVFCV '87 STD Fac'.lit:cs ril '88 SM 187 S.) Long Range Financial Poli- Golf 'arse Animal Ck-vtrc, n►'Ess sersag 7/88 9/88 4/88 4/27/88 initial meeting held. Anticipate conclusion on 5/9/88 5/19/88 Board concluded 8/88 9/26/88 12/88 11/88 2/89 3/89 To Planning Commission for review 5/18/88 Phase I1 Completion 6/88 Site criteria to Council 6/13/88 Implemcnt any recaane"laticn-s 7/28 Draft policy to Council 7/88 2/22 98 Initial draft capital budget d iscusse-1 Council adoption 8/88 Development of business 7/87 strategy Evaluate program 8/88 Extended service to Lag Lake/Spring Park/Minnetonka Beach-1988 .1 .. -.41 AREA GONL ARER lal MIES 3. CP.(-.',NIZATI)`L�L I;I:VF.I11PMENf 1989 Counc i 1 Goal Setting Crnmerx:e Complete 1989 Budget Prcrv,a 7/88 9/88 Assetanent Board of Review 4,'88 4/27/88 initial meeting held. Anticipate conclusion on 5/9/88 5/19/88 Board concluded Capital budget Adoption 8/83 Budget Adoption 9/26/88 1989 Legislative Program Complete 12/88 Team Building Staff 11.188 Council - Consider "ormats 2/69 Undertake if Aesirel 3/89 4. SERVICE nF'LIVFRY 1 ,ssion for review 5/18/88 187 S M Facilities Study 6/88 Fto Courzil 6/13/88 188 SM Phasc IT ''�r,.pletiun Impl�7-;it any recomme-mi-It"',- 7,1PP 187 IT) Long Rarrge Financial Policy/ nrait policy to Council 7/88 2/22/88 Initial draft capital budget discussed Council adoption 8/88 rnit Course Development of b,isineb 1/81 strategy Animal Control Evaluate program 8/88 Extended service to Lag Lake/Spring Park/Minnetonka Beach-1988 AMR GOAL AM CeirCTIVES 5. IRR" RESOUICFS 6. MARKETING L Compensation Explore Performance Incentive as addendum to compensation plan Ca=,anity Informatiun/ Mayor's Articles riewsletter Evaluation of system ams TMIUS A,'RB Formal plan to 2/88 Formal plan and adjustments presented 2/22/88 3/25/88 plan adopted 4/12/88 camp worth report submitted to State ong. of nq 8/88 Mayors's Article format to continue to 8/88 for next evaluation 6221 . 2 17 27 1� TO: Mayor and City Council V, ,d ., ul ! OF owl" ".1tt FROM: Mark Bernhardson, City Administrate DATE: June 22, 1988 SOBJBCT: Water Conservation Advisory Attachment: A. Minneha�ia Creek Watershed District Lake Levels Report as June 19, 1988 B. News Article/Dick Grey - Pioneer Dated 6/9/88 C. City Ordinance Section 3.10 Subd. 6 Water Emergency D. Excerpts - Minnehaha Creek Watershed - Water Resources Managemen Plan - 1987 Chapter 4 ISSUE - Determination by the Council as to what action, if any, h tey would desire to take to improve water conservation in the City during this extended period of dry weather. INTRODUCTION - While the City water system that serves principally the Navarre/Shadywood area has not been experiencing high demand levels, the ongoing drought does raise a concern about the adequacy of longterm water supplies. This issue has been requested to be addressed as it relates to lake levels and lake pumping by Counci lmember Goetten and as it relates to the aquifers generally by Councilmember Callahan. In addition you may have noted that the Governor has made a request that the Cities in the Metropolitan area, that use water from the Mississippi River, undertake selected conservation methods to not fully draw down the resource. Attachment B is an article addressing current lake levels and how we have reached the present state. DISCUSSION - While water has presently not been been a problem O ror r_ono the substantially dry year last year together with a dry year this year could lead to significant problems, not just from a City well water operation standpoint, but since the City and its residents are utilizing the same or through the same aquifers as are most of the Cities in the western suburbs usage by all may substantially draw it down. As noted in Attachent D these aquifers may in fact have some interface with Lake Minnetonka and also with the Mississippi River. Most regulation of water resources in the suburbs are of the customers of the utility system. This is the case in Orono's regulation as noted in Attachment C. To regulate pumping from the aquifer by private wells and/or the lake may require the City to explore a different approach to the issue whereby excessive sprinkling on the outside may be constituting the waste of a natural resource rather than regulating customer usage. (This is separate from usage for domestic and sanitation purposes.) As far as actual regulation of pumping from the lake, the Department of Natural Resources presently issue permits for such pumping when it exceeds 10,000 gallons per day or 1 million gallons annually. Below that level they have not been regulating it. (This issue of lake pumping is not only a water supply issue but also a recreational and aesthetic/property value issue.) LMCD presently does not regulate and their authority in the matter is unclear. Much of the current water usage is to k,2ep lawns green together with shrubs, flowers and trees. When people stop watering their lawns, the grass just goes dormant. It is our present understanding that there is a concern by some people in the landscaping field that ongoing watering of the lawns may actually lead to the death of the lawn in such adverse conditions. At present people are advising that watering of large trees is not needed as they are able to reach into the soil to a considerable depth where there is still moisture. The concern may be however, for shrubs and selected type flowers that have shallow rc of systems. It is advised that watering of established growth neLd only to be done so on a weekly basis. The other concern is for newly planted sod and trees in that it does need water and it is our understanding that every other day watering would be appropriate. A final note should be that sprinkling generally between the hours of 11 in the morning and 5 in the afternoon are not terribly productive as much of the moisture that goes onto the lawn evaporates. Watering is best done in the late evening or early morning hours. ALTERNATIVES - 1. Take no action at present. 2. Put in the media a voluntary advisory regarding excessive usage of sprinkling. 3. Invoke the odd/even section under Section 3.10 of ordinance for water customers only. 4. Explore regulating items such a sprinkling as a waste of natural resources. 5. Explore regulation of pumping of lake water with the Department of Natural Resources. 6. Table for further consideration. RECOMMENDATION - It is presently recommended that the City -------------- undertake the voluntary advisory to its residents to conserve the aquifer usage together with usage of lake water. If the drought holds into August it is recommended that the City explore regulating of sprinkling, not from the water customer standpoint, but from the proper use of natural resources. 2 PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by __, seconded by __, that direct staff to issue a volunary water conservation its residents requesting their voluntary compliance advisory and that the is -sue be brought back in determine if the City should undertake regulation Ayes __, Nays __ the Council advisory to with such an a month to f the issue. 3 MEMO TO: Board of Managers Minnehaha Creek Watershed District FROM: Eugene A. Hickok and Associates DATE: June 16, 1988 RE: Lake Level, Flow and Precipitation Summary for May 1988. 20� J J Lake levels in Lake Minnetonka have declined through May as illustrated by the attached graph and lake elevations. There hss not been any discharge from Lake Minnetonka to Minnehaha Creek since November 17, 1986. Creek flow at the Browndale Ave. dam in Edina during May is shown below. The 30 year average precipitation for May at the National Weather Service station in Maple Plain is 3.93 inches. The actual precipitation recorded in Wayzata for May was 1.46 inches. A summary of precipitation follows. Maple Plain Minneapolis -St. Paul Intern'] Airport Wayzata PRECIPITATION SUMMARY Actual 1.70 1.46 MONTHLY FLOW SUMMARY Grays Bay (cfs ) 30 Year Average 3.93 3.20 Browndale Ave. Day (cfs ) June 2 0 3.6 June 4 0 2.5 June 6 0 1.8 June 9 0 25.0 June 11 0 19.0 June 13 0 6.9 June 16 0 4.0 June 18 0 2.8 June 20 0 3.6 June 23 0 2.5 June 25 0 0.6 June 27 0 1.8 9 W 9 30.00 929.80 929.60 929.40 929.20 929.00 928.80 928.60 928.40 928.20 928.00 927.80 927.60 927.40 927.20 927.00 LAKE MINNETONKA Water Levels 1987-1988 NOHW(929.4) RUNOUT ELEVATION(9 09-Jan-87 21-May-87 31-Jul -87 21-Sep-87 05-Jan-88 28-Apr-88 DATE KW War Elevations - Lie Itlmetonta .................... pets Elevation Fla Date Elevation Floc Date Elevation Flow Date Elevation Fler pate Gevatloe Fla 011-lan-17 4"21.31 0.00 06-JUI-V W.41 0.00 W-5wV 92/.22 0.00 174eb-M M14 0.00 03avr# n7.m 6.00 21-Jan 4rA.37 0.00 14-Jul-V 477.43 0.00 14ip-V MIN 0.00 254eh-00 927.96 0.00 DMru►i m.76 1.00 30-Jrr07 in,x 0.00 Iwul-V m.37 0.00 lmsp-17 m.33 0.00 07-+Ir-/1 m.% 0.00 01-J" m.66 0.00 0"ob-17 921.40 0.00 21-Jul-V m.71 0.00 21-iwv 93.47 0.00 t.-Mr-11 /2B.00 0.00 13-4 ro IVA 0.00 1940-V 93.33 0.00 2Nul-V 927.71 0.00 25--iepi7 921.44 0.00 24-Mar-M /21.06 0.00 lwur•11 32 0.00 26feb-17 921.34 0.00 24-JW-97 921.62 0.00 21-iep-V 1A.42 0.00 30-ftr-M 121.01 0.00 QArft_ 7 921.35 0.00 V-Jul-V 921.75 0.00 05-Ort-17 M.32 0.00 04-Apr-6 /28.14 0.00 13-fier-97 TA.34 0.00 21-m-97 921.73 0.00 12-Oct-17 92L13 0.00 O6-W-N tn.16 0.00 26-Mr-V 921.37 0.00 30-Jul-97 M.79 0.00 16-W-1117 f21.14 0.00 it-AV-OB /21.14 0.00 06-AFr-17 921.21 0.00 31-Ju1-97 93.11 0.00 20-Oct-V M.13 0.00 13*r-H 121.16 0.00 13-Apr-V 93L25 0.00 03-Ai0-f1 /21.11 0.00 26-Oct-07 Va.12 0.00 Ip-•Apr-1 121.20 0.00 21-W-V 921.20 0.00 "-kq-17 93.71 0.00 0211ov-V 921.06 0.00 25-Apr01 921.06 0.00 V-W-V 921.22 0.00 10 WV 921.79 0.00 09-Noy-V M.04 0.00 29-Apr-0 t21.00 0.00 04-fsy-V VA.22 0.00 li-*q-V 921.77 0.00 lb-llor-O7 tn.04 0.00 03i'larm 921.00 0.00 l2-Mep-O7 ►21.23 0.00 17-Asq-V ME 0.00 24ib4-V 921.40 0.00 06-fHY-* IN.00 0.00 21-fNy♦7 w.94 0.00 1e +Aq-v m.a 0.00 01-DK-97 M.10 0.00 o+-" Tm 14 0.00 21-My-V 927.93 0.00 11-Aq-07 M." 0.00 07-OK-97 93.01 0.00 13•ffa 921.04 0.00 03-Jun v 977.1119 0.00 2444-V M.72 0.00 14-Dec-67 M.08 0.00 17-May-01 Tn.00 0.00 15-hn-17 IV.61 0.00 26-60-V M.bs 0.00 054An-W TV.16 0.00 19-NY-U 977.96 0.00 23-hrr-V 927.67 0.00 31-*Ary M.65 0.00 19-Jw* m.• 0.00 24-fay-W m.90 0.00 01-2u1-1117 TZ7.55 0.00 01-Svp-V M.64 0.00 034*M N TV.% 0.00 31-f1 r* m.M 0.00 4 3.5 3 1 0.5 m SIX MONTH PRECIPITATION RECORDED DEC. 87 JAN. 88 FEB. 88 MAR. 88 APR. 88 MAY 88 MONTH ® MAPLE PLAIN AVE. ® WAYZJATA ACTUAL SIX MONTH PRECIPITATION RECORDED MPLS. AIRPORT MPLS. AIRPORT MAPLE PLAIN WAYZATA AVERAGE ACTUAL AVERAGE ACTUAL DEC. 87 0.87 1.25 0.66 0.79 JAN. 88 0.92 1.37 0.64 0.96 FEB. 88 0.83 0.30 0.78 0.19 MAR. 88 1.17 1.33 1.52 1.51 APR. 88 2.05 1.59 2.35 0.95 MAY 88 3.20 1.70 3.93 1.46 Blliar's neat: The f,,llnwina +'dam .. Callum,, dated April 1%, Is awe of the rcgWw columns propene" by the author for distri- idtso to Freshwater Foundation friends. We reprint gt sere wMh the author's per - ,By Dick Gray I "la -The Music Man,'' Profes- sor Howard Hill said. Ther[ s trouble — trouble — trouble — in River City." I can't sing the saute snag. but 1 can paraphrase his words to a certain eases. berates '*There's treubls — trouble in lake country." no two speci6C troubles are low water levels and the infestation of a new water weed. lie former wdl be nor Kid in time by nature: the lat- ter may be here to stay• and that's bed, bed news. (Sec story. these Within the last three years, we have seen lake levels fluctuate from a war modern all-time high in May 19*6 to the lowest levels in years (lasa year and this spring). Lake lev- els; in the Twin Cities area would be much lower today if we hadn't received super rainfall from two major storm, in July lar year, the Meand storm betas called "the i S mm of the ccalury.•' Lake Mm- t ass a►a water levels were raised Over 17 inches by the two rains. Without them, our levels of today would be low indeed. For all practical purposes. our tegiosal Isk-s receive their water% from precipitation and runoff from rain sod truiltiog show. Low precipa- 1ati0e cicada an almost immediate i drop is wow levels. Sues late 1966. we've experienced below nortrsal raanfail and snows, waw levels were low for most of 1"7 (temporarily helped by the big July rains), and now levels are lower than normal for I"g Minnetonka rainfall, runoff r rid evaporation. it's critical that precipitation and runoff balance evaporation when dmlirng with closed systems — which most of our lakes are. Wee Min- f luenakti. for e%ampk, loses about 30 inches of water per year from e%'apo- ). ration. To maintain a reasonably even water level from year to year. aboa t that earn amount of water trend fall or run into the lake from prscipustatsn that averages about 26 lhdes. Very link is added by seepage or apsinp. it seems that no matter what, evaporarton keeps its steady pace, so i/ precipitation falls below normal. lake levels react promptly by falling below normal. Once ab- norriudly low levels occur, it takes super rains to bring theirs back Quack• iF ly. panda. marshes and general f groundwater levels fall along with Abner Smith's flay, the shoreline Is wilder then n has Seen in years, so the level of Lake Minnetonka continues to drop. 0saorm h aaar eOUIKVP lake levels, and the enure system must be replenished for the lake lev- els to become normal again. When water levels drop below normal. old-timers start comparing today with those years of the great drought — trom 1929 through 1943 During the years 1937 and 1938. Lake Minnetonka water levels hit lows of 92 1, 90 feet abuse sea level or about 61: feet below today'$ le%- rls. For 11 consecutive year$. the yearly low water levels were below 91-6 feet — at least tuo feet below tu•.:aY's Icsel. Sevcn dccp wells were drilled be- tween April 1939 and Stanh 1940. %th their pumps adding about I4,M10 gallons of water ter minute to Lake Mannetonks. It's turd to d.- termine what effect these wells had Dirt restoring the lake level because precipitation was either normal or aho%e nortrul staning in the'•10s. In any event, the lake it%el had returned sufficiently b� 1942 u• shut down the welh, never to be rug again. It's difficult fur us morn is to con, prehetd the magnitude of the galAms of water contained in a ma)or ratn- alorm. Water in a large lake Is meas- ured in acre-tcc1, Une acre -riot u a roux of water ktocring tine acic of surface. Mmocaunko has a water sur. (ace of about 14,500 acres (and I W mules of shoreline). The two big ra.ns of last July raised the water levy el of N1111 ta(nka by abort 17 inches. This translate into 9.701,00000 gallons of water that fell or ran into the lake from th'sc two rains ,tun may try once to a while to help na- ture, bat when she decides to turn her big hand to the job at hand, her might is awesome. She can fist or ruin anything in a hurry If our general area receives nor- mal rainfall for the remainder of the season, it's possible to construct a trend line for lake water levels, based on past averages. A trend line for this year bottoms on December 31. 1998. at about 926% fees. That's more than I ih feet lower than to days le%cl. 11'5 best to plan accord- ingly. set your docks fur shallower than nofmsl water, keep an eye out for the buoys and the rocks during the boating season• and hope for some ma)ur rainfalls wid—i much storm danuge. ' M.P. issues sprinkling ban The City of hlaplc Plain has On - pined a sptuikling ban dtcthve im- medialcl% from 7 a in to 7 p.m. Mig.daya through Fridays. This will be in effect until further notice. 9TM e 4 A-rr-pt(,__qIL4 FAT (7. . S 3.10 L tubing shall be flared and kept to a minimum. Not more than one joint shall be used for a service up to seventy feet in length. All service pipe, including joints, shall be left uncovered until inspected. Minimum size connection with the water mains shall be 3/4 inch in diameter. Subd. S. Private dater Supplies. No water pipe of the City water system shall be connected with any pump, well, pipe, tank or any device that is connected with any other source of water supply and when such are found, the City shall notify the owner or occupant to disconnect the same and, if not immediately done, the City water shall be turned off. Before any new connections to the City system are permitted, or at the time such new connection is inspected, the City shall ascertain that no cross -connections will exist when the new connection is made. When a building is connected to "City Water" the private water supply may be used only for such purposes as the City may allow. Subd. 6. Water Emergencies. A. Whenever in the judgment of the City Administrator the water pressure and available water in the municipal water system reaches a level which endangers the public health or safety of residents and other persons in the City, he may declare a state of water emergency which shall continue until such time as he shall determine that the danger to public health or safety no longer exists. Forthwith upon the declaration of a state of water emergency notice thereof shall be given to the news media, and all orders of the City Administrator issued pursuant thereto shall be enforced after one (1) hour has elapsed from the time of such notice. B. During the existence of a state of water emergency the City Administrator may by order, (1) prohibit any sprinkling, irrigation or other utilization of water from the City's municipal water system for lawn, grass or turf, (2) prohibit sprinkling, irrigation or other utilization of water from the City's municipal water system for lawn, grass or turf, except in those areas stated in the notice that such utilization of water may be used on odd or even numbered days of the month, or (3) curtail industrial water usage. C. Upon written request and approval by the City Administrator and subject to such terms and conditions imposed by the City Administrator with respect to such approval, the following persons may be authorized to sprinkle, irrigate or otherwise utilize water from the City's municipal water system at times other than permitted in Subparagraph B hereof: 1. Arty person owning or operating a commercial or business enterprise whose economic well-being is dependent upon sprinkling, irrigating or watering of a lawn, grass or turf owned, leased or operated by it; ORONO CC 47 (4-1-84) § 3. 10 2. Employees and agents of the City, in such instances wherein lawn, grass or turf used for play fields or areas owned or operated by the City require more frequent watering to prevent unreasonable damage thereto; 3. Owners and lessees (their employees and agents) of lands newly sodded or grass seeded which requires sprinkling or irrigation to prevent loss of new sod, seed or immature turf or grasses. E. Unlawful Act. It is a petty misdemeanor for any person to violate any provision of this Subdivision. Subd. 7. Private Fire Protection Systems. Owners of structures with self-contained fire protection systems may apply for and obtain permission to connect the street mains with hydrants, large pipes, and hose couplings, for use in case of fire only, at their own installation expense and at such rates as the Council may adopt by resolution as herein provided, and upon such conditions as the Council may prescribe, including unmetered connections. Any system so installed may be used for fire protection purposes on the premises or adjacent premises. Subd. 8. Opening Hydrants. It is unlawful for any person, other than members of the Fire Department or other person duly authorized by the City, in pursuance of lawful purpose, to open any fire hydrant or attempt to draw water from the same or in any manner interfere therewith. It is also unlawful for any person so authorized to deliver or suffer to be delivered to any other person any hydrant key or wrench, except for the purposes strictly pertaining to their lawful use. Subd. 9. Unmetered Service. Unmetered service may be provided for construction, flooding skating rinks, swimming pools and any other purpose upon approval by the City. Such service shall be at a duly adopted rate. Where it is difficult or impos- sible to accurately measure the amount of water taken, unmetered service may be provided and the unmetered rate applied; provided, however, that by acceptance thereof the consumer agrees to have the City estimate 'she water used. In so estimating the City shall consider the use to which the water is put and the length of time of unmetered service. Subd. 10. Water Meters. All water meters and remote readers shall be purchased and maintained by the property owner. All repairs of water meters not resulting from normal usage shall be the responsibility of the property owner. The installation, and cost thereof, of all water meters shall be the responsibility of the property owner under the supervision, of the City. ', ORONO CC 48 (4-1-84) it rlvt" m e�T- U The quantity of water available from an aquifer on a continuing basis is limi-ed r' to the amount of recharge it receives. In the Minnehaha Creek watershed area, all aquifers above the St. Lawrence formation are recharged from precipitation. Part of the precipitation that infiltrates the glacial drift moves laterally and discharges to the lakes and streams but most of it descends vertically and provides recharge for aquifers.' Practically all recharge to the Jordan sandstone originates from the overlying glacial drift and Shakopee formation. e. Hinckley and Other Sandstones The principal recharge areas for aquifers below the St. Lawrence formation are located generally north and west of the Twin Cities where the formations outcrop or are covered only by glacial drift. The Hinckley sandstone ranges from 75 to 175 feet in thickness. Its texture is usually medium -grained but may range from coarse to fine. The Hinckley formation yields large supplies of relatively soft water to many wells and is an important source of water for municipal and r' industrial concerns. 2. Recharge ----The-infiltra'.on of surface water from precipitation into the groundwater system of a region i� a process known as recharge. In varying levels, recharge can be said to occur a ,rywhere within the watershed. The degree to which a specific location is susceptible to groundwater recharge is the result of a combination of conditions. For example. areas of less permeable surface material such as tight clayey glacial till allow less downward seepage than areas of highly permeab'ie soils such as loose sandy or gravelly glacial outwash. Areas where bedrock aquifers are directly exposed to surficial drift materials such as buried bedrock valleys are also highly susceptible to groundwater recharge. Figures IV-8 and IV-9 show contact areas for the Prairie du Chien and the IV-35 Jordan aquifers within the Twin Cities region. Other conditions also contribute to the ability of the surface water of an area to percolate downward, making precise groundwater recharge modeling difficult. A relatively accurate estimate of where groundwater recharge occur,- can be determined through observation of aquifer water levels. Areas displaying high water elevations generally indicate recharge when comp,,•-ed to lower levels found in outlying wells drilled into the same aquifer. Figure IV-10 and Figure IV-11 identify water levels and move:.ient for the Prairie du Chien -Jordan and the Mt. Simon -Hinckley aquifers in ttie Twin Cities area. Using this as a guide, it can be generally stated that the area in the western portion of the watershed around Lake Minnetonka is an important source of groundwater recharge for the major regional aquifers. Exceptions to this rule exist however, with one notable example being the well documented recharge area created by the permeable soils overlying a buried bedrock valley underneath Lake harriet and Calhoun. The best estimate, therefore, of the ability of a location to act as a recharge area is one that takes into account all the important contributing factors for that particular location. PIF The Lake Minnetonka vicinity has been identified as an important recharge area for the Jordan aquifer. Piezometric surfaces are generally above the limits of the aquifer and range from approximate elevation 88U to 92u+ near the lake. Tne approximate elevation of the upper licit of the aquifer itself ranges from 560 to 820 feet. Water tables in the glacial drift near �ake Minnetonka are for all practical purposes equal to the lake level which normally ranges from approximately .5 to 930.U. 9 I V - 3 8 • Qvw "Kw oov Epp Qmw our Eotr 4w 30D-------------- SEA LEVEL '• FIL. . III-4 GEOLOGIC STRUCTURE OF !HE TWIN CITIES ARTESIAN BASIN "Who" jwdm i ■. ts &1w Fuwtnrr. Ferw.Nw Rr E 0 E t0 tE 191LES SOURCE: Water Resources Outlook, 1973 r LaL. Et. ar. low IM t EEO' Aw 3mr KA LEVEL 3w rntkid ..ewm.M.w ME _LEGEND _ Prairie Du Chien - Jordan Aquifer - -- �"` Si Peter Aquifer - -- _ ® Franconia - Ironton Galesville Aquifer - --- __- 61488.4 ; I I C-0-T AL tpti rm TO: Mayor and City Council U1 27 FROM: Mark Bernh3rdson, City Administrat F DATE: June 14, 1588 SUBJECT: Woodhill Avenue Attachments: A. Bid Tabulation - Woodhill Avenue B. Woodhill Avenue Memo Dated 5/25/88 ISSUE 1. Determin«_ if Council will reconsider the award of hid ordering on the project. 2. If reconsidered and ordered in, what financing would be appropriate. 3. If not reconsidered, formal rejection of bids. INT_ROD_UCTIO_N_ - At the Council's June 13, 1988 meeting on a 2 to 2 vote regarding the ordering of the project the item did not receive a sufficient majority to order the project. As established in the bid specifications the bids which were received on May 20, 1988 originally expired on June 20th, but have been extended to July 20th. DISCUSSION - As the Council has taken bids it would be appropriate that if Council does not desire the project to go ahead at this time that the bids be formally rejected. As such this would allow the Council at some future date, shoull it desire to undertake the project, to re -bid the project although it is anticipated that the project bids will be at or above the original Engineer's estimate instead of the apFroximate $7,000 below that is presently available under the bid. ALTERNATIVES - 1. Reconsideration A. Accept bid/Order project in B. Not reconsider C. Table to July llth 2. Financing A. Developer 75% - City 25% B. Developer 75% - City 15% - 3 abutting owners 10% C. Other D. Table to July llth t 3. Bids A. Order project in (Issue #1) B. Formally reject C. Table to July llth R_EC_O_M_M_E_N_D_A_T_ION_ - Given the need for the project improvement and the favorable bids at this point it is still recommended that the Council reconsider and that the project be ordered in on at least a 75% developer and 25% City split the costs. It is anticipated any rebid in the future will be higher and may not generate '.he 75% from the developer. Should the City subsequently order the road in after these bids lapse it is anticipated that the costs will be substantially higher to the developer and the City. If not awarded it is recommended to formally reject the bids. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by seconded by _, that the Council reject all bids for the Wood --hill Avenue project. Ayes --, Nays cc: John McDowell, MSM & Associates, 315 East Lake, Wayzata Henry Kingman, Woodhill Country Club, 200 Woodhill Rd 2 STREET IMPROVEMENTS WOODHILL AVENUE ORONO, MINNESOTA 1988 CONTRACTORS Alexander Constiiction Buffalo Bituminous Hardrives, Inc. Munn Blacktop Preferred Paving, Inc Alber Const., Inc. Barber Const. Co., Inc. TOTAL BASE BID $45,998.75 39,414.00 36,991.00 45,937.30 !9,890.00 9,906.00 45,875.00 52588. �X1-F lB I i TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark Bernhardson, City Administrator DATE: May 25, 1988 SUBJECT: Woodhill Avenue Improvement Attachements: A. Woodhill Avenue Improvement Memo Dated 11/13/87 B. Woodhill Road Plans and Specifications Dated 4/21/88 C. May 28, 1988 Bid Summary - Woodhill Avenue D. Orono Letter to Woodhill Dated 6/7/88 E. Draft Resolution Ordering Project and Awarding Bid F. Financing Alternatives ISSUES 1. Review process and determine appropriate means to undertake the improvement based on activities to date. 2. Determination as to whether the project is to be undertaken. 3. If the project is to be undertaken, award of a bid to the appropriate contractor. 4. Determination if the process is to be undertaken of the financing including any possible assessment of parties other than the agreed party who has committed up to 75% of the project. INTRODUCTION - At the Council's November 23rd meeting a public hearing was held regarding the improvement of Woodhill Avenue and on a 3-2 vote it was directed that further work be done regarding the installation of the project including F �paration of engineering plans, bid and specs. At the Councii's April 25, 1988 meeting they directed that bids be taken again on a 3-2 vote. This project was initially commenced as a precondition to the Woodhill plat subdivision in order to upgrade the public portion of Woodhill Avenue to a 22 foot standard and the City has an agreement with the applicants, MSM Inc. plus Woodhill Country Club that they pay 75% of the cost of the project. The original cost of the project as directed to be undertaken was $55,000. DISCUSSION - fssue_1.__ Review of Process_ - Subdivision approval was contingent upon an agreement for the improvement of the public portion of Woodhill Avenue in order to serve a greater volume of traffic to be generated by this development. Although the City does have an agreement from the developer who does have 40% of the strut frontage on the public portion of Woodhill Avenue it does not have what would be constituted as a petition. Therefore in order for the project to be ordered as an assessment project, the 1 Council would require a 4/5's vote. The City however, could undertake the project on a 25% City 75% developer split at its own expense without the assessment on a 3/5's vo=e. The City does not have the agreement of the contractor to extend his bids, so that this matter could not presently be tabled beyond the June 27, 1988 meeting be considered as late as the Council's July 11, 1988 meeting. The agreement with the developers make them responsible for the costs. Mr. McDowell has verbally agreed to pay his share as a lump sum and Attachment D is a letter to the Woodhill Country Club requesting a lump sum payment also. At this time al 1 1 ots are sold so there is no property of the development against which an assessment could be made, although the Woodhi11 Country Club project does abut the road. (In order to have Woodhi1I's payment done as an assessment, it would require the necessary 4/5's vote for the project.) The project vote, ordering the project, in any less than 4/5's however, negates any subsequent vote to assess the abutting property owners apart from Woodhill and MSM (it would give them an initial basis; on which to contest the special assessment hearing.) An alternative avenue and project direction would be to undertake the following process in advance of the public hearing: 1. Vote to cease the project's initial consideration from last fall. 2. Receive a petition from the developer. (Although there is no guarentee of receiving the petition - especially since all lots have been sold.) 3. Reorder the feasibility study. 4. Accept the feasibility study that has already been done. 5. withdraw bids. 6. Hold a public hearing. At that point the City would be a position to order the project on a 3/5's vote. Issue 2. Ordering the Project - Once it has been determined as to the course of action the City chooses to undertake the nexL issue would be determination as to whether the project itselc should be ordered with final resolve of the 3/5's or 4/5's vote issue. Should the City not choose to undertake the project at this time the developeL would no longer be required to pay anything regarding the improvement directly. In the future, should the City choose to undertake improvement to this public street it will either have to do it at its expense or attempt to specially assess some portion of the project to the abutting property owners. In the case of a future assessment direct benefit to the six lots in the Woodhill subdivision may not be easily demonstrable, many do not directly abut on the public portion of the roadway. In addition to the concern with the present 16 foot width and condition of the road that an improvement project to the area will be necessitated in the next 5 to 10 year anyway regardless of the increased traffic. issue 3. Bid Award - The present bids received have a project total of $47,900 wFich is approximately $7,000 under the modified En,ineer's estimate from the previous project. Such would lower the costs of all parties involved (apart from the City) depending on the scenario that the City chose to undertake for financing if the project went ahead. Issue 4. Method of Financing - As stated above the developer, at this point, has committed to 75% of the cost. It is his expectation to pay it as a lump sum. It then becomes a question of whether there is an assessment on the three abutting property owners. Prior to the subdivision the three abutting owners particularly the one furthest, had the advantage of being on a quiet, almost private road, as there was no traffic through there since the voluntary blocking off of that access by Woodhill in about 1975. While having the quiet repose of a private road the property owners have not had to pay any of the costs to date for the maintenance of the road. (Other private road owners have had to pay the ongoing snow plowing and upkeep of their roads and in the case of Eiollander Road are facing about a $2,000-3,000 cost to just bring the road up to City sta,idards should the City choose to take it over.) while the increased traffic on Woodhill would not necessairly be considered a benefit from the property owners standpoint the additional width and stability of the road, as far a access is concerned, is to some degree a benefit, and is the fact that a future improvement to this road may cost those property owners substantially more, should the City choose to assess a portion of it. The City would not have in the future a guarantee from the new subdivision as to its share of the payment. Please review Attachment F regarding potential financing alternatives. The layout as presented in the revised alternative shculd provide a means to limit the adverse impact on the property owners. ALTERNATIVES Issue 1. Review and Determination of Procedure A. Go through the steps in order to limit the needed vote on ordering the project to 3/5's as outlined above. B. Go ahead with the vote on ordering the project to determine if a 4/5's vote is available. C. Order the project on a 3/5's vote requiring the developer to 3 live up to the agreement but not assess any of it. D. Order the project on a 3/5's vote and have the City pay for all of it. E. Commence and conclude the public hearing and then determine a course of action. F. Hold and continue the public hearing and table further discussion until the June 23rd or July llth meeting. G. Not undertake the project. Issue 2. Determination as to Whether the Project Should be Ordered A. Order the project with a 4/5's if there is no petition in order to assess a portion to the property owners. B. order the project with the 3/5's with the City paying 25% and the developer paying 75% in accordance with the agreement. C. Order the project at 3/5's vote with the City financing the total. D. Table E. Not undertake the project. Issue 3. Award of Bid (Agenda Item #17) A. Award the bid to Hardrives Inc. B. -able for futher discussion. Reject all bids. Issue 4. Determination of Financin4 A. Undertake the originally agreed on percentages. B. Undertake an altered percentage of the costs. C. Table. D. Do not undertake. RECOMMENDATION - it is recommended that the City Council order the project to be undertaken on a 4/5's vote and that the Council determine by separate action the financing. It is recommended that the financing be as follows: the developer pays 75% f or a total of S36,000, the City pay about 15% and the three abutting property owners split the difference on the remaining 10% for an average cost of about $ 1.,500.00 4 PROPOSED MOTION # 1 - Moved by , seconded by , that the Council desires that the project for WoodhillVAvenue be undertaken with the necessary 4/5's vote in order to assess. Ayes , Nays PROPOSED MOTION #2 - Moved by seconded by that the Council award the bid to Hardrives for a bid of with an eventual total of Ayes , Nays PROPOSED MOTION #3 - Moved by , seconded by , that the Council determine the preliminary funding to be as follows: MSM 75% - $36,000 Abutting property owners about 10% - $4,500 City of Orono about 15% - $7,500 Ayes Nays _ cc: John McDowell Woodhill Country Club W, --T % tA lc1 1v 1 r 7 .! 11168 7. 1 -� TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark Bernhardson, City Administrato DATE: November 13, 1987 SUBJECT: Road Improvement - Woodhill Avenue Public Hearing 7:90 P.M. Attachments: A. Feasibility Study Dated 9/23/87 - Follow-up Letter Dated 10/13/87 B. Agreement of Assessment and Waiver of Irregularity and Appeal Dated 10/5/87 C. Woodhill Avenue Project _,rogress Memo Dated 10/6/87 D. Public Hearing Notice/Mailing List E. Draft Resolution Ordering Project ISSUE 1. Holding of public hearing regarding proposed improvement to the upgrade of Woodhill Avenue. 2. If deemed appropriate ordering in project. 3. Direct staff to establish date for hearing for imposition of the assessment when project completed. INTRODUCTION - In order to provide appropriate access for the Woo3hi 11 plat, Woodhill Avenue needed to be upgraded to handle the increased volume of traffic. As a result of this, a feasibility study was undertaken to determine the approximate cost. The range of the or ig inia 1 feasibility study had the cost of the project between $50,700 and $61,680 depending on the alternative selected. This has subsequently been amended as the original feasibility study submitted by the Engineer was done in advance of soil borings being done on site. Because of soil borings, it was determined that additional expense would be entailed in the project and the Engineer is recommending a revised alternative II with some relocation of the road as alternative I is no longer cost effective. As a condition of the subdivision approval adopted on September 23, 1987 was a requirement that an agreement had to be reached with the subdivider regarding their share of this project improvement. Following negotiations it was agreed that the developer and Woodhill Count-:y Club would pay 75t of the total cost based on the original feasibility study not to exceed $46,260. Between the parties they agreed Woodhill would absorb 3/16 of the cost and McDowell 9/16. As such this represents a way for the special assessments to be spread up to the maximum outlined above. The City expedited its consideration and determination of the i appropriate amount for Woodhill and the developer in order to allow the developer the opportunity to construct the road before the winter. This has been accomplished and at present the road has been graded with the initial surfacing being placed on it. It is anticipated that the second surfacing will be placed on it next spring. DISCUSSION Project - The project has been revised based on soil borings with the Engineer now recommending a revised alternative II. Any increase in the project over the original total should be borne by the City. It is expected that the revised alternative II will be below the original alternative I. Process - The following represents the process to be undertaken for this project. 1. Public Hearing 2. Consideration and ordering of the project. 3. Project bidding and award 4. Project construction 5. Project assessment in advance of October 1, 1988 Financing - As noted above the City has an agreement for up to-75% of the original cost from the Woodhill Country Club and the developer. As noted in Attachment C it is the recommendation that the City take 10% of the cost plus any expense over the original maximum $61,680. This leaves a balance of $9,252.00 to be assessed against the abutting property owners based on an equal share to each property. As such this would need assessment shares as follows: - a. Jane Delaney, 1315 Woodhill Avenue - $3,084 - b. Mark & Mary Fox, 1230 Woodhill Avenue - $3,084 - C. Jane McClaren, 190 Orono Orchard Rd - $3,084 A ten (10) year assessment could be implemented with an approximate $310 per year principal assessment plus interest. Alternatives - 1. The following represent alternatives the Council could take at this point. t a. Not do the project. b. Order the project to be undertaken based on the preliminary funding plan outlin:..d ahove. + c. Order the project in based on an amended financing i plan and assessment date. 2. Direct staff to set an assessment date in advance of the October 1, 1988 deadline for certification of assessments. RECOMMENDATION -- To accept the revised alternative II for woodhill project presented by the City Engineer for the Woodhill Avenue Street improvement and to direct the City Engineer to prepare plans and specifications for the street improvements to Woodhill Avenue. It is further recommended that Council directs staff to set an assessment hearing date for an appropriate time in 1988. d PROPOSED MOTION - Moved bye , seconded by ��, To approve the revised alternative II presented by the City Engineer for the Woodhill Avenue street improvements and to direct the City Engineer to prepare plans and specifications for the street improvements to woodhill Avenue. It is further recommended that Council direct staff to set an assessmet•hearing date for an appropriate time in 1988. Ayes Nays _ s 3 Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik & Associates, Inc. (*roc eownrruu, Pf Well.R C-4 PL R..6— W Rw.... P L And w L-a— P f ------- _---_ O /uarywC A dl",L. rL lA­ t A.n. YL B•W/1.•d A l •• b,,# P f X. w.ud W I..", I F R. )W d E Twwn. P L Mo6rn G Y A... A." P L 2335 W. Trunk Highway 36 Engineers & Architects J_"C Otfuw. PA M.•r.wL %,.-I. PL St. Paul, MN 55113 uw.ld C Arbil dr. P E /aq A IurNur. P E 612.636.4600 Mat A N.ww., P L October 13 1987 d A fiNO Pf f Ma.AA ../ T Mwrwuww. P E MuAwr R P/r/Jn1. I• t City f Orono w.du L-A w.. PL Y OIAurwu W NIM". Pf Box 66 M., Awl Lea A. PL Crvstal Bay, MN 55323 .�R AWtdrWsaif. of A ... elk P AwdHww. "I Attn: Mr. John Gerhardson Ae"AA t11t R Ro(f. P "ill. Pt Mar£� Rutr.r L R.nel. A I A TAurww f Aw�w. P t Re: File No. 13934 1. uu L ►urnj. /' L Woodhill Avenue Street Improvements Ch-Ar,A L•.A.aw L.. At P..n4Af Jla•l.w M OL..w Dear John, %. At La.nw We have obtained soil borings on the loodhill Avenue Street Improvement Proi- ect. The soil borings indicate up to 19 feet of organic soils in some areas. There are three options for constructing the street as outlined in the soils report. The street could be surcharged to remove the potential f " signifi- cant settlement in the future. The organic material could be excavated out and backfilled with granular material. The street can be constructed over the existing embankment with the use of a stabilization fabric. The surcharging of the site does not appear to be desirable as it would re- quire closing the road for approximately three months. The excavation of the organic material is a viable option but gets quite expensive. We estimate that this option would add $75,000 to the project cost. Construction of the street on the existing embankment would seem to he the most desirable alternative. The existing roadwav appears to he quite stable over this area. We would not anticipate any significant change in stability as a result of the construction. We would anticipate some settlement in the street over a period of years. The rural design section through the low area will minimize the maintenance prob- lems for the Citv. This new soilP information will require a change in the alignment from that proposed in the preliminary report. We were originally planning to widen the roadway to the north. We would now recommend that the new construction be centered on the existine roadway through the low area. The project costs could 'be increased by 10 percent as a result of additionr.i tree removal and restoration work. If you have any questions, please contact this office. Yours very truly, BONESTROO, ROSEP:E, ANDERLIK b ASSOCTATFS, TN('. Clenn R. Cook CRC:li 7231e AGREEMENT OF ASSESSME17T AND WAIVLR OF IRREGULARITY AND APPEAL THIS AGREEMENT is made this Sth day of October, 1987, between the City of Orono (hereinafter referred to as the "City') and Woodhill Country Club, a Minnesota nonprofit corporation, and t1SM Associates, a Minnesota general partnership, (hereinafter referred to as "Applicants"). In consideration of the action of the City Council to approve the final subdivision of certain real property legally described in Exhibit A, attached hereto, prior to the City's final determination of costs and assessments associated with the Woodhill Avenue upgrade and in consideration of the benefits conferred by such upgrade, the Applicants agree to pay a tair share of su,:h costs as set forth below. The improvements to Woodhill Avenue (hereinafter referred to as "the Project") include an upgrade to a 22 foot standard from Orono Orchard Road east to its connection with the private road to be constructed to serve the Woodhill Ridge development in accordance with information outlined in the City Engineer's Report for Woodhill Avenue Street Improvement Project 87-3, dated September 23, 1987. In consideration of the City's action, Woodhill Country Club agrees to pay 3/16ths of the cost of the Project up to a maximum of $11,565.00. MSM Associates, also in consideration of the City's action, agrees to pay 9/16ths of the cost of the Project up to a maximum of $35,695.00. Although the final specifications of the Project have not been determined, the foregoing agreements assume a naximum Project cost of $61,680.0C. In the event the Project costs exceed t,61,G80.00, neither the Woodhill property, nor the liSM property shall be assessed any more than the respective amounts set forth above. Finally, the Applicants expressly waive objection to any irregularity with regard to the improvement assessments and any claim that the amount thereof levied against the Applicants' property is excessive, together with all rights to appeal in the costs. CITY OF ORONO Jam s R. Gra ek Its Mayor STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ss COUNTY OF HENENPIN ) The foregoing was acknowledged before me this 5th day of October, 1987, by James R. Grabek, the Mayor of the City of Orono, a municipal corporation under the laws of Minnesota, on behalf of the municipal corporation. 4 i 6;TTY L. NELLIST '' ;+ � Nrc�cr rwtt, _ waaesoi:. 1 ►+ENN!F;N COJNTy ' Notary Ub11C Mr commission e.t"'esA;61 17, 1991 WOODHILL fQUNTJkY CLUB By STATE OF MINNESOTA Its ) ss COUNTY OF HENENPIN ) The foregoing was a`c)cnowledged before me this }� day of October, 1987, by L— V Q , the of Woodhill ;.ountry Club, -a Minnesota nonprofit corporation under the laws of Minnesota, on behalf of the nonprofit grad .)n�: : �:. • � ,• On corps l t, i—,r PV-'uC • i'..._. -st .1 .], 1::.3 tary Publ iC �1\.:y Mr Gommsacn Capres fro. MSM ASSOCIATES iL STATE OF MINNESOTA ss COUNTY OF HENENPIN ) The foregoing was acknowledged before me this r day of October, 1987, by 12 Air i� �'�{Y„-I r thF of MSM Associates, a Minnesota general partner-:iip and r the laws of Minnesota, on behalf of the general partnership. E tCSCHCt NOTARYARY PU8L PUI3lIG—N.:t:%ESOTF Notary PUb11C HENNEPINCCUt1n My Commission EiD+res h" W- 1553 4562w -2- rx11T131T A aoclat and 12, "Auditor's Subdivision Ntso2ier 507, Hennepin County. (Monty, exceptthe�f llo to th portions ethereof: reof On file and of record in tlw office-3 of tfe ry of Titles -and the County Recorder in and for said Hcnnep 2 -xcepc that part of lot :1 ire Aui.W vision Number 307, Hennepin County.. Minnesota described as follows: Beginning at the Southeast corner Lot 8 in said Auditor's Subdivisio 307, therx-e Fast along the extenson of the South line of amid Lot 8 a distance of 46.6 feet; thence Tcnauship 117, Range 23 a distmx of 352.61 feet to a point in the extc-nsion of the ,rth p&rnllel with the North and South line of Section 2, distance .)rtherly line of said Wt8; thelf sa�dUlotsB sly alto of 3 0 f ecdco theerly line a of beQi inof 49.83 feet to L4e Northeast oorrer of said Lot £i; 7ence South alonline t crept that part of Lot 12 in "Auditor's Subdivision Number 307, Hennepin County, Minnesota", described m follow: IleYirviinY at the point of ith e North •ntersection of the Nortli�rl line origftLot 8 in he Northerly line id ofraaid tut 8siun Number to the 1eOpoint in�'th Northerly 1 ne ofcenter saidline lot;osaidpooinnt2bring 25.5 Cect arigt 23; the, ce S�ui"e y sat of the meat Westerly corner of said (ot 8; thence Northwesterly 32.2 feet w n point 204.74 Ccet Southwesterly Eton the point of begirninQ; hence l;ortheasterly 204.74 feet to the point of beginning• x[arpt a triangular tract of I" in Lot 12, Auditor's Subdivision Niseber 307, Hennepin Ccxsity, Minnesota". dewribed as follos+s: BeYirsiing at a oint in tl,e dividing line between the northeasterly [lit9 rnortherly.12 in inloeigithe•divid dividingsiGn line bead►a-en70sfonrsaid L7. which ou 3nt uard 1241.1 la di tanoe of 7eet northerly ©9 fee w an anile orner of Lot 4 in said 5uhlivision: thence L n►nt in said dividing line; thcsioe at a right ortSle easterly along the dividing line bet"rer' a&isi Iota 3 and 12, a diutancr o! 57 feet to another ogle point in said dividing line; thence southwesterly in a straight-- traight lira 97.3 feet Dore or leas. to tha point of tx�uuiir.:• �uxpt thit trim aabraced within Tract A. RMISTUK'D LAND SLMvL•Y W. 159G. Files of Registrar of Titles, Cewaity of Hcr•.ricpin. :.La^.7 'Ai uLor's Subdivision Number 307. Hennepin County, Mirviesotn". of said lot 10 descrihed as follows: Fleginnina at th 'themat corner of last 8 in "tuditor's Subdivision Nusnber 307, Hennepin kept that part the South line of said Lit t(s dial of 43.4 feet w a point in the North arti 3ouCi center line of Section 2, carr-:!r of Lot .:Dori t y . M i nnrio ta" ; theme West al On't said ':o.•,-iahip 117, RsriYe 23; thence South &local the Northtucenbe I�rb[o mid Lot 9.2a disttance of 351reet to the lLor.hms14.3 feet to Cie t cornerr of srid Lot i in said Auditor's Subclivisian Number 3U7; thence hNorth a+xl :, a diatarice of 114.3 feet toa point in the ectrnslan of Lhc South i; therir - North parallel with the i,Auth ux�it.er line u[ gad of 8 n distance o[ 4G.6 f lion 2 Brie of said lot 8; thence West along said octettiled South line of s&iLot eet tothe point of b-itu:i.r,^. ALb Lot 13. "Auditor's Subdivision Kkmabe r 307, 1larsriep in Cota►ty, h!intesote". ith the mat line I,ot I iliac pactthe dcucribal as follows: Beginning at the most northwesterly corner of said Lot l3 (which corner is also the northeasterly corder cf Of lot i of said Airiitor's Subdivision); ; lect�to the easterly extxnaionra f thSort of e Lot 1Jne fiitnnictimid Lot 2l' feet; theme west nlnrtdth �dle�te^lyy extension an of said Lot I s distlirxx _ distance of 25 feet, more boriness, to sl �coco�inII to the riled platthereof.wr's Sutsiivimiciti; thence North nlottl tad seat line 157.15 teat. ono or less. to the point of Y lu io7.3 l TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark Bernhardson, City Adminstrato�l DATE: October 6, 1987 SUBJECT: Woodhill Avenue - Project Progress Attachment: A. Special Assessment Waiver Agreement - City of Orono/Woodhill Country Club/M.C.M. Associates B. Proposed Resolution Receiving and Calling Hearing on Improvement C. Notice of Public Hearing ISSUE 1. Acknowledgment of infor.nation regarding agreement between the City of Orono/Woodhill Country Club and M.C.M. Associates regarding their share of costs related to the upgrade of Woodhill Avenue. 2. Establishment of the p-iblic hearing date for the special assessment hearing for the upgrade of Woodhill Avenue. INTRODUCTION_ - As you may recall a contingency of the final subdivision for McDowell passed on September 26, 1987 was that they were to enter into an agreement regarding their fair share of costs for the upgrade of Woodhill Avenue. Based on the agreement the parties have closed their land sale on Monday, October 5, 1987. DISCUSSION - After a review of the project it was determined by staff that the appropriate share between Woodhill Country Club and John McDowell was a total of 75% of the total cost of the upgrade. Between the parties they agreed that Woodhill would share 3/16 of the price and McDowell would share 9/16 of the price. This represents a waiver of the special assessment. In order to get this upgrade project under way for construction in the spring of 1988 it is necessary that a public hearing be scheduled and suggest the November 23, 1987 Council meeting at which time the other three benefitting property owners can present a case and at which time the Council can determine their appropriate share for the upgrade. Based on the 75% that has been agreed to by McDowell the staff's recommendation that the City fund 10% of the cost (approximately $6,200 maximum) which is its foregone share of the maintenance over a 20 year period and up to the balance of ;5% be assessed over the other three property owners based -i the amount of frontage they have on Woodhill Avenue. Shouiu Woodhill have to begin to use this as their primary access it .,-,uld require further upgrade of Woodhill Avenue which mould by n,:crssity need to be borne by the Country Club. RECOMMENDATION - It is recommended that the Council accept the Information regarding the agreement between Woodhill Country Club and the City as to their share of the upgrade together with establishing November 23, 1987 as the public hearing date for Project 87-1. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by seconded by , that the Council accept the information from the staff regarding Woodhill Avenue, adopt Resolution $ receiving and calling hearing on improvement and establish November 23, 1987 as a public hearing for the project sibility and special assessment for the upgrade of Woodhill . .anue. Ayes , Nays 2 AGREEMENT OF ASSESSMFNT AND WAIVER OF IRREGULARITY AND APPEAL THIS AGREEMENT is made this 5th day of October, 1987, between the City cf Orono (hereinafter referred to as the "City") and Woodhill Country Club, a Minnesota nonprofit corporation, and MSM Associates, a Minnesota general partnership, (hereinafter referred to as "Applicants"). In consideration of the action of the City Council to approve the final subdivision of certain real property legally described in Exhibit A, attached hereto, prior to the City's finr_i determination of costs and assessments associated with the Woodhill Avenue upgrade and in consideration of the benefits conferred by such upgrade, the Applicants agree to pay a fair sham of such costs as set forth below. The improvements to Woodhill Avenue (hereinafter referred to as "the Project") include an upgrade to a 22 foot standard from Orono Orchard Rjad east to its connection with the private road to be constructf:d to serve the Woodhill Ridge development in accordance wit', information outlined in the City Engineer's Report for Woodhill Avenue Street Improvement Project 87-3, dated Septemrer 23, 1987. In consideration of the City's action, lgoodl:ill Country Club agrees to pay 3/16ths of the cost of the Project up to a maximum of 511,565.00. MSM Associates, also in consideration of the City's action, agrees to pay 9/16ths of the cost of the Project up to a maximum of 04,695.00. Although the final specifications of the Project have not been determined, the foregoing agreements assume a maximum Project cost of $61,680.00. In the event the Project costs exceed $61,680.00, neither the Woodhill property, nor the MSM property shall be assessed any more than the respective amounts set forth above. Finally, the Applicants expressly waive objection to any K irregularity with regard to the improvement assessments and any claim that the amount thereof levied against the Applicants' property is excessive, together with all rights to appeal in the costs. CITY OF ORONO By James R. Gra ek Its Mayor STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ss COUNTY OF HENENPIN ) The foregoing was acknowledged before me this 5th day of October, 1987, by James R. Grabek, the Mayor of the City of Orono, a municipal corporation under the lawq of Minnesota, on behalf of the municipal corporation. Notary Public WOODHILL COUNTRY CLUB By Its STATE OF MINNESOTA ) as COUNTY OF HENENPIN ) The foregoing was acknowledged before me this day of October, 1987, by , the of Woodhill Country Club, a Minnesota nonprofit corporation under the laws of Minnesota, on behalf of the nonprofit corporation:. Notary Public MSM ASSOCIATES By Its STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ss COUNTY OF HENENPIN ) The foregoing was acknowledged before me this day of October, 1987, by , the of MSM Associates, a Minnesota general partnership under the laws of Minnesota, on behalf of the general partnership. Notary Public 4562w City o f ORONO ' RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. A RESOLUTION RECEIVING AND CALLING HEARING ON IMPROVEMENT WHEREAS, pursuant to a motion of the Council on August 10, 1987, a repo--t has been prepared by Glenn Cook, City Engineer with reference to the improvement of Woodhill Avenue east of Orono Orchard Road, and this report was received by the Council on September 28, 1987. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF ORONO, t1INNESOTA: 1. The Council will consider the improvement of such street in accordance with the report and the assessment of abutting property for all or a portion of the cost of the improvement pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Chapter 429 at an estimated total cost of the improvement of $61,680.00. 2. A public hearing shall be held on such proposed improvement on the 23rd day of November, 1987 in the council chambers, 1275 grown Road Scuth at 7:00 p.m. and the clerk shall give mailed and published notice of such hearing and improvements as required by law. Adopted by the Council this 12th day of October, 1987. ATTEST: James R. Grabek, Mayor Dorothy Fi. Hallin, City Clerk~ r N(YTICE OF HEARING ON IMPROVEMENT TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: NOTICE is hereby given that the City Council of the City of Orono will meet in the council chambers, 1275 Brown Road south at 7:00 p.m. on tovember 23, 1987, to consider the making of an improvement on woodhill Avenue east of Orono Orchard Road, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 429.011 to 429.111. The area proposed to be assessed for such improvement is the property abutting on such street. The estimated cost of such improvement is $61,680.00. Such persons as desire to be heard with reference to the proposed improvement will be heard at this meeting. Dorothy Hall.in, City Clerk Published in the Laker/Pioneer newspaper the weeks of November 2 and 9, 1967. FV i:.1:wA'r.lryp" 1,atthe GtyG of 11e citybt Orem will melt to the councu tlwn0ers. 1275 Brown hood South of 7 p to on Noveinber 23 1987. to consider ttar rrmak rq of an Irrlprovetnent on WoodMu Avenue east of Orono Orchard Road pursuent to trlrr,esota Statutes Sect on 429 01 1 to 4.2 1 11 The area proposed to in assessed for %Min Improve merit Is the propsev abutlnp on sttch street The esltmsfed Coat OI such improvement is I Set 000 Such portions as desire to be heard Mth reference to the proposed onpruvement wig I be Mad of INS noel" . r t M Nail , Or Ulrk IpupngYled In Try lekel eincei un NOr 2 p 12c��ad� Affidavit of Publication State of Minnesota. County of Hennepin Bill Holm. being duly sworn• on oath says that he is an authorized agent and employee of the publisher of the newspaper known as THE LAKER. Mound. Min- nesota, and has full knowledge of the facts which are stated below A.) The newspape• has complied with all the require- ments constituting qualifications as a qualified newspaper• as provided by Minnesota Statute 331 A 02. 331 A 07, and other applicable laws, as amended. (�) j., k B ) The printed '`��1 Cam - •ti (h-,-V* w. e- which is attached was cut from the columns of said newspaper• and was printed and published once each week for _2._ . successive weeks It was first published Monday. the _ day of _-_ N %vim_ ._ . 19 and was thereafter printed and published ever)j Monday• to and including Monday. the 9 dad of Authorized Am Subscribed and sworn to me on this day of �L'a� 19_, BY/1- - --- -- --- )„µ.�n;1M�MJI1 Mt M•'-r+�rMlA rrr�����, ��^t� Publi F ; If- L. LL4fiF-11 PCJIU": C tsi ..� .. ` i cA I:r. CCUNi1 j WMI • —Rate, Information""'"' 11) Lowest classified rate paid by commercial users for compal We space $7 8-1 per inch (2) Maximum rate a'!Dvo9 by law for above matter $4.54 per Inc (3) Hato actually charged for abo•ro matter 54 54 per inch Each addtUonal succossrve week $3 03 per inch WOODHILL AVENUE IMPROVEMENT MAILING LIST - 11/9/87 02-117-23 24 0001 David J. Lindstrom 1315 Woodhill Avenue Wayzata, MN 55391 02-117-23 24 0003 Victoria H. Raiche 280 Orono Orchard Road South Wayzata, MN 55391 02-117-23 21 0009 McClaren Jane �yF�cC 190 Orono Orchard Road South Crystal Bay, MN 55323 02-117-23 21 0007 CO`G Michael & Darlene Blazek 1230 Woodhill Avenue Wayzata, MN 55391 02-117-23 12 0001 Woodhill Country Club 200 Woodhill Road Wayzata, MN 55391 02-117-23 24 0007 John D. McDowell 4045 Bayside Road Maple Plain, MN 55359 02-117-23 21 0007 Mark & Mary Fox 1230 Woodhill Avenue ►�' Wayzata, MN 55391 i9W�YZA-rR CERTIFICATE OF MAILING STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) SS. CITY OF ORONO ) I, Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk, of the City of Orono, Hennepin County, Minnesota, do hereby certify that a Notice of Public hearing concerning Woodhill Avenue Improvement was mailed to the attached list of property owners on November 9, 1987 In Witness Whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and seal this 9th day of November, 1987 I othy M. llin, City Clerk (SEAL) N City of ORONO k ��`✓ RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL 4R" p NO. _ _- f --'"" A RESOLUTION ORDERLNG IMPROVEMENT AND PREPARATION OF PLANS WHEREAS, a resolution of the City Council adopted the 12th day of October, 1987, fixed a date for a Council hearing on the proposed improvement of woodhill Avenue. WHEREAS, ten days' mailed notice and two weeks' published notice of the hearing was given, and the hearing was held thereon on this 23rd day of November, 1987, at which all persons desiring to be heard were given an opporutnity to be heard thereon. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA; 1. Such improvement is hereby ordered as proposed in the Council resolution adopted 12th day of October, 1987. 2. Glenn Cook, City Engineer is hereby designated as the engineer for this improvement. Fie shall prepare plans and specifications for the making of such improvement. Adopted by the Council this 23rd dal of November, 1987. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, Crty Clcrk Jamez R. Grabek, Mayor (:ITS' of ORO NO I'osl l/fficr liox litieCryslal Nay. Mlnnesula sir, nicipal ()ffirr•v On the North Shore of Lake Minnetonka June 7, 1988 Mr. Henry Kingman Woodhill Country Club 200 Woodhill Road Wayzata, MN 55391 Subject: Road Improvement - Woodhill Avenue Dear Mr. Kingman, At the Council's November 23, 1987 meeting they directed the City Engineer to undertake a feasibility study for the improvement of the public portion of Woodhill Avenue. As you may recall Woodhill Country Club together with John McDowell had agreed to pay a total of 75% of the improvements. The course of action that was chosen from this feasibility was estimated to total about $55,000 for the improvements. On April 25, 1988 the City Council approved the specifications for the project. This was subsequently bid and the City is now in receipt of the results. The total for the construction portion was approximately $47,900. This represents a reduction in Woodhill's share of the costs from about $10,300 to about $9,000. As discussed on the phone, Mr. John McDowell has verbally indicated his desire to pay his portion as a lump sum and it is assumed that the Woodhill Country Club would be paying its portion in a likewise manner. Unless the City hears to the contrary, the City will be sending a bill for about $9,000 to the Woodhill Country Club for its share in August of 1988. Attached please find a copy of the agreement between Woodhill Country Club, John McDowell and the City of Orono. me. Should you have any questions or comments, please free to contact Sincerely, a k F.. Be ardson City Administrator Enclosure cc: mayor and City Council BUILDING A ZONING 4737357 • ADMINIS1RA11ON & FINANCI• - 473-7358 • PUBLIC WORKS - 473.7339 ASSESSING city of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 2219 A RESOLUTION GRANTING PPF,ININARY APPROVAL Tip ; PLAT OF MOOD BILL APPLICATION NO. 11.63 WHEREAS, John D. McDowell and T.V. Markle, Vice President of Woodhill Country Club (hereinafter "applicants") on May 22, 1987 filed a Class III subdivision application with the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") for approval of a 5 lot plat of a property legally described on Exhibit A attached to this resulu ion and �.ereinafter referred to as "the property"; and WHEREAS, after due published anc A -led notice in accordance with Minnesota Statues 462.358 et. seq. and the City of Orono Zoning and Subdivision Codes, the Orono Planning Commission held a public hearing on June 15, 1987, at which time all persons desiring to be heard concerning this application were given the opportunity to speak thereon; and WHEREAS, at their regular meeting held on July 13, 1987, the Orono City Council considered the subdivision application of the applicants, noting the following findings of fact: 1. The property is located within the RR-lB Single Family Rural Residential zoning district requiring a minimum of 2 acres of contiguous dry buildable land within each newly created lot. 2. The property consists of approximately 37.5 acres. Lot 1 contains 2.2 acres of dry contiguous land; Lot 2 contains 2.03 acres -" Iry, contiguous land; Lot 3 contains 2.50 acres of dry contiguous lanc.; Lot 4 contains 2.63 ac, -s of dry contiguous land; and, Lot 5 contains 3.5 acres of dry contiguous land. 3. Outlot B consists of approximately 20 acres and is not proposes: fcr residental development and will be combined with contiguous lands owned by Woodhill County Club. 4. Lot 3 shall achieve access via an existing private driveway easement to the south and Lots 1, 2, 4 and 5 shall be served by a private road that shall access from the north t Woodhill Avenue. 5. A single family residence can be constructed on all five lots without the need for further variances. 6. Septic testing has confirmed that all lots have areas for on -site sewage disposal systems. The topography have placed limits on available, flat, areas for septic development. suitable soils and wetlands and steep more gentle sloped Page 1 of 4 property with road City of OR ONO RESOLUTION OF THE L' 7"' c;OUNCII NO. -2219 iique character of the heavily wooded, and steep sloped has required special consideration by the City in dealing design and lot development. 8. Lot 2 does not meet the required lot width to the rear of the front yard setback line, the applicants have asked the City to consider the following hardships: a) the need to preserve adequate areas in building envelopes of adjacent lots; b) minimize tree removal; c) provide feasible grades for drives to house locations. 9. Lots 1, 2, 4 and 5 shall be served by a private road that has been designed to minimize the impact of the construction but yet provide a safe use level for the public. Lot 3 shall achieve access via an existing private driveway which will also minimize the impact on the property. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that based upon either one or more of the findings noted above, the City Council of the City of Orono hereby approves the preliminary plat application of John D. McDowell and T.V. Markle, Vice President of Woodhill Country Club per plat drawing by Thomas S. Bergquist dated June 26, 1987 and further grants a variance to the standard that would require all lots have frontage on a public road with the creation of the private road and use of private driveway and per Section 10.02, Definition 77, grants a width variance to Lot 2 because the lot does not meet the required 200 feet width at rear of required front yard, subject to the following conditions: 1. Prior to the issuance of building permits for new construction, the final plat must be filed with either the Hennepin County Recorder's Office or Registrar cf Titles Office, road base installed and approved by City, and, if required improvements are not completed, the developers must execute a devel,per's agreement and post a letter of credit (150% of cost of remaining improvements). 2. Required improvements: a) Woodhi 11 Avenue - The improvement of Woodhi 11 Avenue sha ] ' bey completed as a public project. Developer/applicant shall execute an agreement that will affirm his/their share in the cost of said road improvement. City to determine the amount of the payment upon receipt of final costs for said road improvement. Woodhi11 Avenue shall be upgraded from 16 feet minimum paved width to a 22 feet minimum paved width. i b) Private road to be constructed per standards setforth in Section 11.33, Subdivision 4 and 5 for road serving 3-6 lots except for changes in design recommended by City Engineer in his letter of July 16, 1987 and attached to this resolution. Page 2 of 4 City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 2219 c) Fencing provided for septic test sites prior to any land alteration. Applicant to contact City upon installation of temporary fencing around all septic areas. 3. The following list of final submittals must be submitted to the Zoning Administratcr two weeks prior to the rejularly scheduled Council meeting on the second and fourth Mondays of the month: Final Plat Submittals A. RECORD PLAT drawings in the form of two (2) mylar conies and one (1) copy reduced to 1"-200'. Drawing to include: a) Lot lines platted per preliminary survey. b) Dedication of "drainage and utility easements" 10' wide along all perimeter property lines and 5' each side of internal property lines. c) Dedication of additional right-of-way for Woodhill Avenue per City's request to provide area for cul-de-sac at east end. d) Designated wetlands to be shown on the plat as "drainage easements" - wetland within Lots 4 and 5 at 957.8 elevation and wetlands within Lots 2, 3 and 4 at the 960.5 elevation. e) Designate 20' wide drainage easement over drainageway from pond to south lot line of Lot 3. B. Other 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 applicants must provide certified copies of all recorded easements currently affecting the property. c) Execution of the following forms and easments required by the City. Please contact the Building 6 Zoning staff if you have any questions in the execution of these documents: 1. Flowage and Conservation Easement - over all designated wetlands and drainageway within Lot 3. 2. Underlying Road and Utility Easement over road Outlot A. Page 3 of 4 City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 2219 f i i , i , 5U2, i 3. Road Maintenance Covenants - if develcifir 1fiW considered other covenants f r road, `"&Vep and-, maintenance of private road, please see'0i tS,ICXW gf0jV0 an original executed copy for review a`r.4,4il.i-ng v ,Ltd the plat. rt�i;rt-',WK -WU 4. Road Name Request - please see that 1;cw') edlfiblt*w'` are submitted. Road name approval is a separ'At— Council action and should be submitted for Council's consideration as soon as possible. 5. Developer's Agreement. - to include all improvements not completed by final plat approval. No lot grading or road construction can begin until all grading and revised road plans have been approved by the City. 6. Execution of agreement that will confirm your I payment for cost of improvement of Woodhill Avenue. C. FEES TO BE PAID: Total Due $1,300.00 a) Park dedication fee per current schedule: $200.00 for each residential lot at 5, Total Fee $1,000.00. b) Final plat fee - $150.00. c) Filing fee for plat and associated documents $150.00. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held July 13, 1987. ATT Lark Page 4 of 4 51388.1 RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BID WOODHILL AVENUE IMPROVEMENT WHEREAS, pursuant to an advertisement for bids for the improvement of Woodhill Avenue, bids were received, opened and tabulated according to law, and the following bids were received complying with the advertisement published in the Laker/Pioneer Newspaper the week of May 9, 1988 and Construction Bulletin the weeks of May 2 and 9, 1988. AND WHEREAS, it appears that 11arr1rives of Maple Grove is the lowest responsible bidder. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF ORONO, MINNESOTA: 1. The Mayor and City Clerk are hereby authorized and directed to enter into the attached contract with Hardrives of Maple Grove in the name of the City of Orono for the improvement of Woodhill Avenue according to the Plans and specifications therefore approved by the City Council and on file in the office of the City Clerk. 2. The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to return forthwith to all bidders the deposits made with their bids, except that the deposits of the successful bidder and the next lowest -idder shall be retained until a contract has been signed. Adopted by the City Council this 13th day of June, 1988. James R. Grabek, Mayor ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk 4 , • ,. .. —.,,,.c,%uT 1- 6988.4 WOODS ILL AVKMZ PROJECT -COST ALTERNATIVE SELECTED Contsruction Cost $42,273 Continuing 4,227 $49f5ee Legal, Admin. Capitalized Interest FINANCING MSM 31,388 wood hill 10,462 4I,850 3 property 8,550 owners City 5,400 $55,80A 9,300 $55,880 BID Hardrives $36,991 1,110 MOW AS CONSTRUCTED 9,880 $47,881 PER BID Alternatives I II III 26,933 26,933 26,933 8,977 8,977 35,9IB 55,9I0 _8s977 35,9IA - 4,590 7,500 (1500 per (2500 per owner) owner) 11,990 7,490 4,490 $47,98A $47,900 $47'90A TO: PROM: DATE: Mark Bernhardson, City Administrator John R. G% -hardson, Public Works Director June 23, 1988 SUBJECT: 3508 Ivy Place - Water Meter 623.80.7 AG JUII 27 OT-4 fir NA, At the June 13, 1988 Council meeting Attorney Jim Lord representing Mr. Stephan Wilson, 3508 Ivy Place, addresscd the Council regarding high water use at the above address. Staff has not received adequate information to make a determination as to the cause of the problem. It is hopeful that we may reach a resolution of the matter by the July 11, 1988 Council meeting. Recommendation - To direct staff to continue its efforts to resolve the high water use at 3508 Ivy Place. Proposed motion moved second to direct staff to continue its efforts to resolve the high water use at 3508 Ivy Place. To: Mayor and Council From: Mark Bernhardson, City Administratog V Forwarded recommending approval. 614 b_ �u t-T, nTIL .iUil 41 1- TO: Mayor and City Council '^ �.y FROM: Mark Bernhardson, City Administraty� DATE: June 14, 1988 SUBJECT: Solicitor's Ordnance Attachment: A. Reques= For Ordinance Amendment - Solicitor's Ordinance Dated 6/7/88 B. Orono Letter to Paul Larson Dated 6/17/88 ISSUE - Consideration of the attached request for an amendment to the or id inance . INT_RODUCTIO_N -At the Council's June 13, 1988 meeting a request by Paul Larson regarding amendment of the solicitor's ordinance was presented, however Mr. Larson was not able to be present and the Council agreed to have this item tabled until its June 27, 1988 Council meeting. D_IS_CU_S_SIO_N - Mr. Larson has not given a response to Attachment B to indicate if he will be able to attend the Council meeting on June 27, 1988. RECOMMENDATION MENDATI_ON - It is recommended that the Council review stafs _reco__mmendation in Attachment A together with any proposed motion. cc: Paul Larson, 3225 Casco Circle 1 b788.3d TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark Bernhardson, City DATE: June 7, 1988 SUBJECT: Solicitor's Ordinance Auministratovjy Attachment: A. Paul Larson Letter Dated 6/3/88 B. Solicitor's ordinance Memo Dated 4/15/88 C. Council Minutes Dated 4/25/88 ISSUE - Determine if the Council desires to amend the solicitor's ordinance as it relates to requiring to place solicitation on commercially zoned land. INTRODUCTION _ - At the Counc i l's April 25, 1988 Council meeting they adopted the ordinance amendment which required that all peddlers have a license and that licenses can only be issued when the business is conducted on commercially zoned property. They had additionally indicated as noted in Attachment_ C that the current situation on Shoreline Drive could continue through the balance of the year. Mr. Paul Larson, the owner of the property where it is being conducted, has requested that the City delete the language regarding commercially zoned property as a requirement of the licensing. DISCUSSION - The original ordinance amendment when reviewed was realized not to cover situations such as Mr. Penke. As a result of that review staff recommended and Council adopted an ordinance ' to regulate them and also to require that people conducting such businesses be done in a commercial zone. This is really a "cross reference" from the zoning code as a person would nct normally be able to conduct a business such as this in a residential zone but only a retail operation in a commercial zone. Mr. Larson would like this dropped as he doei not want to go through the rezoning of his property to commercial property in order to allow not only Mr. Penke but also other mobile vendors and the old ice cube shop, which has now become a dock assembly place, to continue on his property so that he may generate the necessary revenue in addition to the rental of the existing residence in order to give him the appropriate cash flow. It should additionally be noted that the staff will be presenting to the Council at its July 11, 1988 Council meeting a proposal to undertake a master planning process in the '.Navarre area as a prelude to potential redevelopment along the lines of the Highway 12 Corridor Study. ALTERNATIVE - 1. Agree to amend and also direct amendment of the zoning code to allow such retail operations as a premitted use. 2. Retain as is. 3. Table. 4. Indication related to rezoning. 5. Table matter until the master planning process has been undertaken. RECOMMENDATICN - It is recommended that t',ie Council retain the lanquage and not allow commecial operations, be they mobile or stationary, in residential zones and that Mr. Larson be directed to, at this point, submit the rezoning application pending the master planning process review. PROPOSED MOTIO11 - Moved by , seconded by _ , that the Council desires to retain the current language and Ordinance and directs Mr. Larson to undertake the necessary rezoning applications which are to be held in abeyance pending a completion of the master planning process. Ayes __, Nays __ cc: Paul W. Larson, 3225 Casco Circle 40 t 2 `- xtt I s I T ti . tr June 3rd, 1988 E City Of Orono Crystal Bay, MN I would like to appeal the City Council decision to amend the Mobile Peddlers ordinance restricting the present use of my property. I was not notified of the meeting and don't feel my interest was fairly represented as a Orono tax payer. This property has been used commercially for years befor the zoning was changed il: 1975. This made the present use nonconforming. This property abuts c::,rmnercially zoned and commercially used property on all sides. It is my wishes that the City allow the present use of the property ac; thPv have in the east. 41588.6 17 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark Bernhardson, City Administrato DATE: April 15, 1988 SUBJECT: Mobile Peddler's Ordinance Amendment Attachments? A. Ordinance No. 5.30 B. Draft Amendment - Tom Barrett ISSUE - Consideration for adoption of language related to and incfusion of certain classes of peddlers and transient merchants under its licensing provisions. INTRODUCTION - As the Council's April 11, 1988 council meeting staff was directed to develop ordinance language for the inclusion of certain types of mobile peddlers who were not presently not included under its solicitor's ordinance. DISCUSSION - The City Attorney has drafted language in Attachment B for inclusion of merchants who market their wares either from vehicles or on other pieces of property together with an f mendment to limit such sales specifically to commercial pieces of property. t A ALTER_N_A_T_I_VES_ - -- 1. Adopt as drafted. 2. Amend and adopt. 3. Table. 4. Choose not to include this type of merchant for regulation. RECOMMENDATION - It is recommended that Attachment B be adopted as presented_to regulate this class of transient merchants and peddlers. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by _ , seconded by _ , that the Council adopt Ordinance No. _ , Second Series as an amendment to Ordinance No. to regulate select classes of solicitors. Ayes --' Nays -- --- 0 ORDINANCE NO. , SECOND SERIES AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SUBDIVISIONS 1, 2(H), 2(I), 3(F), 3 (G) , 4 and 5 (B) , OF SECTION 5.30 ADOPTED APR IL AND ENTITLED "SOLICITORS" The City Council of the City of Orono ordains: Ordinance No. 5.30 Subdivisions 1, 2(11), 2(I), 3, 3(B), 3 (F) , 3 (G) , 4 and 5 (B) adopted Apr i 1 1, 1984 and ei.t i t led "Solicitors" is amended to read: Section 5.30. SOLICITOR AND TRANSIENT MERCHANTS Subd. 1. Purpose. This Section is not intended to in any way hinder, delay or interfere with legitimate business or organizational activities. The Council finds, however, that solicitors have used public streets and their direct contact with residents of the City for the illegitimate solicitation practices of harassment, nuisance, theft, deceit, or menacing, troublesome or unlawful activities. This Section is intended to ferret out and control: (1) businesses and organizations using solicitation as a means of concealing unlawful activities; and, (2) businesses and organizations which, though its activities be lawful or even commendable, use such illegitimate practices in solicitation; and, (3) individual natural persons who, though they represent lawful business and organizations, use such illegitimate solicitation practices; and, (4) businesses and transient merchants, though legitimate, which cause, or are likely to cause, a traffic hazard or other inconvenience or danger to persons or property. The Council further finds that a large number of the residents of the City are employed as their livelihood and means of support by manufacturing plants and other businesses on shifts rotating between night and day, and to disturb them during their sleeping hours for the purpose of solicitation is a source of nuisance or even harassment and should be subject to control. Subdivision 2. Definitions. H. "Transient Merchant Activities" means engaging in any temporary, intermittent, or transient sales or exchanges of anv -foods, wares, rr services by scatting up any outdoor stand or structure, or by u--ing any truck, automobile, or any other vehicle, at any point or place in the City. I. "Transient Merchant" means any person engaging in transient merchant activities. Suhdivision 3. Prohibited Solicitation and Transient Merchant Practices. B. It is unlawful for any solicitor or transient merchant to practice harassment, nuisance, theft, deceit, or menacing, troublesome or otherwise unlawful activities during the .7ourse of solicitation or transient merchant activities. F. It is unlawful for any person to engage in business solicitation or transient meic;hant activities without a lincense as herein provided. G. Transient merchant activities can only be conducted on commercially zoned properties. Subdivison 4. Application. Applications for solicitor and transient merchant licensing or registration shall contain the name and address of the solicitor or transient merchant and such other information as may reasonably be required by the Council as a condition to registration or licensing or to permit investigation into the applicant's background and past solicitation practices or transient merchant activities. Application for solicitor licensing shall also contain the ame and address of the business or organization for w A ch solicitations are sought. Subdivision 5. Investigation, Approval or Disapproval. B. If he finds no past history of the applicant indicating violations similar to those declared unlawful in this Section, and if he finds that to grant the application is not likely to result in a hazard or danger to persons or property, he shall recommend issuing a license or approving registration, as the case may be, and the City Clerk shall forthwith advise the applicant. The City Clerk shall issue a licen_e, upon payment of the fee therefore, to the approved applicant for business solicitation or transient merchant activities, and shall approve the completion of registration by the applicant for a conribution solicitor. Passed by the Council this 25th day of April, 1988. --------------- ----------------- James R. Grabek, Mayor ATTEST: Dorothy-M. Hallin, City Clerk Publi.hed in the Laker and Pioneer n-- . _ne week of 2 4188. 2 c;7 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark Bernhardson, City Administrator - DATE: SUBJECT: Mobile Peddlers Attachment: A. Mobile Peddlers 3/23/88 B. 1967 Zoning Map C. Present Zoning Map ISSUE 1. Information ding the 4in interpretation 2. The background on zoning information regarding the PFul Larson Droperty 3. Issuance of the solicitation permit to Mr. Penke INTRODUCTION - At the Council's March 28, 1988 meeting Council received comments from members in the audience regarding the appropriatness of its solicitation ordinance together with the conduct of this particular peddler's permit in what is presently zoned residential. Based on t'ae discussion at the Council meeting of the 28th the Council felt that an appropriate avenue to rectify the issue of a solicitor doing business on a residential piece of property was for the property owner to seek a rezoning of the property. DISCUSSION I_ssu_e_ #1 - Ordinance Regulation - Under State Statute Chapter 329, the State requires the licensing of peddlers, hawkers and transient merchants by the County Auditor, but does permit the licensing and regulation of such by a municipality. The City of Orono did not specifically regulate such until the 1984 recodification. It had been staff's interpretation of that ordinance that anyone defined by the ordinance nee ' to be 1 icen-ed. A rev iew by the City Attorney however, fe' nat Mr. Penke's type of business is not regulated under the inance. While it may have been the City's intent to so regulate, the ordinance does riot provide for that regulation. he would be required to get a license from the County Auditor and the issue of retail sales on residential property is separate from the licensing issue. Issue #2 - Zoning on Property - In a brief review of the property it appears that the northern portion of the area was in an industrial district with the balance zoned B-1 Commercial until ,7anuary 1975. The Council, at that time, chose to zone it with the 1/2 acre residential. The change in zoning to 1 residential was done in order to limit curb cuts and traffic generation on 15 th<<t was anticipated if left as commercia' (This was a typical strategy of the Counc4.1 at the time.) I, light of this the Council may considez: A. Rezoning of the property although this may have an impact on the type of deve'r.omcnt that comes to the property between lots and �i-,ysh:re lots which wets expected to be some type of iow, to moderate residential density. B. Leave as :s. It would be staffs position that there need to be a registration and awareness of these tyres of ocoposalE and if the r-irrent ordinance doesn't require s-ich, t'.ien it so amended. iL, does not mean that the City should be ir, _ osition to discourage such activity. whether It is--gulateJ under City ord nance or not it does not prevent t'r. Pe-i;e's type of business from being l.censed by the County. The issue of Mr. Penke's continued business on the site needs to be addressed. Because of the fact that the zoning is a new issue and Mr. Penke has been doing business on this site for three years, it may be appropriate that tine Council action to continue it for at least 60 days pending the possible rezoning of t)--- property. ALTERNATIVES - Issue 1. Ordinance Regulation 1. Acceptance of i-jfnrm.- ion from t' City Attornev on ordin,- c-- interpretati-> 2. Discuss what actio, Lnci 1 may want to take in retationshio to the exist_ -rdin 3. Direct s`.aff to amend ordina govern peddleLS and transient merchants. 4. Choose not eav -ng regulation to County. 5. Table. Issue 2. Rezortina Accept the r� 2. Table for furtner coneiderzition S. Give . preliminary indication to the owner as to whether it is fruitful tD urdertake a rezoning or not 2 ■ 4 Issue 3. License ISSLance 1. Iss:e a license even though the ordinance really does not require. 2. Table 3. Deny approval of the permit pending rezoning 4. Not require a 1 4r-ense but ensure he has a Cou-.r.y issued license. RECOMMENuATION- 1. It is recommended that the Council accept the information regarding the ordinance and that the appropriate ordinance modifications be undertaken for presentation at the April 25, 1988 Council meeting. 2. That the property owner undertake the appropriate r- ^oning. 3. Only require a permit if the ordinance is amended to so govern but ensure he has a County license. 4. If no rezoning undertaken by l5 June not permit further sales on residential property. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by , seconded by that the Council direct staff to revise the ordinance regarding peddlers in line with the Council's -iiscussion on the matte:. Ayes Nays cc: Jear sth, Zoning Admini:- rator Melv. oo, Police Chief Doroth iallin, City Clerk Al Penke 32388.2 To: Xayor Grabek s Orono Council Members From: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrato hate: March 23, 1988 YAR " 8 Subject: Mobile Peddlers CITE Attachments - CITY of T"Orin A. Petition - Soliciting and Peddlers Memo Dated 3/9/88 B. Ordinance No. 5.30 - Solicitors ISSUE - Consideration by the Council as to any additional action they may desire to take in the regulation of peddlers in the Community. INTRODUCTION - At the Council's March 14, 1988 meeting, the Council discussed a letter from Helen Skaret together with a petition that had accompanied that from the various Orono business people. At that meeting, the Council chose to take no action. The person who had sent the letter was unaware that it was going to be on the agenda and in a conversation subsequent to ':'' meeting wondered when it would be considered. Based on the fact tha, t:!ey had not been contacted, it was indicated that it would be placed on the agenda again. DISCUSSION - As noted in Attachment A, this issue was discussed at the March 25, 1985 Council meeting. Concern expressed at the time was that the individual had a right to be able to peddle under the City's ordinance regarding licensing of peddlers provided they committed no violations of the ordinance. Consideration of this matter from a zoning standpoint, however, has not previously been done. The individual hds been soliciting on property that has been zoned residential property (LR-IC-1) although it presently is used commercially as a non -conforming use. To the extent that the zoning ordnance does t;ot allow for anything other than home occupations, which are not to show outside the home or road -side stands for produce grown on the property, it is .-n on -going business in an "established place" (refer to Ordinance 5.30 for the definition), and therefore would only be permitted in a commercially or business zoned area. To that extent, the individual could be licensed on an on -going basis howev. , they would have to cnange locations and get the permission of the property owner of a commercially zoned property to conduct his business. ALTERNATIVES - A. Policy alternatives: 1. Leave ordinance un-amended. 2. Limit the peddler's license to number of days or number renewals within a years time. Mobile Peddlers March 23, 1988 Page 2 of t 3. Increase the fee for peddlers to compensate for the fact that they are not paying taxes on a commercial use. t 4. Specifically, in the peddlers ordinance, restrict sales to commercially zoned properties if they go for a certain time period in a place. (This ib probably not needed as the zoning code already would restrict that.) S. Limit the types of sales that could take place under a peddler's license. B. Action: 1. Renew the license at a specific location only in commerciall,, coned properties. 2. '.mend the ordinance to further restrict peddling sales. 3. LLave the situatio;, at the current status -quo. RECOMMENDATION - It is recomme:.�ed that any solicitor permits of an on -going business nature be limited to commercially zoned properties requiring permission of the property owner. At this time, however, the further limitations applied to the ordinance for at least this particular case (with the exception of limiting them to commercially zoned property for "on -going" businesses) are not appropriate as there have not been other problems related to the business and it is probably not appropriate to unduly limit business competition. PROPOSED MOTION: Moved by , seconded by , that the Council direc staff that all solicitor's permits that are to be of an on -going nature ar. to be limited to commercially zoned properties, but at this time take n further action on an ordinance amendment. Ayes , nays cc: Helen Skaret 41HUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD APRIL 25, 1l6e •sTY ROAD 116 CONTINUED . Mayor Grabek supported staff's recommendation on behalf of the Orono citizens and hoped that this action wo lld not jeopardize any relations with the City of Medina. It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, that staff be directed to indicate to the City of Medina in writing its desire not to endorse the proposed resolution regarding County Road 116 and encourage Medina to work with the County to terminate County Road 116 at County Road 24. Motion, Ayes 4, Nays 1. Councilmember Goetten voted nay finding that Orono needs to look at another north/south road from Hwy. 12 to Hwy. 55. She felt that the comprehensive plan amendment may affect this issue and felt the Council should remain open in this matter. Motion carried. COUNTY ROAD 15 STREET LIGHTING - DESIGN ENGINEER REPORT City Administrator Bernhardson reviewed the changes in costs based on the outcome of the feasibility study. Design Engineer Bob Ehlers of Ehlers and Associates was present for this matter. He stated that he found the bids to be reasonable and noted that the original bid did not include lighting through Minnetonka Beach. It was moved by Councilmember Callahan, seconded by . Mayor Grabek, that the City set May 23, 1988 as the public hearing date for asessing $97,000 in street lighting costs with the Lalance to come out of MSA/General funds. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. MOBILE PEDDLER ORDINA=* ORDINANCE NO. 50, SECOND SERIES It was moved by Councilmember Sime, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, that the Council adopt Ordinance PIo. 50, Second Series as an amendment to Ordinance No. 5.30 to regulate select classes of solicitors. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. RESOLUTION OF RECOGNITION* RESOLUTION {2411 It was moved by Councilmember Sime, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to adopt a Resolution of Recognition of Chief Melvin Kilbo. Motion, Ayes 5, Prays 0. PROCLAMATION - MINNESOTA CITIES WEER* RESOLUTION {2418 It was moved i:y Councilmember Sime, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to adopt Resolution 02418 proclaiming May I - 7, 1988 as Minnesota Cities ~Week. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. • 13 CITY ®f ORONO Post Ofrwe Box 660Crys"I BOY. MinnseotO 55=*HOnioP&' 01&M On the North Shore of Lake Minnetonka June 17, 1988 Mr. Paul Larson 3225 Casco Circle Wayzata, MN 55391 Dear Paul, At your request you had been scheduled on the Council agenda for Monday, June 13, 1986 to discuss your desire to amend the solicitation ordinance. Given that you were not present at that meeting, Council agreed to table the discussion of that item until its June 27, 1988 meeting. The indication from the Council however, is that if you are not able to be present at that meeting Council will take action on the matter without benefit of further input frcm you, apart from your letter. Please call me to indicated whether you will be able to attend that meeting or not. incerely, Mark E. Be nhardson City Administrator MEB/dh cc: Mayor and City Council BUILDING A ZONING - 473.733 • ADMINISTRATION A FINANCE - 473.7358 • PUBLIC W')RKS - 473.7339 ASSESSING of �c�ts.7 -4/ TO: Mayc•_ and City Council , 'J "p NG FROM: Mark Bernhardson, City Administrat Ji1N 27 1�'1-.3 J DATE: June 14, 1988 SUBJECT: Ordinance Amendment - Fence Height CITY OF ORONO Includes Clarified Non -Encroachment Section Wording Attachments: A. Draft Language Regarding Non -Encroachment Section (10.03 Subd 15) B. Draft With Changes Circled C. Existing Ordinance with Notations D. Sketch ISSUE - Presentation of draft language regarding fence regulation and related "cleanup" of non -encroachment sections to determine if Council desires to refer this to Planning Commission for their consideration. INTRODUCTION - In response to Mr. Hollander's request the Council directed at the June 13, 1988 meeting that the staff bring back to Council draft language regarding an amendment to the City's fence ordinance. DISCUSSION_ -Given the difficulty of designing a fence ordinance for "all occasions" and the uniqueness of each situation, particularly in Orono as it relates to fences, the draft language attempts to address the issue of allowing certain open style fences to have a greater height than those that do not meet that openness standard. The proposal regulates the post height, spacing, rail height, fence "opaqueness" (degree of light blockage) and size of rails and posts. in addition, wording and punctuation within the "non - encroachments" section of the code is slightly revised for the sake of clarity and ease of interpretation. No changes in substance are presented, but the new wording will more closely adhere to the intent of past Council code changes. ALTERNATIVES 1. Refer to Planning Commission 2. Amend and refer to Planning Commission 3. Choose not to have any amendment directedi to the Planning Commission from the Council regarding fences RECOMMENDATION _ - It is recommended that the Council refer t`le draft language to the Planning Commission for its study, thought j and recommendation. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by , seconded by , that the aunci 1 refer to the Planning Commission draft language of Atta_nment A for their consideration and response to the Council when deemed appropriate. Ayes Nays cc: Planning Commission I� John Hollander, 200 Hollander Road, Wayzata ORDINANCE / , SRCOND SERIES AN ORDINANCE AMENDING PERFORMANCE STANDARDS TO THE NON-ENCROAC@IKET AND ACCESSORY STRUCTURE SECTIONS OF THE ORONO MUNICIPAL CODE The City Council of Orono ordains as follows: SECTION 1. Chapter 10 of the Municipal Code of Orono is hereby amended by repealing Sections 10.03, Subdivision 15 A through F, and substituting the following language in its place: Section 10.03, Subdivision 15 - Non -encroachments. The following shall not be considered to be encroachments on yard requirements: A. Chimneys, flues, belt courses, leaders, sills, pilasters, lintels, ornamental features, mechanical devices, cornices, eaves, gutters, and the like provided they do not extend more than 1-1/2 feet laterally into the required yard from a structure that is not located within the required yard. B. Off-street parking in any required yard except as otherwise regulated in the Municipal Code. C. Name plate signs for one family dwe'lings. D. Lights for illuminating parking areas, loading areas, or yards for Lafety and security purposes, provided the direct source of light is not visir,le from the public right-of-way or adjacent residential property. Such lights may be located to within 5 feet of the front lot line. E. Fences which do not exceed 3-1/2 feet in height; terraces, steps, uncovered porches, stoops or similar structures, which do not extend above the height of the ground floor level of the principal building an3 extend to a distance of not less than -a 5 feet from any lot line. F. In side or rear yards only: bays which do not exceed a depth of 2 feet nor which contain an area of more than 20 s.f.; fire escapes which do not exceed a width of 3 feet; fences and walls which do not exceed a height of 6 feet above original grade, except as regulated hereinafter. G. In rear yard only: accessory structures and equipment such as balconies, breezeways, detached outdoor picnic shelters and recreational equipment except as regulated hereinafter, when such accessory structures or equipment are located at least 5 feet from a rear lot line. No fence or wall constructed within a rear yard shall exceed a height of 6 feet above original grade. However, for lakeshore lots which by definition do not have a front yard, but have only a "lakeshore yard" and a "rear yard", no fence exceeding 3-1/2 feet in height is allowed within the required rear yard, except a fence not exceeding 6 feet in height is allowed along the street lot line of lake frontage lots which front on, but are not divided by, a major thoroughfare Uf fill is required, the total combined height of both f ence and f i 11 sha 11 not exceed 6 f eet above the height of the crown of the road) . H. In side yards only, no accessory structure shall be closer than 10 feet from any side lot line. No fence or wall constructed within a side yard shall exceed a height of 6 feet above original gra-le. I. Fences and walls exceeding 3-1/2 feet in height may not be located closer to the shoreline than the "average lakeshore setback", defined as the average distance from the shoreline of existing residence buildings on adjacent lcts. Fences or walls of any height shall not be constructed within 75 feet of the shoreline, regardless of the average lakeshore setback. J. In any location where a fence not exceeding 3-1/2 feet in height is normally allowed, a rail fence meeting the following performance standards is allowed to take the place of such fence: 1. Maximum post height 60 inches. 2. Minimum post spacing 72 inches. 3. Maximum rail height 54 inches. 4. Maximum fence opacity 33%. For purposes of this section, the following definitions apL,ly: 1. Opacity (opaqueness): percent of light blocked, or 100% minus percent of openness as viewed perpendicular to the fence. For measurement purposes, opacity = total width of rails divided by top rail height times 100. 2. Post height: original ground level to tip, of post. 3. Post: vertical columns supporting the horizontal rails, maximum width/diameter = 8 inches. 4. Top rail height: ground level to highest point of top rail, measured vertically. 5. Rail: horizontal member, maximum vertical width/diameter = 6 inches. Refer to Orono Manual of Design Standards and Specification, r a diagram of fence types which meet these criteria. SECTION 2. Adoption and Publication. This ordinance shal: be effective upon adoption, and a short summary shall be published in tc.e Laker and Pioneer newspapers. Adopted by the City Council ,)f Orono on this by a vote of ayes and nays. of 1988, Dorothy Hallin, City Clerk James Grabek, Mayor l( 1 S CIse c'4t. n ORDINANCE ; , SECOND SERIES AN ORDINANCE AMENDING PERFORMANCE STANDARDS TO THE NON —ENCROACHMENT AND ACCESSORT STRUCTURE SECTIONS OF TbE ORONO MUNICIPAL CODE The City Council of Orono ordains as follows: SECTION 1. Chapter 10 of the Municipal Code of Orono is hereby amended by repealing Sections 10.03, Subdivision 15 A through F, and substituting the following language in its place: Section 10.03, Subdivision 15 - Non -encroachments. The following shall not be considered to be encroachments on yard requirements: A. Chimneys, flues, belt courses, leaders, sills, pilasters, lintels, ornamental features, mechanical devices, cornices, eaves, gutters, and the like provided they do not extend more than_ 1-l/; feet laterally into the required yard from a structure that is not beat within the required yard. ---- -- - -"- - 8._ ___Off-strve�t- parking_ in any required yard except as otherwise regulated in the Municipal Code. C. Name plate signs for one family dwellings. D. Lights for illuminating parking areas, loading areas, or yards for safety and security purposes, provided the direct source of light is not visible from the public right-of-way or adjacent residential property. Such lights may be located to within 5 feet of the front lot line. E. Fences which do not exceed 3-1/2 feet in height; terraces, steps, uncovered porches, stoops or similar structures, which do not extend above the height of the ground floor lever--qf the principal building and extend to a distance of not less tha �eet from any lot line. F. In side or rear yards only: bays which do not exceed a depth of 2 feet nor which contain an area of more than 20 s..; fire escapes which do not exceed a width of 3 feet; fences and wars which -do not exceed a height of 6 feet above original grade,_,(except as regulated 1 hereinafter. - - G. In rear yard only:�,accessory structures and equipment such as balconies, breezeways, m ac a ou oor pictlric-shelters and recreational equipment except as regulated hereinafter, when such accessory structures or equipment Pie located at least 5 feet from a rear lot line. No fence or wall constructed within a re_ar_._yA.r_d_sh exceed a height of 6 feet above original gr-;de.__/ However, for lakesho=e TBts which -by definition do not` ►pave a front yard, but have j only a "lakeshore yard" and a "rear yard", no fence exceedi!) _3-1�2 feet in height is allowed within the required rear yard,Jexcept a fence not exceeding--6 feet in height is alowedJnTong £Fie streetict line of lake frontage lots which front on,(_bgt are not divided by) a major thoroughfare (if fill is required, the total combTn'ed-h-e-Ight of both fence and f i 1 1 sha 11 not exceed 6 feet above the height of the crown of the road). H. In side yards only, no accessory structure shall be closer than 10 feet from any side lot line. No fence or wall constructed within a side yard shall exceed a height of 6 feet above original grade. I, Fences and walls exceeding 3-1/2 feet in height may not De located clog to the shoreline than the "average lakeshore setback", define as the average distance from"the shoreline of —extet ng restdence buildings on adjacent lots. Fences or walls of an hei ht shall not be constructed within 75 feet of the shoreline, regar less �of the average lakeshore setback. �J. In any location where a fence not exceeding 3-1/2 feet in height is normally allowed, a rail fence meeting the following performance standards is allowed to take the place of such fence: 1. Maximum post height 60 inches. 2. Minimum post spacing 72 inches. 3. Maximum rail height 54 inches. 4. Maximum fence opacity 33%. For purposes of this section, the following definitions apply: 1. Opacity (opaqueness): percent cf light blocked, or 1004 minus percent of openness as viewed perpendicular to the fence. For measurement purposes, opacity = total width of rails divided by top Y rail height times 100. 2. Post height: original ground level to tip of post. 3. Post: vertical columns supporting the horizontal rails, maximum width/diameter - 8 inches. 4. Top rail height: ground level to highest point of top rail, measured vertically. 5. Rail: horizontal member, maximum vertical width/diameter 6 { inches. Refer to Orono Manual of Design Stand=-ris and Specifications for a diagram i of fence types which meet these criteria. SECTION 2. Adoption and Publication. This ordinance shall be effective { upon adoption, and a short summary shall be published in the Laker and Pioneer newspapers Adopted by the City Counci 1 of Orono cn this of _ 1988► by a vote of ayes and _._ nays. Dorothy Hallin, City Clerk James Grabek, Mayor rt J JyJ r •SW. ,►L� Y Tz-�) C- o Subd. 15. No1i Encroachments. The following shall not be considered to be- encroachments on yard requirements: ---------------- AChimneys, flues, belt courses, leaders, sills, \� pilasters, lintels, ornamental features, mechanical devices, cornices, eaves, gutters and the like, provided the do not_ extend _ Y more than 1-1/2 feet, -s r�eeE-parTing except -as hereinafter regu a - mew C B. Name late signs__for _one family dwell in si _ lights for it uminat ng park ng areas, loading a=ea- -or yards or Z- I safety and security purposes, provided the direct source of light is not visible from the public right-of-way or adjacent residential property. may be located to within five feet of the front lot line. _rQ C. Fences which do not exceed 3-1/2 feet in height, fences not /over s x e.n h ieie ght a��ng the s �eg�i-vt' no of lake �irontage lots which front on a major thoroughfare, if fill is required, the total combined height of both fence and fill shall not exceed 6 feet above the height of the crown of the road 33 terraces, - steps, uncovereTp-brches, stoops or sTmi ar s urea, which do not extend above the height of the ground floor level of Z the principal building and extend to a distance of not less than two feet from any lot line. - t— C hnN-- D. In side or rear yards only, bays not to exceed a depth of tr, feet nor to contain an area of more than twenty square feet. fire escar%Ps nest to exceed a width of thceP feet, fences aced walls not./ I36 0.0 to �tceed a height of six feet above ori_9 grade an en -off Peet parking lexcept—for-Ta e ore lots, no fence or wall over forty- wo n:hes but not in excess of seventy-two inches in height above original grade may be located closer to the shoreline than the average distance from the shoreline of q existing residence buildings on adjacent lots, such fences stall . not be constructed within 75 feet of the shoreline. "{ E. Rear yard only; balconies, breezeways, detached outdoor picnic shelters and recreational equipment except as regulated hereinafter; no accessory structure shall be closer than five feet from a rear lot line nor shall a f-?nce or wall _-instructed j within a rear yard exceed a height of six feet abo•• riginal grade. F. Side yards only; no accessory structure shall be closer than `l ten feet from any side lot lin- nor shall a fence or wall constructed within a side yard ext a height of six feet above original grade. -_-_ Subd. 16. Traffic Visibility. No fences, structures or planting more than three feet high in the "R" District on corner i, lots shall be permitteO to obstruct traffic visibility within a \V triangular area define. "ollows: "Beginning at the intersection t� of the projected curb of two intersecting streets, thence thirty feet along one cu. ne thence diagonally to a point thirty feet from the point of bt:yinning on the other curb line, thence to the point of beginning. G y G Lo NLs Ft-.n► CC - tot t. SIG c("e Fe" f- t I)C-fv SQs,r to r 12 8s p.Cb f+t.l t tr 0 62388.6 FING TO: Mark Bernhardson, City Administrator FROM: John R. Gerhardson, Public Works Director DATE: June 23, 1988+ RU SUBJECT: Driveway Permit Ordinance n June 13, 1988 a draft driveway permit oidir: I was presented r:= Council review. Since that time minor re,..,.3ions and major additions were included that were missed. The additions and revisions are highlighted. Recommendation. To accept the draft driveway permit ordinance at this time and to table the ; ter for final approval at the July 11, 1983 Council meeting. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by , seconded by __, t. accept the draft Driveway Permit Ordinance at this time and t•i table the matter for final approval at the July 11, 19 'ouncil meeting. Ayes __, Nays __ TO Mayor ai,d City Council FROA.- Mark Bern' :rdson, City Administrator pj* Forwarded recommendinq approval. The title of the ordinance is L-ing changed from driveways to private iR,provements in public -ight-of-ways to better reflect the covereae of the ordinancF. i DRAfx 4,IZ3 69 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 6.01, 6.05 and 6.06 OF THE CITY OF ORONO MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO DRIVEWAYS, PUBLIC AND PRIVATE ROADS THE CITY JRONO DOES ORDAIN: Sect: , .01, Subdivisions 1, 2, 3 and 4 of the City of Orono Municipal 1 ^e,a are hereby deleted. A new section 6.01 is added to read as follows: Section 6.01 DEFINITIONS. Subd. 1. Except as otherwise defined in the City Code, or where the context clearly indicates a contrary intent, the words and terms defined in Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 169 shall be applicable to the City Code, Chapters 6, 7 and B. The following words and terms, when used in this Ordinance, shall have the following meanings, unless the context indicates otherwise: A. "Corner" means the point of intersection of the extension of lines of two public or private curb faces. B. "Curb Cut" means the opening along a street curb line or pavement edge for the purpose of motor vehicle ingress and egress from a roadway. Curb cut width shall include the width of the driveway approach and of the curb returns, if any. C. 'Curb Return" means that portion of a curb next to a driveway approach which includes the radius or curvature or the ramp -type lug on commercial or industrial type pavements and which connects the drive+ay approach to the public or private road curb. D. "Driveway" means a paved or otherwise delineated area on private property for the operation of automobiles and other vehicles. B. "Driveway Approach- means a paved or otherwise delineated area, on the right-of-way between the roadway of a public or private road and private property, intended to provide ingress and egress for vehicles from a private or public road to private property. A driveway approach must provide access to a parking area, a driveway, a door intended and used for the entrance of vehicles, or other similar structure or facility. Driveway approaches shall be of two classes: a) resident driveway approaches; and b) business driveway approaches. F. "Business Driveway Approach" means a driveway approach from any public right-of-way providing motor vehicles with ingress and egress from the public or private road to any property other than a single family dwelling. -2- G. "Resident Driveway Approach" means a driveway approach from any public or private right-of-way providing ingress and egress for motor vehicles from the public or private road to a single family residential dwelling. H. •Driveway Tu•:.arrund" means a paved or otherwise clearly delineated area which is part of or connected to a driveway or driveway approach, on private property, sufficient in size fir an automobile or other vehicle to turn 180 degrees without leaving the paved or delineated area. I. "Frontage" means the lot line abutting a public or private street. J. "Parcel of Land" means a lot or contiguous lots or a tract officially registered under one ownership. R. "Private Road" means any street or roadway which has not been dedicated to public use, or which is not maintained by public funds, but which is open to travel pursuant to an easement between persons or between a person or persons and the City. -3- L. 'Public Road' means the entire area dedicated to public use, or contained in a plat, an easement or other conveyance, grant or by adverse possession, to the City or other governmental body, and shall include, but not be limited to, roadways, boulevards, sidewalks, alleys, and other public property between lateral property lines in which a roadway lies. Where traveled public roadways exist in a location not shown on the platting map, the right-of-way shall not be less than ten (10) feet wide on each side of the actual paved or traveled roadway surface. -4- Section 6.05, Subdivision 1(A) and Subdivision 1(B) and Section 6.05, Subdivisions 2, 3 and 4 of the City of Orono Municipal Code is amended to read as follows: SEC. 6.05. CONSTRUCTION AND RECONSTRUCTION OF PUBLIC ROADWAY, SURFACING, SIDEWALK, CURB AND GUTTER, DRIVEWAY OR CURB CUTS. Subd. 1. Methods of Procedure. Abutting or affected property owners wishing to contract for, construct or reconstruct public roadway surfacing, sidewalk, curb and gutter, driveway, driveway approaches, driveway turnarounds, or curb cuts must first obtain a permit from the City in accordance with this Section. Also, with or without petition by the methods set forth in the Local Improvement Code of Minnesota Statutes, presently beginning with Section 429.011, as the same may from time to time be amended. Subd. 2. RSa 'rement and Aopl'catio for P rm't. It is a misdemeanor to construct or reconstruct a sidewalk, curb and gutter, driveway, driveway approach, driveway turnaround, curb cuts, roadway surfacing or private improvement in any public road or other public property in the City without a permit in writing from the City. Application for such permit shall be made on forms approved and provided by the City and shall sufficiently describe the contemplated improvements, the contemplated date of beginning of work, and the length of time required to complete the same, provided that no permit shall be required for any such improvement ordered installed by the Council. Such application shall also contain information showing the type of construction, the width and the location of an improvement on the parcel of land and the -5- lot and block number or the parcel number and the street and house= number and a profile of the proposed improvement, if necessary, and other s-ich information as may be required by the Public works Director. The application shall be filed by the property owners desiring to construct such a driveway approach, driveway turnaround, sidewalk, curb and gutter, driveway, curb cut, roadway surfacing or private improvements in any public road or any property in the City, or by his or her duly authorized agent. All such applications shall contain an agreement by the applicant to be bound by this Chapter. A permit from the City shall not relieve the holder from damages to the person or property of another caused by such work. These regulations shall apply to all City, State and County roads. Subd. 3. Issuance of Permit. Such permit shall be issued by the Public works Director, if he or she has determined that the applicant has complied with the terms of this ordinance, the permit fee hereinafter specified has been paid and the Public Works Director has approved the driveway, driveway approach, driveway turnaround, sidewalk, curb and gutter, curb cuts, roadway surfacing or private improvement in any public road or other public property in the City as requested or with stipulated changes. The Public Works Director shall have the authority to refuse to issue a permit when, in the judgment of the Public Works Director, the requested construction would impose an unreasonable hazard to the public. Such decision may be appealed in writing by -6- the applicant to the City Council. The City Council shall have the power to affirm, reverse or modify the decision of the Public Works Director. Subd. 4. Permit Pees. The fees for permits for the construction of improvements as outlined above, shall be as set forth in the City's Pee Schedule which may be amended from time to time. Subd. 5. Revocation of Permit. A. All permits granted for the use of public property under the terms of this Ordinance shall be revocable by the Public Works Director pursuant to the procedure set out below in Section 6.05, Subd. 6, "Authority of Public Works Director." S. In addition to the provisions of Section 6.05, Subd. 6, a permit may be revoked by the City Council and City shall have the right to revise, relocate or close any sidewalk, curb and gutter, driveway, driveway approach, driveway turnaround, curb cut or private improvement in any public road or other public property in the City as the result of the reconstruction of any road, a change in land use, or a major change in the traffic pattern of an existing land use. I A. All work done under a permit issued in compliance with this r 'inance shall be under the direction and supervision of the Public Works Director, who is hereby authorized to make the necessary rules, regulations and specifications with respect to materials for and method of construction of a sidewalk, curb and gut'.er, driveway, driveway approach, driveway turnaround,; curb cut, roadway surfacing or private improvement in any public road or other public property in the City. A copy of such rules and regulations shall be kept on file with the City Clerk. A permit issued under the provisions of this Ordinance may be revoked by the Public Works Director when he or she determines that the construction or activity authorized by the permit is not being performed according to the terms of the permit or this Ordinance. B. Notice of such revocation, with a description of the facts supporting such revocation, shall be mailed or delivered to the person named in the perr.at at the address listed in the permit. C. All work shall cease upon receipt of the Notice of Revocation. D. Any person whose permit is revoked as set forth herein may appeal that revocation to the City Council by filing notice of such appeal with the City Clerk within ten (10) days of the date that the revocation was mailed or delivered. E. The appeal of such revocation shall be conducted according to the procedure set forth in Section 6.05, Subd. 3, 'Issuance of Permit' herein. Subd. 7. Cobmiasion of Plans to Public Works Director. Any 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 R a it m n c 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 the public road pavement at an angle to be approved by the Public Works Director based upon the physical characteristics of the public road, driveway approach and the parcel of land being accessed. Such angle shall be as close as is reasonably practical, in the judgment 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 ajoining 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 road 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. -10- D. Driveway culverts shall be provided and installed by the owner as required by the Public Works Director. E. Driveways shall not be constructed over curb stops or catch basins, if at all possible. If there is not other fessib•- location for the driveway, it shall be the responsibility of the applicant to set the curb stop or catch basin cover flush with the final driveway surface. F. The owner and contractor shall protect the public from injury or damage during the construction of the sidewalk, curb and gutter, driveway, driveway approach, drivewav - __ turnaround, curb cuts, roadway sur: -•.ng 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. -11- 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-de-sac. A. One driveway approach shall be allowed from a single residential parcel of land to the same public road. Parcels having frontage on more than one public road shall be allowed a driveway 1 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 a single parcel of land from a single public road shall not exceed 20 feet. -12- 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. F. For residences hereafter constructed, 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 driveway and/or driveway approach as is necessary to remove the maintenance problem. Portland cement concrete will only be allowed outside the public road right-of-way. This requirement shall not be construed to reduce paving otherwise required I, by performance standards in the Zoning Code or -13- 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, eight 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. 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 i access road or 32 feet at the property line, -14- which ever 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. D. No portion of a driveway approach, except the curb return shall be constructed within 100 feet -is- of a corner in a business, commercial or industrial area, or within 100 feet of a corner in a residential district. E. Driveway turnarounds shall be required on all driveways or driveway approaches entering onto a State highway, County road or a collector roadway and on all entrances to public roads within the City were deemed necessary by the Public Works Director based upon traffic counts, sight distances, street grades and other relevant factors. Such requirements shall be stated on any permit issued by the Public Works Director pursuant to this ordinance. F. Driveways must be 10 feet from the side property line of a parcel of land. Subd.11. Maintenance and Removal. Every driveway :.approach or entrance to abutting property shall be maintained and Y� kept in a safe condition by the owner of the abutting property or C: - by the Homeowners' Association, and any such driveway approach which shall not be so maintained and kept in a safe condition or which shall interfere with or obstruct the drainage carried by the ajoining public road or interfere with or obstruct the use of the ajoining public road for purposes of travel shall be repaired to -16- conform with the specifications of this ordinance and the City's requirements, or it shall be removed by the owner of the abutting property or the Homeowners' Association. .r upon removal of such driveway approach, that port;on of the street or right-of-way occupied by the owner or Hr.neowners' Association shall be restored to its former condition and all curbing shall be replaced to its former condition by the owner or Homeowners' Association of the abutting property at their ezpense. If such removal and restoration is not accomplished _ within ten (10) days of the receipt by the abutting property owner of written notice of the City to remove the driveway approach and restore the public road, curbing and right-of-way to its former condition, the City shall remove the driveway approach and restore the public road, curbing and right-of-way and assess the cost of such removal and restoration against the abutting property. The property owner may appeal the order to remove and restore in the manner set forth in Section 6.05, Subd. 3 of this ordinance. Further time for removal and restoration may be authorized in writing by the Public Works Director. 4 Subd.12. Regulatory Siang. The City shall require the erection of regulatory signs adjacent to a driveway serving three or more parcels of land, at its intersection with a public road. The sign shall be purchased, erected and maintained by the '1 �.. property owner. If the property owner does not have the sign -17- erected within a reasonable length of time, the City shall erect the sign and bill the property owner for all costs. Subd.13. specifications and Standards. All construction and reconstruction of roadway surfacing, sidewalk, driveway, driveway turnaround, curb and gutter improvements, including curb cuts and driveway approaches, shall be strictly in accordance with specifications and standards on file in the office of the City, and open to inspection and copying there. Such specifications and standards may be amended from time to time by the City, but shall be uniformly enforced. Subd.14_ Inspecti , a City shall inspect such improvements as deemed neces,; r advisable. Any work not done according to the applicable specifications and standards shall be removed and corrected at the expense of the permit holder. Any work done hereunder may be stopped by the City if found to be unsatisfactory or not in accordance with the specifications and standards, but this shall not p'ice a continuing burden upon the City to inspect or supervise such work. -18- 1 Section 6.06, Subdivisions 1, 2, 3 and 4 of the City of Orono Municipal Code are hereby amended to read as follows: SRC. 6.06. CONSTRUCTION AND RECONSTRUCTION OF PRIVATE ROADWAY SURFACING, SIDEMAT.E, CURB AND GUTTER, DRIVEWAY APPROACHES, OR CURB CUTS. Subd. 1. Methods of Procedure. Abutting or affected property owners may contract for, construct or reconstruct private roadway surfacing, sidewalk, curb and gutter, driveway, driveway turnaround, driveway approaches or curb cuts in accordance with this Section. Subd. 2. Reouirement and Application for Permit. It is a misdemeanor to construct or reconstruct a sidewalk, curb and gutter, driveway, driveway approach, driveway turnaround, curb cuts, roadway surfacing or private improvement in any private road or private property in the City without a permit in writing from the City. Application for such permit shall be made on forms approved and provided by the City and shall sufficiently describe the contemplated improvements, the contemplated date of beginning of work, and the length of time required to complete the same, provided that no permit shall be requir for any such improvement ordered installed by the Council. Such application shall also contain information showing the type of construction, the width and the location of an improvement on the parcel of land and the lot and block number or the parcel number and the street and house number and a profile of the proposed improvement, if necessary, and other such information as may be required by the Public Works -19- Director. The application shall be filed by th:: property owners desiring to construct such a driveway approach, .idewalk, curb and gutter, driveway, driveway turnaround, curb cut, roadway surfacing or private improvements in any private road or any property in the City, or by his or her duly authorized agent. All such applications shall contain an agreement by the applicant by this Chapter. A permit from the City shall not relieve the holder from damages to the person or property of another caused by such work. These regulations shall apply to all City, State, County and private roads. Subd. 3. Issuance of Permit. Such permit shall be issued by the Public Works Director, if he or she has determined that the applicant has complied with the terms of this ordinance, the permit fee hereinafter specified has been paid and the Public Works Director has approved the driveway, driveway approach, -driveway turnaround, sidewalk, curb and gutter, curb cuts, roadway surfacing or private improvement in any private road or other private property in the City as requested or wi':h stipulated changes. The Public Works Director shall have the authority to refuse to issue a permit when, in the judgment of the Public Works Director, the requested construction would impose an unreasonable hazard to the public. Such decision may be appealed in writing by the applicant to the City Council. The City Council shall have the power to affirm, reverse or modify the decision of the Public Works Director. -20- III Subd. 4. permit Fees. The fees for permits for the construction of improvements as outlined above, shall be as set forth in the City's Fee Schedule which may be amended from time to time. Subd. 5. Revocation of Permit. A. All permits granted for the use of private property under the terms of this Ordinance shall be revocable by the Public Works Director pursuant to the procedure set out below in Section 6.06, Subd. 6, "Authority of Public Works Director." B. In addition to the provisions of Section 6.06, -`- Subd. 6, a permit may be revoked by the City Council and City shall have the right to revise, relocate or close any sidewalk, curb and gutter, driveway, driveway approach, driveway turnaround, curb cut or private improvement in any private road or other private property in the City as the result of the reconstruction of any road, a change in land use, or a major change in the traffic pattern of an existing land use. 1 A. All work done under a permit issued in compliance with this Ordinance shall be under the direction and supervision of the Public Works Director, who is hereby authorized -21- to make the necessary rules, regulations and specifications with respect to materials for and method of construction of a sidewalk, curb and gutter, driveway, driveway approach, driveway turnaround, curb cut, roadway surfacing or private improvement in any private road or other private property in the City. A copy of such rules and regulations shall be kept on file with the City Clerk. A permit issued under the provisions of this Ordinance may be revoked by the Public Works Director when he or she determines that the construction or activity authorized by the permit is not being performed according to the terms of the permit or this Ordinance. B. Notice of such revocation, with a description of the facts supporting such revocation, shall be nailed or delivered to the person named in the permit at the address listed in the permit. C. All work shall cease upon receipt of the Notice of Revocation. D. Any person whose permit is revoked as set forth herein may appeal that revocation to the City Council by filing notice of such appeal with the City Clerk within ten (10) days of the date that the revocation was mailed or delivered. -22- E. The appeal of such revocation shall be conducted according to the procedure set forth in Section 6.06, Subd. 3, -Issuance of Permit" herein. Subd. 7. riahmingion of plans to Public Works Director. Any plans submitted to the Building Inspector for his or her approval, which include or involve a sidewalk, curb and gutter, driveway, driveway approach, driveway turnaround, curb cuts, roadway surfacing or private improvement in any private road or other private 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. S. met act'on Reau'rementa Genera llv. 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 the private road pavement at an angle to be approved by the Public Works Director based upon the physical characteristics of the private road, driveway approach and the parcel of land being accessed. Such angle shall be as close as is -23- reasonably practical, in the judgment of the Public Works Director to a :fight angle to the pavement of the private 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 &joining 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 road for the purpose of travel or maintenance. The constructed private 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. r R _2q_ D. Driveway culverts shall be provided and installed by the owner as required by the Public Works Director. E. Driveways shall not be constructed over curb stops or catch basins, if at all possible. If there is not other feasible location for the driveway, it shall be the responsibility of the applicant to set the curb stop or catch basin cover flush with the final driveway surface. F. The owner and contractor shall protect the public from injury or damage during the construction of the sidewalk, curb and gutter, driveway, driveway approach, driveway turnaround, curb cuts, roadway surfacing or private improvement in any private road or other" private 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. -25- i 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 private road, the driveway shall be constructed off the "lead-in" portion of the private road and not the cul-de-sac. 11 Bubd. 9. Resident nri ewava A oroaches and Turnarounds. A. One driveway approach shall be allowed from a .. single residential parcel of land to the seer private road. Parcels having frontage on more than one private road shall be allowed a driveway approach to one private road. ti 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 a single parcel of land from a single private road shall not exceed 20 feet. -26- 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. F. For residences hereat:er constructed, the driveway approach and that part of the driveway and turnarounds which drain to the private 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 private road, including, but not limited to, the washing of dirt and gravel into the private road, the Public Works Director shall order that the property owner pave such portion of the driveway and/or driveway approach as is necessary to remove the maintenance problem. Portland cement concrete will only be allowed outside the private road 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 private 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 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. Subd.10. Business_ Driveways. Approaches and Turnarounds. A. Only one business driveway shall be allowed per development unless a greater number of drivewayb are approved by the City, or approved as part the site plan review. The business driveway approach shall not exceed the width of the access road or 32 feet at the property line, -28- r" which ever 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. r7 B. All business driveways and driveway approaches :=r shall be paved with asphaltic concrete or equivalent material. Portland cement concrete .- will only be allowed outside of the private road -- right-of-way. 8: C. Loading docks, ramps and vehicular entrances shall be located in such a manner that backing onto and maneuvering within the private road right-of-way is eliminated and in such a manner F'. that driveways greater in width than that specified by this chapter shall not be required. D. No portion of a driveway approach, except the curb return shall be constructed within 100 feet of a corner in a business, commercial or a, ra -29- industrial area, or within 100 feet of a corner in a residential district. E. Driveway turnarounds shall be required on all driveways or drivewsy approaches entering onto a State highway, County road or a collector roadway and on all -rances to private roads within the City seemed necessary by the Public works Director based upon traffic counts, sight distances, street grades and other relevant factors. Such requirements shall be stated on any permit issued by the Public Works Director pursuant to this ordinance. F. Driveways must be 10 feet from the side property line of a parcel of land. Subd.11. Maintaneece end Removal. Every driveway approach or entrance to abutting property shall be maintained and kept in a safe condition by the owner of the abutting property or by the Homeowners- Association, and any such driveway approach which shall not be so maintained and kept in a safe condition or which shall interfere with or obstruct the drainage carried by the ajoining private road or interfere with or obstruct the use of the ajoining private road for purposes of travel shall be repaired to -30- conform with the specifications of this ordinance and the City's requirements, or it shall be removed by the owner of the abutting property or the Homeowners' Association. Upon removal of such driveway approach, that portion of the private road or right-of-way occupied by the owner or Homeowners' Association shall be restored to its former condition and all curbing shall be replaced to its former condition by the owner or Homeowners' Association of the abutting property, at their expense. If such removal and restoration is not accomplished within ten (10) days of the receipt by the abutting property owner of written notice of the City to remove the driveway approach and restore the street, curbing and right-of-way to its former condition, the City shall remove the driveway approach and restore the public road, curbing and right-of-way and assess the cost of such removal and restoration against the abutting property. The property owner may appeal the order to remove and restore in the manner set forth in Section 6.06, Subd. 3 of this ordinance. Further time for removal and restoration may be authorized in writing by the Public Works Director. Subd.12. Renul t ry Sians. City shall require the erection of regulatory signs adjacent to a driveway serving three or more Parcels of land, at its intersection with a private road. The sign shall be purchased, erected and maintained by the -31- TO: Mayor and City Council ROM: Mark Bernhardson, City OATS: June 23, 1988 62388.4 COUACIL ING JUu 271e,:6 Administrator C1'iY OF 2HOSO SOBJSCT: Employment - City Recorder Attachments: A. Pati Peterson Memo Update Dated 6/23/88 B. Dorothy Ballin Memo Dated 6/23/88 It is requested at this time that the Council grant the authority to hire one of the four individuals interviewed on a temporary basis pending confirmation by the Council at its July 11, 1988 meeting. The employment would be at the rate est:.blished in the pay plan for part time employment between 28-35 hours/week, (the current number worked by Pati) between $8.193 - 8.675 depending on qualifications plus prorate benefits. The start rate is dependent on qualifications and the range presented is 85-90% of the maximum. As noted in Attachment A, Pati Peterson has agreed to a one week extension to assist during some upcoming vacation periods the week of July 5 - 8, 1988. At the July 11, 1988 meeting the staff may be proposing an increase of the position hours to 40 per week to assist in handling the ever increasing clerical load that staff is facing. Your comments on this change would be appreciated. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by , seconded by , the Council authorizes the employment of --a person for the City Recorder position commencing after 1 July 1988 at a rate between $8.153 - 8.675 plus prorated benefits subject to confirmation at the July 11, 1988 Council meeing. Additionally Council acknowledges the amended resignation effective July 11, 1988 for Pati Peterson. Ayes Nays i1 -rT 014M e-VT TO: ..bark Bernhardson, City Administrator Dorothy Hallin, City Clerk FROM: Pati Peterson, City Recorder DAM June 3, 1988 SOBJ: Resignation This is to inform you of my resignation as City Recorder for the City of Orono effective July 1, 1988. The reason for my resignation is a combination of needing a change from the limited duties of the position of City Recorder; and the desire to devote more time to my young children and their activities. I have enjoyed working with the staff, Council and Planning Commission and appreciate the experience I have gained over the past three years with the City of Orono. It is my hope that in giving ample notice, my resignation will not create any staffing problems and leave me in good standing with the City of Orono. Sincerely, ADDODOm To RRSIGmAT20w 6/23/88 Due to staffing problems during the week of 7/4/88, offered to continue my employment with the City of Orono for an additional week, thereby changing my resignation date to be effective July 11, 1988. This change was verbally approved by City Administrator Bernhardson and City Clerk Hallin. 62388.2 ATT14Cgh\i1.IT TO: Mark Bernhardson, City Administrator FROM: Dorothy Hallin, City Clerk DATR: June 23, 1988 SORJRCT: Employment - City Recorder Attachments: A. Pati Peterson - Addendum Dated 6/23/88 Subsequent to the resignation of City Recorder Pati Peterson an ad was placed in the Minneapolis Tribune and the Laker/Pioneer newspapers for this position. These ads resulted in the City receiving 15 applications. After review of those applications, four persons were chosen to be interviewed by Jeanne Mabusth, Zoning Administrator and myself. From these four persona, two will be selected to be interviewed by the City Administrator, who will make the final determination. I request that the City offer the position of City Recorder to the most qualified candidate with a starting date to be established as soon as possible. Additionally this appointment be presented to Council at a subsequent meeting for their confirmation. 1 City of ORONO j,j(��y p RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL ••'-L��HO NO. Puri 2719ee RESOLUTION Or OUTSTANDING SERVICE BY CiT OF ORONO COUNCILKMMRR WILLIAM SINE, JR. WHEREAS, the City of Orono has a continuing program of recognizing persons who are outstanding in their service to the community; and WHEREAS, William Sime has exemplified outstanding leadership in the Orono community through his work over the past several years; and WHEREAS, William Sime was elected to a four year Council position in November 1986; and WHEREAS, he also served on the Planning Commission from December 1982 through December 1986; and WHEREAS, in 1984 he was instrumental in gathering a petition and presenting it to the Council requesting the City hire its own Assessor and terminate its assessing contract with Hennepin County; and WHEREAS, he also served on the Hennepin County Capital Budget Task Force; and WHEREAS, William Sime has served during a crucial phase of the community's development; and WHEREAS, the City is a better place because of his participation. ROW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City of Orono recognize William Sims for his outstanding efforts; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that he be thanked by the City Council and the entire community for his excellent work. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at its regular meeting held June 27, 1988. ATTEST: Edward J. Callahan, ACt ng Mayor Dorothy M. Ha r n,'crcy C1erTc— City of ORONOCITY RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNOILAN 27 ' OF NO. . . A RESOLUTION RECOGNISING i.H OF ORWO PATRICIA 'PATIO PETERSON, CITY RECORDER WHEREAS, the City of Orono is a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesotat and WHEREAS, Pati Peterson has been employed by the City of Orono from July 7, 1985 through July 8, 1988; and WHEREAS, Pati always put forth her best efforts in attending and recording the the meetings of the Orono City Council and Planning Commission; and WHEREAS, Pati's dedication to her job is demonstrated by the excellent work she did. NOW, THERRPORE EE IT RESOLVED, the City of Orono on behalf of its Council and staff would like to acknowledge its appreciation in this manner for the excellent work done by Pati Peterson and for her years of dedicated service. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held June 270 1988. Edward J. Callahan, Jr. Acting Mayor ATTEST: Dorothy M Hal— 17n, Cray C eirc� 61188.8 ClS— ING TO- Mayor and City Council ^,� JUN 2719�3 /m011: Mark Sernhardson, City Administrate-V p cliy OF 0moku DATtr June 14, 1988 SUSJWTt 1988 Attorney Rates Attachment: A. Barrett Letter Dated 6/20/88 ISSUE - Acceptance of Attorney's rates effective 1 January 1988. INTRODUCTION - During the 1988 budget process it had been Tadicsted that the rates would be raised for the Attorneys fees as now set forth in Attachment A. DISUCSS_ION - While the budget document had incorporated the new rates and the understanding has been those would be the appropriate rates for documentation purposes the Finance Director feels it appropriate to have a formal adoption of the rates by the Council. ALTERNATIVES - 1. Adopt 2. Re -negotiate 3. Seek another City Attorney RECOMMENDATION - It is recommended that the rates be formally adopted 6y the Council. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by , seconded by _ , that the Council adopt the rates contained in Attachment A for 1988 for its City Attorney fees. Ayes __, Nays _ "Li v%!j L. • POPHAM. HAI K,SCHNOBRICH&KAUFMAN. LTD. 2 I !%8 3300 PIPER JAPPRAT TOWER 1 MIN NEAPOLIS. MINNESOTA !HO! ;11 l x-0..A m[wY •N r ............ ....O.... ...... x00[x ..i uxO YICn o [t II I �� r........ A..l . A.. •...iOv DEL •ai N[•O M .....`K[x..... I ..... r n. JON[. v.pl Ni U'l ila-»A-.... .......rEWARN NtOx. pp ...........v.[l iCn. uq �...... I.w............ON "EL.O" .o>o .... A.c.�.wi sse.e. ...:, • : ni r U.o..m L Ex.[[«r. vwE.r un '" D[Nv�w, coLo w.00 e4.e. C.o O Yro ..... ..... 1, MEN .'Art. O1A nE•wl.. a0a ..)-qee u A ,Oi nt t « ao .Pesos w"..wr A.E. . .�.in E.. .�cn. ..... nNxxw . •lt...: o1Lo.o... a.. �.e pf. MINE :w.. .o...... O. wlllu. a JL L NirwO w .p.MIMOfO N. D. C..0. A . .A.A. w t. ..OR... n.EL O., E[ �OO1T A....r.[ A. ............ N.On LE.Jw. NV xON.wO .A. .E p.niLEWIS w.N ...T[LW p.....I r...00N a-a.-YI. JO.[.vt0 vpt g.'.I Ax0 DIRECT DIAL NUMBERIMMA T...A. J.YM[rt .... ...[t..... AO<x 4..x�. ux�nwauuven June 20, 1988 Mark Sernhardson City Administrator City of Orono P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Dear Karkt This letter will recognize that Orono and Popham, Haik, Schnobrich a Kaufman, Ltd. had agreed last December to the following rates for legal servicest $80.00 per hour for associate time; $85.00 per hour for senior attorney time; $1,100.00 per month for retainer time (3643-001); Regular rates for legal assist Rnt time. In addition, it should be the continued practice to bill out all time for matter 3643-047 at the attorney's full rate as these costa are passed on to the developer. If you have any questions regarding the above, please contact me. Sincerely, inccerely, Thomas J. Barrett TJB/dlb/4928j E i 0VOU1 n i-ZING DATE: June 15, 1988 TO: Mark Bernhardaon, City Administrator JUH 27 jacdq FROM: Mel Rilbo, Chief of Police ON OF OwiN i SUBJECT: Police Intern Request This department has a request from one of our Reserve Officers for a police department internship during the period of June 21, 1988 to September 1, 1988. Mr. Mark Allen Meyer 5054 So. Lakeshore Drive Maple Plain, Minnesota 55359 He is presently a member of our Police Reserve and is currently a student in law enforcement. He is reauired, as a part of his studies, to do an internship with a police department. This request does not involve pay to !fr. Mever and does not create a position now or at the end of internship. I request permission to have Mr. Meyer serve as a police intern. TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark Be-nhardson, City Administrat' Forwarded recommending approval. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by _, seconded by _, that the Orono City Council authorizes the internship of Mark Meyer for the period 6/21/88 to 9/l/88. Ayes _, Nays 61788.2 c�7 TO: Mark Bernhardson, City Administrator JUN 2719e8 FROII: Tom Kuehn, Finance Director DATB: June 16, 1988 CITY OF Oufto SUBJECT: Senior Accounting Clerk Step Adjustment Senior Accounting Clerk Charlotte Knutson has an annual review date for step adjustment purposes of July 1. The point results of the Time Spent Profile provided to Personnel Decisions, Inc. place the position in Group 4 of the City of Orono's Compensation Plan. Charlotte is eligible for Step IV of Level 4 under the 1988 Compensation Plan wage table. She has performed her duties at or above the expected performance level and I recommend her salary be adjusted from $19.33 per hour to Level 4 Step IV, $18.71 per hour, effective July 1, 1988. TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark Bernhardson, City Administrate Forwarded recommending approval. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by _, seconded by _, to adjust Senior Accounting Clerk Charlotte Rnutson's salary to Level 4 Step IV ($18.71 per hour) effective July 1, 1988, Ayes _, Nays __ 67 62388.E C�0 TO: Mayor and City Council irr[)IVrr,2pp7 j9i!'.�.�(r�p FROM: Mark Bernhardson, City Administrat 4i/d Vf V.VVL li'Y DATE: June 22, 1988 SUBJECT: Administrator's Information 1950 SHORELINE - The City has received no respoi.ae from its Letter to the attorney for the property owner. As such the City will continue to pursue the hazardous building issue on the property. TRAFFIC ACCIDENT -_ OLD _LONG _LAKE_ROAD/HIGHWAY 12 - What will probably for record purposes be termed an accide bt 7n the City of Long Lake, the City has explored the issue of appropriate site lines and intersection design on the corner. Persons have expressed concern about this corner, but a review of this intersection by the Police Officers at this print indicated that it is not a contributing factor in this accident. In addition Officer Bruce Anderson, who has been to accident reconstruction school, doing the investigation, is having it reviewed by his instructor at the State Patrol. The City is also having from an intersection design point having the work reviewed by an independent reconstructionist. The City has obtained substantial documentation, drawings and photos in relationship to the matter. Related to that is the issue of speed at that particular point and this issue will be discussed with the Police Department as it relates to appropriate enforcement. 3536 LYRIC AVENUE_ - The City continues to explore with the City A6[orhey the impact any current violations may have on the previous judication in March with the property owner. CITY ADMINIS_TRATOR'S VACATION - I will be spending from the afternoon of Friday the 1st through Monday, July 4th in Indiana. I will be back the night of the 4th and the morning of the 5th will be leaving for vacation through the 19th at a lake east of Brainerd. I presently anticipate being in the office on Thursday, July ;th, as I have a previous meeting commitment with the Association of Metropolitan Municipalities Thursday afternoon. ... 1, l Cy LIST OF LICENSES FOR COUNCIL APPROVAL FOR IIECTtUG OF June 27. 1988 set -Up License - Don Scherven Navarre Lanes and Spring Hill Center Solicitors Licer Fabian Seafood P.O. Box 1405 Galveston, Texas 77553 Residential Kennel License - John Hollander 200 Hollander Road Wayzata, tad 55391 INTEROFFICE MEMO DATE: June 23, 1988 TO: Dorothy FROM: Sue (Per Chief Kilbo) RE: Liquor License Renewals Dorothy, I have checked the files on both the Navarre Lanes, (Don Scherven) and the Spiing Hill Center (John Zaveda) and not found any problems with the reissuance of their liquor licenses. MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY PHONE 012- MIN LIQUOR CONTROL DIVISHM 333SIBLEY a ST.PAUL,MNS5101 APPLICATION FOR CONSUMPTION AND DISPLAY (SETUP) PERMIT PEIIINT FEE i1F0,0D IF NAME .NO .ODFESE eNOWN AXIS 5598 RELIC NOT CORRECT. MAKE CHANGES IN ER.C.S.EION Don Scherven Corp. Navarre Lanes Co Rds 15/19, BOX 51 (Orono) Navarre, MN 55392 I i NOTE:ALLCLUB'ON4ALE'INTORICAIMLIOUORLK=SU7MEEXBWrFO MAPPLYNO. .. ^ . m.IwvMM, wIM.Mb.�cNM.ILm CCivic, .E. MANI XAM,N nr an..—M — NN vNIPRE M.N iHiiarr� %e s9-� oNI Od Mom' — „N.N.w w.H' _.w. lb L HERIUSINESSESTAGLISHMENT. c/„•-�� a MrsrNEM.O. THrsl«.,,ON. gum IS ANPI :Lc NALV, ANS,r.❑ .N"'S 9Mn Ise NME ANS or E.. PRIwr, '. PN n. MM NEm, Any, Ean 011Nw Ma IbSN �Gfc'UF /' 7x 78 -"r'kG FORAMIVATICLW M`XAI AymuNrTeblM Lnua Pan QNe Has applicant; if partnership. any Partner; if corporation, Any officer or director; if club. any clue officer or dual ever had a license under the Minnesota Liquor Control Act revoked w8upended or been convicted for any violation of State LEWIS or lout ordinances; if so, give data and details �iTF''O Nrlil,.AIMrnNN, M.N.M m, u M A. MUMnuMIMI IM ynpoll bmllMmaXn RM,n V^MNwnr mlorrMan :NN. ruN,wMIm NHNNnne lnpErmn AMV FFRMIT155VEOHEREVNOEN OOESNOT t E SALE OF INTOXICATING LIOVM, NO CONSIDERATION WILL BE GIVEN TO THIS APPLICATION UNLESSAPPROVEDASPROVIOEDBELOW .0 � CLtd.� IFTNEBUSINESSISLOCATEDINACOUNTY 'P'N•^- IWrrtl AMVwI O,n IF A CLUB ATTACH A COPY OF THE CONSTITUTION AND BYLAWS OF THE CLUB AND A CURRENT LIST OF w.•........ ow. MEMBERS. IF THE BUSINESS IS LOCATED IN A MUNICIPALITY CASH MO.- CwNn NNHNI N RMEMINIn or.. CHECK if•J MINNESOTA OEPARTM ENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY PHONE 619-0966159 LIOUOR CONTROL DIVISION 333 SIBLEY W ST. PAUL. MN 65101 APPLICATION FOR CONSUMPTION AND DISPLAY (SETUNPERMIT PERMIT FEE H154.60 Star. e IF NAME AND ADDRESS SHOWN ARE bpRlh'C- TI II fG EL A NOT CORRECT MANE CNANpEa IN VACESIELM 71S et, ICcP bF BOX d IVA4zAtrI All A( SS341 NOTE: ALL'ON-SALE' INTOXICATING LIQUOR LICENSEE" ARE EXEMPT FROM APPLYING. IN6 X itteftaA RA NNW 57WIA16 Ilk#SIM[blvcER L rt30X let _w 0, rl� _ 'f73-Olat ZACw M/rA/ W 55391 ❑Ni u �N R arM w `VIUWr� DRI ?wM—jt�ZAt'kvhnNVmm SYioIeARO h A✓ 93N1 Ayt-- ry aS IN6 ai tl 1l'.Y`^ /�. �OXwd84 kI ZA(}I MA/ $5311 e[RCVSIx(aa ELTPeLRNNCNr❑uf54: TqS FUSIN[SS fORdWLOfATIOT ❑vX N. eroN u�. AL —cfFDA RAN L . Ruc Ns N N N « A POELIC BUMNEN If a pnry.NW. SNN red N(w aM N. of Eno boar, l4 Cm ICIM MM SUN IN Naw a,,d AWrNT nr EA' O16Lfr e iMfrTNSmAe-fW6ilveuG An•it, BoX d84 7*cn MEJ $5391 - VIC6 iIRMIl It Ada IFnX FIM kl"Ift1- Atd sr341 ��yPPneraNGtAzzll�t ,/ONI/ 2MFipR—!h'T/kRht m6R. PeeOL 11 09 v)M wall FOR APRIwn CLUR »x.nl La«Nee. .nr RxrMn. wR—T.at— LMuw• ❑,,. Ow At Has applicant; if partnership, any partner, if corporation, any officer or dircgor; if club, any club officer or director, eYer had a license under the Minnnots Liquor Control Act rpvp�ed or suspended or been conykted foranyaiolalion Of State Laws or local ordinances; if so, give date and detail• 0 anMamra num annxl•Jy(axrn—nand, Na PlNqu11MN«ur w Mlwlun rogN pxfranunrn•wunn a nu , n n nmupNY CERMrt ISEVfOM ElfUNOE N ODES NOT ALLOW TXF $ALE OF INTOYICATINp 4OWR, �,(/� �f %�I NO CONSIDERATION WILL BE GIVEN TO THIS MPLICATION UNLESSAPPROVEDAS PROVIDED BELOW iK,(Y/aMr. 4/7Lwal Sl IF THE BUSINESS 15 LOCATED INA COUNTY. 3wn•wN-ARVRIRN MARIMIr mN IF A CLUB ATTACH A COPY OF THE CONSTITUTION AND BYLAWS OF THE CLUB AND A CURRENT LIST OF MEMBERS. Ra..e-cnaua.rNn cnna(Fonan Rfnnoma°N ne IF THE BUSINESS 15 LOCATED INA MUNICIPALITY CASH CHECK AryuWa-CAM.FFnbxrfa Rlpbnbrw Data (Wl INSI License No.19 (�^'L� 0 �v/.,. APPLIGTION FOR SOLICITATION - 620.00 fee Date Rece Date Erpi CITY OF ORONO 1335 BROWN ROAD SOUTH 11 BOX 66 i L CRYSTAL BAY, MN 55323 Organization: fwa"09v SfArOp i Address: FO px /y01 Cr1�uE S:D,.i 7) Representative: TOM FgQ.q;j Address: ayo/ ✓iE c% Phone 5o1-76a 37b� Phone Check One: Business Solicitation —.k,� Contribution Solicitation Number of People Solicitating within the City Provide list of Names of Solicitors on back of this application. Type of Product to be solicited ORESR SEAGo o 7) PERMIT EXPIRES 60 DAYS PROM APPROVAL DATE. POLICE CHIEF SHALL HAVE FIVE (5) BUSINESS DAYS IN WHICH TO INVESTIGATE AND MAKE A RECOMMENDATION PURSUANT TO ORONO MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 5.30 SUED 5(a). __________________________________________________________________________ ORONO MUNICIPAL CODE REGULATIONS ON SOLICITORS Subd. 3. Prohibited Solicitation Practices. A. It is unlawful for any solicitor to engage in solicitation for any unlawful business or organizational purpose or activity. S. It iu unlawful for any solicitor to practice here a amen tg7pyj/,Yd&, theft, deceit, or menacing, troublesome or otherwise unlawful acti4t4,wdw1ft the course of solicitation. ;;113J00.�P s 00 C. It is unlawful for any solicitor to enter, or attempt to gain eneVr tNce, Wo residential premises displaying at such entrance a sign with the wtofas 'Piddle and Solicitors Prohibited' or 'Solicitors Prohibited'. or�i;cr_rHpry �;rl ;J5d510 Coll RO1 T09:31 D. It is unlawful for any solicitor to refuse to leave business premises when requested by the owner, lessee, or person in charge thereof. E. It is unlawful for any person to engage in contribution solicitation without completion of licensing or registration as herein provided. F. It is unlawful for any person to engage in business solicitation without a license as herein provided. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- The undersigned hereby agrees to the conditions quoted above from the Orono Municipal Code and any additional requirements the City staff may have. Signature of Applicant: /_..ics,..._. �n /�,r.� Date: ey—oZ7 g',F --------------------------- ..------------------------------"-------------- FOR CITY USE ONLY: After review of application, staff recommends the following: Approval of application Denial of application Signature of City Official: Date: Signature of Police Chief: �TVP�<. /f[p�d Date: Ce /3/8? -------------------------------------------------------------------------- "-1Gl Y ir RZOVE . LICENSE AFFLICATION March 1, 1981 to February A. 198Y Owner Property Address (include city Mailing Address (if di fferen t): Phone: (home)&,&z -D.`1 Gy RRSIDRRTIAL Kennel License Information: 625.00/year (payment must accompany application) Maximum No. of dogs to be kept at one time: 3 (over 6 months of age) 1311800000 Principal Breed: L �� �fJ/ L. - b. TL 47,0 Purpose for more than 2 dogs: -A.... JVVC c' 'T-T4Awl' "U k01 T11 Dogs normally kept: _inside _X_kennal structure 06/0._ CO:----CIAL Kennel License Informations $150/year (payment must accompany application) Name of Business: Business Activities: (cnar..ple: boardir.,, b_r. d±-.r, voter nary core, retail, etc.) Normal Business Hours: After Hours Contact: (name) (phone) Dog runs/exercise areas are: _inside _outside _both The undersigned hereby makes application to the Orono City Council for Kennel License as specified on this form; the undersigned acknowledges th a keanel license is permissive only and does not grant any authority violate any provision of any City Ordinance or other law or regulations t'. undersigned hereby grants the City permicssfon to inspect the premix, prior to lice:anprovel and at any other reasonable time during t', the undersigned agrees to abide by the requiremen :.iS i.rcluding any special ccn.:i ti oz:a ivpOscd t_:� 44 ty rt of .._.... l licence approvCl. Date -- p`rv- Ci.;v flee O!,IV — pR `` Recommends Approval_�/ Denis DATE TIME CITY OF ORONO CALLED a araYT 11.7II�" INSPECTION NOTICE uNEDULED PERMIT'40. ADDRESS . OWNEROWNEROWNER CONTR. ��-1—IJ.1:-� TELEPNGNE i:J. —i� - p IMTVAG - NI P. VM9!N6 . ER D E INSPEC TgM LVN4 DEIGV/NMu,W!11 /py1NG -.:V4BIM6 fIN4 O LMICSNORlIWEll1NDS > O Ne,U,AIV0NWA4L - MEGMANIC4 WATER CONUP NEETRURN O LgFxSINO A 'O p- _ C METER ON O COMPLMNT FMA Qyx PROGI SEWER NOONUP D FOLLOW UP O MPRC EINEL YI O "AM C SERTIC INSTALL MAINT WNxfN O "M MEN i Ulm WELL TEST PUMP X'M,,LLCFIWDDD CO TB: ti rn �✓ts J W ]S' I ' --set.. 11p PNOTOTfREN 7 C,,,, SATE/sCia POCCI0GFED O CDNIEOT WOIIN F PTIOCEfD •.] CppRECTEEOITI ECALL ,,% TIoAi WSPfCtION eE/ORE COVERING STOP TG OORDER POSRD G LL�MEPEGTOR NpUR4 INSPECTOR WILL RETURN INSPECTION REOUMED CALL TO AIIeANGE ACCESS Cell for the Text inspection 24 hours in Oxmer/Contr. gQ site InEpectvr. / 473-7357 YMr /IN Iwl fd/ CNUN 15.1E Nnl¢f CITY OF ORONO MP NNNO NAIWI P A Y R `-Ia-u Y-T-D • - - - - -- DIV GROSS CROSS EKP/ALLOW ANDERSON BL 31 16508.00 1496.38� BERNHARD50 ME 12 23487.88 2044.06 BOBZIEN SA 31 10401. 05 826. 40 808MA JL 12 58T4.20 58D.15 BOYLAN SO 93 1234.64 306.00 BRINKHAUS JF 42 18149.64 148S 10 CARLSON MB 35 96.70 86.70 CHESWICK CB 31 16999.49 1418 00 CORNICK JL 31 155I5.65 1153,00 DENNESON RJ 3S 2720,50 275.32 ENGLISH It IH 31 15128.13 14St.67 ERICKSON DJ 93 522.38 246.7S ERICKSON KR 31 16547.62 1332.42 FISCHENICH OT 31 13835.70 109t.52 FRITZLER JM 31 16576.46 1321.28 GAFFRON MP 33 13101.86 1166.40 GERHAROSON JR 42 19613.9E 1636.08 GREGORY JD 42 14061.24 1076.4E HALLIN OM 12 12348.01 1030.00 HANSEN SC 42 12369.SO 959.20 HANSING CJ 31 5433.28 514.56 JACOBS TJ 33 13991.85 1166.40 JOHNSON BP 31 15037.26 1249.20 KILBO MH 31 21066. 79 1760.00 KIRNYCZUK M 31 4835.61 t32.13 KNOTT NJ 33 0.00 0.00 KNUTSON CA 15 8593.68 826.41 KUEHN TM 15 19234.11 1604.40 LINDSTROM DJ 93 87.13 34.00 MABUSTH JA 33 17002.37 1418.24 MEYER MA 35 29.05 0.00 MIKELSON RA 1S 10362.03 859.49 MILLS JR UH 93 981.00 202.50 MORAN MR 31 17772. 49 1443.33 MOROUCZYNS J 31 16336.43 1277.31 MORROW JS 31 4203.SS 313.IS OAS DO 93 921.51 204.2S OMAN LE 33 IIS98.88 964.08 PALMER PB 31 505.00 O.DO PETERSON PL 12 5695.25 490.58 PETERSON RW 93 0,00 0.00 QUASI WA 92 13330.40 1115.31 ROSS JA 93 177.75 65.25 SASS JJ 42 12469.90 959.20 SCHAUSS CR 31 11117.17 896.80 SKREEN US 42 12494. 40 959.20 STEFFENHAG RE 93 12861. 09 1072.80 STEVENS BG 93 1182.SO 292.50 THOMTON MR 31 13022.20 1136.63 TOMCHECK LF 31 13074.47 1234.87 TOMCZYK MU 31 15162.94 1249.20 .,STING JUN 27 1p9 OILY OF ORONO CITY OF ORONO P A Y R Y-T-D • - - - - - - EMPL-NO NAME DIV GROSS GROSS EXP/ALLOW - WALSH KL 71 0.00 0.00 COUNT GRAND 4I,IB7.26 PAID 00047 TOTAL OOOS2 TOTAL TOTAL FICA TAX GROSS a 22,7S6 SO EMPLOYERS FICo A • CROUP HEALTH B a PHYSICIAN'S HEALTH PLAN C m BLUE CROSS/BLUE SHIELD D • MEDICAL CENTER PLAN E m PRUDENTIAL F m COORD. HEALTH CAPE C a MINNESOTA HMO H m TRANS-AMERICA OCC. 1 w BANKERS LIFE J • MUTUAL SERVICES K • MUTUAL OF OMAHA L m EMPLOYEE'S BENEFIT M m AETNA N m NICOLLET EITEL 0 = LEAGUE OF CITIES P m METROPOLITAN HEALTH PLAN 0 m SHARE Z • HEALTH CARE MAINT ACCT. MISSING HOSP CODE FOR SOME EMPL'S INO CITT Of OIONO MW "Stem tL-IT-N ILM 1 CMM M. 0.19 11110\MT NO IM WOMITIH CCNNIT M. INN. 0 I.O. O pLHN Il)00{ eC/N/N .).fl .GNOMINMMT. IM 011let MILNe 01-421e-e31-I8 InNG Hrt)rN N.N .CIIO-IIINMNTL INC LAIN OOMLNe N-Nw-MC-11 rneN of/nn[ ne.N .NO- lI WTO IM LntN MN [ILI n-Nn-LH-u r n)NL u/eane T..[l .CeO-IItM . IM MIIb MILIM e1-4810-I[)-11 11)a4 LNC[0MIM[MTo tM enlb eYIILtd el-Nu-IH-a) 11f 001 0{/LlI[e .a.01 L-111NIt"T. INC OIIIM MMLIN 01-NIO-[eO-N a!1 .T . u.-Ne I IOHI of/N/es 1\.10 AT a T Cpe, 16aIMOM el-Nle-\l[-]. 11.ff e p I l)eH 0....... Ilf H [M1L I AMM .nc $"=I MINT NIIL el-N]]-lN-.e L.H p .O-bL oo.• I11M0 ../CLN TfL aC C.[elll HLT MIYT NAM PLANT 1FNI5-5.1-11 M Is N.-b1 � o•o. I ICIH N/t)/ee Ta N- COLpIK UI[ tp N WN MT 01-.IN-111-]I Il)OO eV0/N .O.Oh COLMOL Ll I[ AN to N[N Y[tL IM el-.IM-\N-)1 p 11)l1. e./N/ee Il N- CaLMI.L L= IN CO ae[L[ VN6 IM el-.IM-11a01 I ll1 ). OVILN .I.N COLNIY LII[ Ip IF LIFE tN[ Ye el-.IY-1N-ll Ill1). .VNICC .1 AN C0.Nt4 LII[ IM CC LV[ tM pT el-IIN-1N-)\ p ITO. .Vtl/N •I.N MOMI. LV[ IM CO LII[ Ip J11p el-11N-IN-II \T\l0 OVC)/Ge •1 N- COLNLL LII[ IM CO [M T MMNN el-IIM-IN-]I 11111e .Vtl/N ei if C%NOL LV[ ICO Lila Ip MT OI-.IN-IN-3I p 1111 )e .VN/N el. if MNIAL Lila H. GO Lila 1M Al. I11Oe N/t)/ee el.H COLNLL LIII !Ne CO LIN IN JN el-.1N-111-)1 iT)1]e of I[l/H ].. ee- Coal AL LI It lNe CO N!M MT el-.IM-Ita-)1 p 11110 N/N/H II.Of- COLNCY. LII[ [p CO tMN All (M 01-.IN-IN-II IN.N . t 17113I 011.lna UT.n tpM11nY K0O NOT JNp MNtC[ u-NN-e]t-n I1101 svelne t.e.N C e.. eLM MT JNI! MtCm LI-ON-u]-Il Mf.)1 p ...... i ....Cta I71113 eVN/u 4 9 CMOCI.L Llq INS Lila INSJWI el-llM-qf-1e I T111) N/LLH 1.10 eOIeOC.Y LIP Ip 1.19 IM JN el-IIN-eN-1[ IHIO HIN/00 a 10 COIeOC.CL LII[ IM LIIa Ip JYII OI MIM-ILI-Il p I T1111 ONWN iN a C.AL LtI[ Ip IIO[ Ip NII 01-IIM-IN-)1 1711.3 WN/N 1.1. Ce1t10MCIY LIII Ip LIFEIM JIM 01-IIM-IN-aI 11111] e./N/N ).fe CpNOCIAL LII[ ba LIII INe M 01-UM-IN-)) 11111) Of/N/N f.N CelOYC14 UI! INS LII! tp M OI MI N-LII-N I1111] Ol/t)/ee .)f COIOIMCI.L LIIL Ip LIi[ tp JIIN 1!-IIM-Nh11 1711q of/N/eO 11 COMMERCIAL Lila in LII[ lee M Ta-IIN-{N-1L 171143 O{/t)/" f0 COMMERCIAL LIFE IN III[ INt JN H-II N-)te-N f L I1Y CITY P Walla Coleco notom t6-21-Y PAW ! WCt N' Yl[ lK1tIT MYM IT41 ptpltTlp LCCWMI Y. IN. { /. a. ! 11[tYY f 2 N.H . { f' uu.. ..«Cot I11111 OVn/N H.Y 2YL Y YY 1 was [WI/ /YT2 1hMH-{H-1) f f [T.Y . o.0 • o«p2 L '11H1 Of/L]/H ..11LH !0.t a plptN JNR WAVIN 01-110-051-I4 f 1f Hf OL/t]/2{ {.H MOLF ! gIgHY LOnYt 01-631111-052-11 .,1n.H t / IHNt Y/H/H •.O M.. t ION Ca CHgNIOY !2[LL[ 1hMY-1111-11 I a.. . 111e01 01/13/H 1{.Oa HIMSON,YIMT LIl2 INS !1-IIY-ION-]I 1 � uo.• .o-q2 L I 11]H. N/!]/!! ].H]A1 HpIY Ht01L H MIW LIFT STATION T]-I1NyH-1[ ]. H1.11 • t 1l1[H OL/n/!t ]].10 OL[NOo01YL[Y00a YTILITIH 01-.]1I.-)H-I1 C L ]1.0a u«[Ilt C IHOt U/n/{! f{..1H1 "ObLY SHVIM [WV L.To 01-HY-ION-11 0 f{. • uor. ru-qt • • 111HI Of/H/H S.H I 11`WNOTN HILLY[ ♦I-IHI-040-11 LN• { I 11Hi aVn/S2 Itypll q-P me tT2pT Y11T YT •1-.2i1-211Mt • • .?.so .?.so o.or • ..«ut • nfe1T svn/H Is I•N "I MIUB /TON 8Co1o0L 01-I]{1-199-11 .• • ...-Cot • • ""as sf/n/H u.H Y4SI Cn HLT IY LOtTMt O-I]11-w-n u as. • 110O CITY OF OROND CIRCA 000IOTU 00-87-05 PAGE 7 f CHOCK W. DATE AMOUNT VOODOO ITON {IOCRIPTIOII ACCOUNT N0. IND. 0 P.O. 0 me"" f u.-C1R I 11JJ0 00/01/00 00.07 ICM ft O CLIP ICY 5-10 TO 0-10 01-4140-010-1I M.01 . • ...-CIO ...... 1'I9363 00IR3100 10.01 TOP JACOOO HILIAOO 01MA1-174-23 • >•. 11 . ....COO I11110 0010I00 11.00 JIN WATCH OALOO CO IR LUTE RAOI{ 01-4018-049-4I H.{0 . { • • I1f.00 OVOJ/O 1.1.11 FUOTON OLICTROIRCO MINT EQUIP 01-41P4O-101-11 141.79 • ....CNO 0 soo t1NH 06/23/00 35.70 TWO LAKIR .1YLIONIM 6I-4360-0- ' • I Tf.01 00/OJ/Ol 00.11 TNO LARON .IIKJMIM 01-1168-1 00..1 . • ...-COO .. o.. I79419 00/0J/00 I0. 00 LAW ONIORCUCIT NIIR r{0lftlC t 01-A040-101-,. F • ...-CNO I71410 00/83/00 o0. OO HARD VJJ DIOT MOR PUNCH 74-4015-511-04 • 0f0. OO . I ...-COO • IIf.O[ 00 3100 413.ED RARTINO MWMOO 06 MINT AUTO IW/I 01-4341-101-11 0 .1J.SO . • ....COO 1 ..s.. 171.70 00/O3/00 10. 01 NITIO MU NUT AOM NSITINO 01-43N-011-I0 l • 10.10 . • .q.0 171410 00/01180 30.10 NJYROMCO UTILITII{ 01-4O4-099-17 10.10 . I • • IA.fT 00/21/64 39 co 0001 CAPE NCPOA IRIROD•IIP{ 0-000-011-1I 1 1166 CITY OF MONO CHECK REGISTER OD-•T-M ISO[ C CHECK NO DATL RRDYRf "ROM ITEN DESCRIPTION ACCO M. EMM. I R.O. 0 lono i 30.60 . .....• eR.-CMS f I71501 0L/elge IS. tO HIM, GOLF ISSN IIEMSERSMIPS 74-4301-SIO-13 40.60 . oo.. Ilssl• 00 /e]/SS DOLOR MOTOROLA INC RADIO I4-4560-633-e0 < ...... .... Cgs IT)s.e ../eves DD.o XUMrteCM INC MAIMT EQUIP t4-o.e-310-13 ■5.0, . 11sC-s 0E/n/6e ".at NAVARRE M.MDWu OFFICE SVPFIIEs 01-4ne-114-33 0e/C3/50 71.11 MV.RRE MMOUMe MAUll F",I 01-.[x-1E9-31 1ns54e 11140 0.1231e0 27.46 MAV.ME HAND ... A EQUIP PARTS 01-40l-e.1-4e IT16.e .L/CJ/Ce T." NAVARRE MRDUARE STREET MIMT 1VPFL 01-.L33-e.1-.e 1T15.e OE/C]AS 00.40 MV... E ..a...9 .AUT EQUIP 01-as-HYII • IT1e.. 01113190 11.19 .1.9 XAMOVA K MAIMT MAYOR MIMS T!-4349-G41-11 I11114e N113100 N.M MVASAS MASHARE MAIMT AUTO 11-.141-CE1-It IH..e 0./OAt 1.01 NAVARRA ....MARE RAINY EQUIPN T]-.e-501-Ie • 11".. 01/0/ee 70.O0 MAVARRA ........ ...Os MIME SVPPL T4-.t31-51I-13 011..1 . • ...... ...-CONE 111551 0e/p/ee bas .51 STREET LIGHTS 01-.TC5-1.1- ¢ • sC De. eS . ...... ...-CMS • I71SIS O11e3180 11. 50 MORTHMESTERM 11-L TELEPHONE 01-.1e0-0.1-4e 17151- oe/eve. 10. T1 NORTHWESTERN SELL D.T. PROCESS, AG 01-.355-061-15 • 110.E oe:evee n 51 RORTRMESTERR BELL DATA PROCESSING TC-4355-5.1-11 1715e4 01/e31es e...G MKITHVEITE.. BELL DATA PROCESSING TJ-.3511-sl0-u n Is . • • 171613 OL/nnE RAI 00 PEWT8 TRUCK REPAIR IMPOUND VEHICLE 01-4141-ICI-)1 1.1. 10 . 1T1L]s Ol/C1nE 11. TO PRAIRIE OFFICT IMVELJPES e1-4e10-431-IE • 1 Tln. evo/BB 11. 11 PRAIRIE OFFSET ENVELOPES •1-u1e-n.-�) 111. 55 . ...... or CKS 1 1109 CITY OF ONONO r CMCN M. NTt MOUNT f ITIN] eVt]/t{ a." 1Tfo1] 06/!]/06 Rs.11 6 I Tf0.] 06/!]/06 81.00 1T161] 06/ta/60 t.To t I T1f.] 06IRV" 6.06 11.K C o00 I7166a o6/LL60 3H.a0 E l TltlS 06/e3lN 1.607. 6f LnT.1e . • 111110 061113166 MT IT 6N. TV 1 T0T06 0E/e3A6 100. 00 •+n• e0/ea/66 T..n 1.Y- svean6 6 IS • Te Ja I7163S 06/e3/60 SOS. EO • {st.[e . life., 06/83166 18. is I71641 061t3166 16e.61 • • oeo I71101 Q4/eO/S0 s0.{{ 171901 06/23/SS A.IS • S].Y 11110E 06/93100 e] c• El. a 171903 96/n/as if.00 • AS.1e . CMOR tl6ISTIM MMOR ITEM DESCRIPTION MOMNTIAL LIFE IUD JYII PMIIMNTIAL LIFE IUD JM MUUDNTIAL LIME IUD JOM PaUD 11 LIFE INS JUN PRUDENTIAL LIFE INS JUN reUD TIM LIFE 108 JUD REED CAMY 6 TOMCCO CONCESSIONS RESALE ROLLING OIL CO TEIPORARu6 TO 60 TIMFMMI96 TO 60 U4FORMs UNLIMITED UNIFORMS WLINIIED UNIFORM$ IMLIMITSS UNlPMm UML Tf NASNIM LITIS INC MTEs MODUCTS CO "We PSSO-CTS CO 6ASOLIM r 66-17-011 PASS { IT ACCOUNT No. 1M. a P.O. 0 Women t 61-11511-O29-I8 61-11M-611-15 IF 01-1150-I86-31 01-RIM-It1-]1 61-0168-114-]] • ., 01-11511-E11-42 .0.-Cott • 71-K6l-{f 1-94 • ...-us • n-Isu-w-oe • ...-CASs MMVIST0 6/ 613-6/16 .-00-031-16 • MMVI6T0 W 6/3-6110 U-.a16-IT.-aa AOTMIM CLOTMIM CLOTMIM CLOIN/M EWIP RENTAL STREET MINT SPECIAL Will we SCMUSS/CMASLES I TJM SCMWWCM s niE FLORA 6 FA~ LASS CONCESSIONS MISfTONKA MAT Men EWIF MORTAL •' ....CAS 61-0491-IRS-31 As 01-1491-126-3I 01-K11 -Elf-l1 • 61-Kfa-m-a. ....CASs • 01-4131-E41-11 • ....CNa o1-un-849-14 n-Im-SSr61 � ....Cots . 01-.]SS-1l1-]1 11-KM-091-11 . 61-1]]1-290-61 • Ito CITY ON, am wex NE. an • 00,9316E 00,9316E In .M .s I Ia 0.9E 11T a1. :. E,st CHECK waist" AMOLYT K000011, ITEM O[[CNIFTIOM 35.04 [TAN MOVIE IUDLZSWINE as. a• "An TEiE IVELlMtMO T1.es . t40. 00 MN MUNICIPAL CLER%$ CONFENENCE ERR. 00 10 00 IN MA1049 NEW rEME[EEDE 10 00 • Lt CTRONIC CENTER rA:MT LIFT [TATIONE NCRYH ETAN IMF M.IMT CALIF It.O ...0 IVAN tl TOTAL WAY," IUNO 14 TOTAL tst.t,, FT"E Tt TOTAL a. WIE.N. •L 0 Ta TOTAL ..tt.tt NNO Ta TOTAL IF..)t.N TOiK 00-tT-o FREE 0 ACCOUNT M0. INV. t 1.0 • ALONE[ EI-•set-uE-le E1-•lee-Ir.-aa o t-•TEO-Rn-i t 01-434E-Otr-11 Ta-ON-EtA-fE r.-a.t-tE•-.a E[N[tAL A W WATERY[ 1 WWII O'J.LrI WATER OPERATING FUND a[Y[E n•PrT:rc rol:o EOtr .. U, e.Ar:n rE PUBLIC ATTENDANCE CITY OF ORONO CUu nC') MEETING DATE & .a-% a PLEASE FILL OUT THE INFORMATION REQUESTED BELOW FOR OUR CITY RECORDS. NAME OR NUMBER NAME (pleaea print) ADDRESS PRESENT FOR (from agera 1. /Lj Y. p Xi ma /? s. .La.V,13 o P 9. Q/' 2 W (4 { L 2 5. EDtJ �26 J. J9G i' c � � c a2LS✓aJ Prc.J i Z c 7. 9. 0. E O AN 27 ��.. i?fi'j* m Administrative Notes The end of the .thonl v s ",here 1:: a Wse aeon for students and parents. Itla an Important it= not to be tharactariseJ by the absence of school attendant.. Far may families the sumaer .... nee Came t.,.,bar. It is a true for r.c raation. for being out of doors• for conversation with children, for trips and new ad- ventures. Young people's su r experiences may well be as important as anything learned In Chu classroom. Included I. the vale. of .user 1. the struggle to be Imaginative, to create a day filled with interest and fun. Often this Is an effort that begins with the la - ..I, "there'. nothing to do." For older children the suggest packs Important lessons In aer responsibilities, maybe even seer Job or bolmg a army from huge. at creep. for the first rise. S., Is lodged fleeting and so le the school sae to a . of aumaer v... if... If. 1a a currant, that can he spent wisely or foolishly. It Cannot be saved•r bucked. It Will be spent. I knower tnet for at of the parent. who watched their son or daughter graduate from Orono High School c Jesse 9, single 9ue.rich about tlse Como Cc clod. withers did all the tW got" Yesterday they were babies r lamming to swim or bite, or starting schw lT o having best friend.. or needing to look like e also, or having a first due, or planning for vile Vie. Textron feast. Tha advent of suctive r and graduation brings to mind a passage from The Prophet by Kahl❑ Otbnn. "Your children are not your children. They are the ..an end daughters of lll.'s longing for Itself. They cwe through van but not from you. Rod though they are with you yet they Mlnnp not to you. You may glue the. your love but not your thought., Pot thuy have their own thoughts. You may bone. their built.. but not their souls. For their souls dwell In the hm,se of tomorrow, (continued nest cnluav ORONO SCHOOL BOARD Dasld WK.... Charring 479-1692 Don Anderstrt. Vine Chat.. 479.1810 Luck Taylor. Trusurer 473-11" Kitty Crosby. Cleft 479-M7 Jlm Franklin. Dirmurr 479-1130 John Maresh. Director 475-3197 Which You cannot visit, not esen In your drams. You an, arrive to be like tMe. but ..d not to make them It" you, For life goo not backward nor Carrier with yesterday. You .re the basis fro. Which your children m living arras are ..nt torch. Let your bending In the archer's hand be for gladness." Dr. Theme A. Mich Superintendent liaises SUE KUEPPERS, OROMO TUCKER OF THE YEARI Sue began her teaching career for the Orono School District 1. 19r6, teaching fourth grad. at the Maple Plain El.rnte" School. She taught at Upl. Plain for five years briar. moving to the Orono Middle School where she he. been cesch- ing for the last seven year.. Sue has b... to the educatlov field for thirty-one years. After graduating from St. Catherine's College and the University of Minnesota, where she completed her eater's degree in curricula and Instruction, she began teaching in St. Paul in 1955. In edditiuc to clas.ro teaching, her career ham also includv.: being a pot,. 1E..: and administrative assistant. The Orono Education association asked for letters of rae— ommendatlon fro associates. friends. parents and students. In rertesing the letter. of riicomaend.ticin received Sue is highly pratsed aa aexcellent and creative teacher , who stlmulsro students to do their beat by norkl n5 to C their Maximum potential." Her co-workers describe he, PY an an eatillaivin.lic and energetic faculty umber." I., Orono's Teacher or Elie Year, the Orono Education "so- rlrn -- 11• ••ad • mnrnrn �• ., rho Mln+en+ra Ed- c.:1— a .1aiLvo Teu,hel mat rise Seat twpetltlon. rao- ratulatlonm. Sue. Orono in very proud to have Von as their Teacher of the Your. ` OOtM AT A GLANCE ORONO SCHOOL Vista AWARDS %i= first Test Date. Mat fell The following .[.dent. .1. awarded Schaloatic How, &rings at the Oro= High School Manual Awards Right an Bote Re [l et.[fast bedilns May 17. 1968: SAT November 5, 1988 Sestember 10. 198g ACT Oc tabu 22. 1988 5e1t.mbe1 23. 1989 Minnetonka Fruit Greve rs Orono Conchas Annual - Association Award ati.n luard no Preliminary Se Missile Teat IPSAT/gMSQT) for lu- MIt. Ring Robin Nllw nior. Is scheduled for Saturday. October 15. Paul Schumann Award Gordon David Alston TM last day .indoor. at the high school have to clung. Gregg Nato Rmgrk Award the it schedule for Pont year Is June 16. Schedule. Mn. Benedetti will be considered final after [hot dote. Orono middle School Service Award Mound Medical Clinic S., School oppert.ntxf.. mr available at Sinks. Be. Patrick Whalen Award Loin. Park, and Wsy..ra. Both mewe up and enrichment Shannon O'Reilly classes for students 9 - l2 are available. Contact JOMn Waltaley Award year school counsele, at 473-5472 for Information. Moen MDwAII little plain American Union Autlll.n Award .••••• Orono Lion. club Award. March. Barr Thorn Lwery THE SONG HIGH SCHOOL CHAPTER Season Ral.red., Derek F.as.t - Oren OF THE J.. Raining., Mocks, bosnr. Award NATIONAL HOMOR SOCIM 1967-1988 Baby. Thayer Glen Prod.hl The follwing etude[. or. 19B7-1988 ..be,. of the E_L._"Bad" She.thnraay Award Halle Plain Lion Club Orono Nlgh School'. CNp[er of the National H... r $.,I- J... ld Mick. Award. ay: Ncyowe. Lobed. Paeats for Orem Award J... Ifer L.... H Joel... He... McDowell Laura Llang Nevin Bluomendsal Anthony Hughes Nicholas fault Retail. Richard Orono Education Henna. Technical I ... list Smith "Autistic. Award foal.... Awed Scion Derrick gross Bradley causer Gerald Assistant. Jr. Iauta Lt.., Douglas Mal Men 14,11nwe11 Wsteato Rewrite Lodge Award. Or.. I.T.A. Award Janet Sellin{hem Hotels NeMely Derrick Brown Deborah Lay.ring lauu Bieck Robin Mllw Jennifer Weaver Ra,l Bome.n Den. %adde,.ey.c G.11i.w. Award. Elizabeth Bracken hnrdaret New. Bank of Maple Plain Award M.I Bows Derrick grown Shennon O'Reilly Muni,.. Bonaire Daniel Batted... Jodl Batter J..hma P..Ri.r Den Mayor Joan Barn Nicole Pfeffer Oro.. Music Award Brie Nissan Daniel BacterBo.. Glen prodebl DAns Wqn.. Michael Poll., Sky Carlso. Jodi Owes Nicole Pfeffer Bo1dl Dmienall Mo. Raea.d.hl Or... District Award. Any Scott Jeff. Fred... Ellen Scherer Eurasian Mal Sand,. Wong Mlle. MBA My Scot[ LAwra Black Elltab.th Hibbs Chad SMrtvedr Jodi Rohrer Beat.. Rofl..d Baby. There, Any Carlson gttin Johnson Julie Theis Meldl Mlnnell Met,.. ggotta entler Timothy Vaughan Jolla F,edeen amete Ring Jennifer Wua J...vJn Lee "o MayLebode Jennlist Willoughby Done Mdds[mayer 5' Jun Lee Jodi Qua.Ell. Clbn Scher raw ee•••• Julie Theta Jennifer Willoughby STUDENT DIRECTOR CNOSEN Diane Le., daughter of Myong and Sung Lee of Long Lake. has been chosen as the Student Director of the Orono Bonds for the 1988-59 school year. Her mein vesperal- bill[y will be to conduct the Pit Band for the Fall Musical. JOgN PHILIP SOUSA AWARD Bong Beal. son of David and Audrey Real, fen the 1968 1wipi Ht of the John Philip Sou.. Award, the highest Award glue. by the Orono Bond P,og,a.. Mug v . ae- foeted by Bola fall. band .ember. and his bondadirce,or as the student who has contributed the suet to the mono hand P...... during his four year. In head. MINNESOTA AIL -STATE BAND Jeannie Wong. daughter .f Feeeman and Joyce Wong of Long Lako. was chosen to particlpnte in the 1989 Nine - seat. All -State Bond. The four -day ramp will be held on the campus of MmidJi State University in July, under the direction of Dr. James Craft of Florida Star. Uni- I ,mity asL Jnn, . cl.elnet player in In. Oran High a . y]JI School Bond, man one of 346 pwpl. chose . out of 863 ..druaned. besides . concert given 1. M.IdJl. theilbabial will perfov at 0,,h.m,r. Hall in Polar..". at the Mirem- esut. Music Educator.' Ce..ntl.n. Alternate Bond mess - bars are Darla Berµman, flute. d'rughter of Gregg and Harry gergnan of Mple Plain. and Eric. Pea.. clarinet, daughter of Curt and Sharon Weaver of Medina and wry end Judy Fos. of Whit. Mor Lak.. 1, tv. M CELEBRATE LIFE SOD Members brought a busy year to Its close with . befor..school breakfast on Jun. 1. TM chapter has attempted to be a part of school functions this veal as wall as plating posters around the school, often. to realist students of our purpose, students against driving drunk. The chapter Operated the winter epor conu..In.. to fin.... that, projects for the .at. They printed complimentary programs for the Junior - Senior Prom. presented pencils to eighth grader. in hope. of interesting the. in joining us neat year. [ Hell as pointing out to them that they can also he1F by not riding with drunk driver.. Key chain. .... .re- amed to new drivers with Our name and the ma up. 'Friends Don't Let Fiends Drive Drunk.' Dennis Stauffer of Chancel 11 spoke to .n ow.lflo.ing audl- torlu. about hie mgporiamc.. with the kill. kill. .rlas, when he participated in a drunk driving experl- ac.. Saw..I of our umbers canned . baolh at the Tv 11 Health fair at Medina in the .psfa, Graduation senior• received a gift from SOD as they left gradu- .tion practice on June 9. contacting the. to Celebrate Lit.. the SOD theme for this year. by no[ drinking and driving. Many [Hoke to Lyz Hibbs, our graduating pro. - Ideal. and .11 the other hard until" ."or. who made this a great year for the chapter. Margret Larsen. Sporn, ORO110 HIGH SCHOOL CHOIR MEMBERS RECEIVE HIGH RATIXLS AT STATE VO L CONTEST The fallowing Orono High School Chair students received superior ratings at cM State vocal Salo and Ensemble Contest held at Ac.e[rong Nigh School oa April D. Vocal solos: Jenny Abdo and Nichol* Utech. Madrigal Croup: May. Mrgeon. Just. Ely, Nichol. Utech, Sherry Martin. Dealse Holland, Jeff Marr. Shayde Rude - nick, SM. Strehl.w. Erik Su...... and Let. Christian - Quarter: Erik Swenson, Jeff Mart, Leta Christiana... and Shay.. Rudenlck. Girls' in ... ble: Nichol@ U[Hch, Sherry Martin, Therese Abdo, yllzabeth Scaif, and Jenny Abdo. Vocal assist Shawn Strehlow .nd Nichol. UtacIn, Jeasica Ely ad Mlchole Poch. Special Mixed En.eabi.: Denise Holland, Nichol@ Pteth, Jamaica Ely. SM..y Hartln. Erik Swanson. lace Chrinl- imagae. Jeff Harr. Sho,4. Rudanlek, and Shawn Stiehl.. The accompanist for the students participating was Denys Bergman. Al... the Orono Nlgh School Choir .[[ended [has Chen- hassen Dinner Theater performance of the solve 1[ ym.r- self mystery musical. "The Mystery of Edwin Drood.. O Thur.day a sing June 2. The mu nIc.I we. tSc 1tt Broadway in 198b winning five Tony Award.. Including Bear Musical. 'brood" in based an Charles Dlckeru' netini.hed novel. Howard C. Leruhl !,irector RESPONSE TO MINNESOTA DAY RALLOOM LAUNCH Students and .[elf of "ch.... tlemantary Here p1..aed .ad ea[Ited be the Areal napoa.. to our May 10 hot an launch fur Nl.... ata Day. [bar .0 of our cards have been returned. Manv res,an... Included n� few, cards, and letters; one rudent received s man and another (lire[ grader) a college bulletin! Tracking the t of Our Ies.o,aw .. map Nave u. Rood weather and gmg- raphy lassons as w. e followed the c of the balloons Southeast thr... hMinn...to, Iwo,lllinate, Tana ... a.. .ad Al.b.m.. We a].. received ...pans.. Prim Mississippi and Arkansas. Letters of ,Make will be maGLed to all our "pen pale." Herb... Us. Elementary Libraries ORONO MIDDLE SCHOOL STLDEMTS LEON TO DANCE Th. Orin. Middle School Physical Education Mpartmant recently finished a run week ..it in dancing. Student• In grade 6 wore exposed to folk dance, parachutes, and robics. Inc.. %rude.,. 1. 1th grade !eared buss to .qua. dance as Hell as folk door,. The Bin grad... learned It.. dance. end fully.. dancing. The unit ended in a clams dance hold during the day for all of the students in sth grade. The student% We re tested and treated to rafr.ahmenc. following the dance. A tonne. ... held for the dance that w.te learned dor- m, the unit. Listed below ere the wl One to of the earl - no. dances: career Couple: - Ann Cl.dNail, Bob Zavltz beer D..... it: - John Richard. Chl.ra Wood, Tou Mich. Angola Kearin Line Dance: - Greer Voxt, Wade Edwards 60'a and 60'. - Courtney Finley. Joan Circulate Butterfly - I..m, Run.. Kate Greenly, Seth Muth Schottbho - Nick Jan... Rachel Coop r. Charlie Paulson, JanQ1. Ertekson Limbo . De Jr.... Greer Vogt, P..I. Anl. a,.:. a Wand Falk. - Lw Kale,. Mery Franklin, Its Sc Drill, Joanna Kunz, Charlle Pool - sun, Shelly Os[land, Sarah Vatican, Brian Co. Lindy - Erir Mar4land, Sarah Brown. Andy Dunlap, Jenny Gabber) F.. Trot - Sarah Vergln. !:ad Hoare in. David Evans, Jaclnda Job..... B,ten Cos. Sarah N.etr.l ORONO GYMNASTICS TCAM ,ORTN SHORE GYMNAST ADVANCES To RF.TI L COMPETITION On Tuesday, North 1. the ormnn Gysnasties tam held their annual their nual awards night banquet. All gyvdas v has ... en over thepea.an. The v ratty .quad ended the Y.., vl.att, a n dual at. and losing two. They war three lnvltetionals and placed second in the costa rents duet aswell s eighth In the Region 6M at. MS. yew Ch.tem broke the p,.of... school tom eat. by rurLn% I11.7 age mat 0....11 c.Mto on Jan..ry Sth. They .1. bleb the old .drool record n the .... Room lave it.. and .heed up •rating 12.75 for the now record. ar They also earned a school record in the reultln,awaat do oring 14.0. The Junmc v.nity .good was undefeated Ill. ....... with nine wine and dare toms. In dual let cm'attt loan. They wan e Invitational end von first In the conference rat. They. too. broke the old ].aloe r ..if, Inch.[ rac.cd . busscoring 27.1. On floor exercise they cats out with a ream obsol ..cord start., 12.0. Participants on eha tam this year were: Joann Kunz. Kathy Md.raom, Halley Ritchie. Great Vogt. sod Robin Forsythe. Managers for the ram wore Treim Mrdock sad Mena King. First year letter winners arts No fly Hart. Erin King and Chiars Wood. Second year later winadto are Gretchen Used, and Racket Fulkerson. Third year latter wiener is Sarah Levering. Fourth year letter wln- n.rs or.. Ellen Scherer. Debbie Levering and Traci. Bey.. Special awards for the team sure given out: Attendance. Trade Hays and Mb Levering. Rookies of the Year. Erin Kling, Chlars Wood. Sportsmanship, Trade Mrs. M..t Improved. Kelly Hart. Haedeor worker. Ellen Scherer and Kathy Anderson. Mot Attitude. Erin King. Mat Melpfut. Malta King. Best Boom Sticker, Traci. Mays. Sarah Lev- ering received recognition for her participaclon am a KARL.. finalist on the balvice beam. All-coaftranc- award..1. glv.a to the top ten Bya..... In the cast .... to Chet earn In. mast points dart.; the .moo. Mi. yr. Oruro w.. pl w.d to Mr. thr.. .cip- facts of this awards Sarah Levering. Ellen Scherer ad Ttscla Hays. The most valuable player award is voted on by the gymnasts. Ell.. Scharer r ..Ivd this award. The gymnasts recognised senior Mb Levering for her -c- co"limhrnt. In rmy .port. at Onna. She race load high hone to a he fire g,.a., to ncay. the A, he award. "plains for neat season are Sarah Levering and Rachel Fulkerson. Bark Now: Bar.h Levering. Rachel Fulkerson. Deb Lev.r- mg. Traci* gays. Ellen Scherer. entcheo Craven. 2nd Now: Coach Console Priest. Kathy Anderson, 11,11,WnOd. Joann Kunz. Coach Bob Kos.. Bc,tm: Ke 11, net. e.e VOSt. Tucie Mrd.ck, Kdlq Fllchi., P.byn I ... y,he. aria Keg. Jill Behrendt, an Dean. Re.hrn. qualified to CO"Ote in the Clans 11 Unirsd If.ne Gymn,ea cat Federatton'. Regional IV bet. Jill ..•lifted with an .11 .round core of 67.OS at I Mi..... t• Star. bet there she placed (flat in .11 individual treats -ed the all .round. Th. Rogluool Me, wee held April 10 and My 1 1. MCI... Kra. Yf.conaln. Particip.Gng gym% .... .... from South 0aho.. lot.. Halt..". His- our1. Wisconsin end Mi..... to. Jill had • oar tstanding performance finishing eighth in .11 .round, fourth on floor. efLhch on bean ad eighth on ban. Jill trains at the Orono Middle School with North Shore Cyrestfcs Association. SPORT -FIT FOR THE FEMALE ATHLETE Th. key to the ultimate athletic performs,- 1. doter - aimed by o s ability to stay Fit during their off sea- SMRT-FIT is a new progra: which I. affiliated with North Bhor. Gymnastics Meoaletion. 1, 1. being offered for the ferrule athlete Igo- 15-18 Yost$ of alp- The program .111 lotus o as entire, non-e-ight circuit training. Individual fit .... .. scome.t. nu"Itional issues and other related topic.. Oe Beef is to hap the achlan achieve and ro intail ' op p.[for.nce In and out of snort cospotltlon. SPORT -FIT will be effaced In . too ....ion .prat fr. June 20 - July 15 Rod fro July IB - August 12. Ath- let•s have the oppo.... Sty to elan up (or both. CI..... will be held on Muddy. Wednesday -red Friday from 8:00 to 9:30 • at a cost of $47.00 per four week ..salon. For more information 1.11 Mrb at 692-3082. Patti or Comic at 917-9194. GYMNASTICS SPRING SHOW PROVED GOOD ENTERTAINMENT The annual North Shen Cysreatics Association's spring show prevented .tune 4 at the Middle School f.stund gymucs of all ago from the North Shure Gvona.tic- Club. Featured in the aMe, was Norte Ro.thllebergor, Mi..... d. evn 198, Olympic cem .mbar and University of Kim .... to Gopher Gymnast. NSW Is a .n-profit organization supported by the com- unitY• it te a program for youth of all age. and ablliate. The,. are ,leas (or rs,reati.s Systematic - and competitive sum along with aerobic classes for te,n. and .dul,.. For Information and a schedule of dote. •red Itr. , the gym stlu proem, call Shari at 972-1867 MAIL. at 476-4140. For InInmtlon an adult earth or teen aerobics. call Patti at 917-9294. Is`R r SCBOOL SUPpLIEg - SCNUWANM ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 1918-99 The teachers lust ewplled a list of supplies by grade level Which we hope will guide you fn purchasing supplies you wish to furnish for your child's school year. PLEASE PVT NAMES ON ALL ITEMS gtndergarten Robot: beg with mar tar of I..... CraYma. 9 or 16 count Credit I 1 Black of oilcloth (IS" g 24"0 1 Mrs. boa of .1moves _yam, Toonb shots for Om us. Faint shirt - an old shirt with alcove. cut short - nar across .Mold.z 10 i+ Be. 2 ".if. - Ctyma. I con, ... 4 plastic contains, - pint is. 2 soft pencil erasers I - a as. Mttle of whits Sims School Ma - tiger boa Sae - plastic If possible l pocket folder. (Mo Trapper.) 1 old T-shirt with name in large letters an front and back (for gym and music t ether to lure Magic marten - WATER SOLUBLE ONLY - opt. 2 old took. Lt. tee ea an .rase.: 1 glue •tick Scte... 2 sticks of modeling clay I .arch tap. I Lou 1/2w pop.. te.ten.rs 1 spiral notebook - vide ruled l ball of knitted worsted Yarn - any color 1 boa of our color. Crad. 2 Crayons - 24 count 10 Su. 2 mono. Suit Rue. Box of tissues School Ma - sturdy ... plea.. Tonal. shoe. for By. uea 1 foldan With pack. s .1 1 fast ea. bottle of white glue 2 red felt tip peas '1 '� Ca T-ehirt With acme to brae Letter. on front a back Marking peas - HATER SOLUBLE ONLY Sri..... - pointed I old clu. Wbit. sock 1 .pits: notebook - wfde ruled Crude y 10 Mo. I pencil• I cad pencil. 1 blue and I black pro Soft .non l closed wid.-linad .,at 1 small bo. tl..... 6 pock.t fold... T...1. nMe. for pM raw Paint shirt with name written .r.... back shaWlder Plastic rlpps, pocket or school but I four ... bottle of white Sim. Cray... - 24 count Sc L...r. - poloted 1 spiral notebook for Journal writing Colored puntil. - optional M.gic market. - WATER SOLUBLE ONLY - optional Old T-shirt with name In laq. letter. an front sM back (for gym and music teachers to learn anrq Untreated 2 pockst folders to carry papers 10 No. 2 p..11s 1 large bo. of if .... a for cles..no. eau I fora. os . bottle of white awe Ens. to P.lAt shirt with oar arms. beck shoulder In marker Tennis •boom for gym uma C,...... Markets - WATER SOLUBLE ONLY Wide -lined spiral ....bout Cr. 1 after wines. break 2 vide -lined astral notebooks . Us. 2 T vide -!toed spiral notebooks - Cr. 1 1 red felt tip pen gci.acr. - pointed 2 old mucks - Cv. 1 4 2 Old T-shirt with nap In large letters on front and bulk (tor gym and music teacher. to learn oars) I three Subject ..rebook - 1, Y i Board Action Review ReMisr Meeting - April il. I9,8 • Approved A D.M ce request for Casty Anne. grade y, to complete the 1997-80 school year at Weston". • Approved the following coaches for spring sport. Brian Burger Frm. e.elstant he.aball-boys: Kevin Sharp.• aD.L.tant baomb.11-bey.; MY Falls. Holt coach -boy.: Scott E.Ldler, ...Latent AoftMllt Amy WoAbrink, assistant ssftbali; Bill Gr..n- wood. assistant track. • Approved the appointment of Lynna C. Bryant as high school buslse.. eduration computer clerk for the remainder of the 1987-88 school Year. • Accepted the na18mat1on of Sol" A. Mr... u short hour klteh.n aid. at Orono High Briton I. • Approved the contribution of $150. DO to the Orono Ld... tin. Aemoclation to offset wee. Of the M.- ognitiontrulrvmmn[ breakfast held at the end of the school Year. • Approved the following now Coommnity Education class for summer, 1988: Los. Arta Leadership In- atituu. • Approved the Chemical Health Policy. • Approved he teraln.tlen of the long ten eub.ti- tut teaching contract of Lour. Jobnsan. Orono High School. • Ap,r... d the urination of the loathing contract of EDI, A. Wilke. Schumann Elementary School. • Approved Ingalls, the .ervices of the Institute for En"'chum oral Aae.s.aent as Consul unto to Inure ccepli.nca with the federal Asb..los He- ard fiereancY Act. • Authorised the incne.e of lunch prices by ten cents for the 1988-119 school year for .,.dent and adult lunch.:, with the price of salad All" to remain at 25c. • Approved the Memorandum of Understanding as pre- pared by the Hennepin Cou 1, Attur.vy'. office. • Approved the 1982-88 final budget and the 1988-89 preliminary budget. • Au,horlt.d adalntscutlon to P."Mse A van for handicapped transportation for 1988-89. Spscial Meeting - Ap[11 14. 19gg • Approved • r .oluioo to inllislo eminent doma In proceedings for the maple Plot. Elementary School .it.. Re let Mesons - ter11 25. 1988 • Approved • ari; nq.e.t for Me[Y Ludwig• ara6 11. to comp le. the 1982-BB school year at Orono. • Approved a variant. request for Rebecca Et"rt, kindergarten. and Celia Eckert, kindergarten, to complete the 1982-58 school year at Heston". • Approved the request Of Doris Fenholt. Schumann Elementary teacher, tar A five year I.M. of ab- e commencing with the 1988-89 school year. • Avproved the request of Cathy Inglis, .Mr, hour cook at Orono Middle School, for A medical leave of absence for the reminder of the 1987-88 school ye at. • Adopted the pupil staff ratio policy as prepared by the Minnesota School Boards Association for the 1988-89 school year. • The Board of Fduc.lips Mrogni...nd .eknovisdgss with gratituds sed appreciation the troMedwa support provided by school volunteers to the Orono School system. Further, that it I. recognised that hundreds of volunteers generously donate thou- sand. of house for the benefit of the stud..,. of the Orono School District. Further, tau ,his gen- erous gift of time and effort underscores tht $up- onrt of the community for the OMO. Schools end the students it serves. • Approved the ..,.ditur. of Capital OutlAy funds for track restoration, middle school reMdallng. A football field rAM,I., .,at.. and tommuEer. softmmn totaling i148.000. • Approved the Commmnity Educatton budget for 1988-89. • AuthorlMd the change of the starting time of the May IT. 1955 retul.rly ecMdul.d bard ..t- in from 7:00 p.m. to 9:10 p.m. • Established the procedure.. polling place-. poll- ing hour., and jOda.. for the 1988 School bard El.ttion. special Me.tint - MY 5. 19" • Directed that a letter be .en1 10 Hood. Academe rejecting their proposal dated May 4. 1963. • Direct" the Superintendent and Comnoal to Are Act term. of a cwnterproposal to be presented to the Orono bard of Education for approval at its regularly scheduled ..if" on My 9. 1988. SPECIAL OLYMPIC STATE TRACK MEET HOD JUNE 1 - 8 Kristen Monson throw• the e.ftball The Orono Spatial Olympic tuck aM field rasa crawled 1a Brooklyn canter to comp., In the Weat W[[a Ana Special Olympic track and field Mat which ra. held no Wednesday. May 4. Competing for Orono 1n the softball throw was Lori Mop" - let, "gar BAY - lot. Kristen W"neon - let. Brandon Lommls - 2nd. Mike Brian lay - led. Jim Mllingh" - lot. Competitors compete in categories according to .9. I.P.- In the hundred hater dash, Lorl Hopp, 19.9 - lyd, KIMt.n W"Mon 21.4 - 4th. Roger Rey 15.5 - lot. Brandon Loomla 12.5 - Sib. For the lour hundred voter dash Mike Bried1.Y 1:42.9 - bth. and Jim 5e111ngbem L•V.9 - let. The Stott Mot was held at MC.l..W College on June 2-8, u ch the Orono tam attended also. faculty anmbet attending van: My Ebbacke, Connie Prizes And Dicc ;tow - art. many members of the Orono community served as va- mnar. at the Me[ to help Prommlo Spacial Olympics. Th..ir help was very much appreciated. NEWY�. •w.Mu o-a Ar . W.O�,1'1 a MID _IXinuranon o c•rnu tar •o.o xo.n tomes tau, w,xx fore aaiu IIU'I hws• "" MM.,U ii City of Orono P.O. Bow 66 Crystal Bay PIN 553P3 (contloued neat column, to 623.1 TO: Mark Bernhardson, City Administrator FROM: John R. Gerhardson, Public works Director DASRt June 23, 1988 SORJt Progress Report - County Road 15 Construction Construction on County Road 15 is moving along very well and is still on schedule. Currently, the construction is in the Navarre business area with the relocation of overhead and underground utilities. The relocating of utilities is the most time consuming part of the construction. Construction is also taking place at the intersection of County Roads 15 c 19 with the removal of earth and signs to prepare for turn lanes. Storm sewer is also being placed on County Road 15 and north and south on County Road 1^. The Dunwoody intersection has been reconstructed to the new design and some concrete curbing and driveways have been placed on the south side of County Road 15 west of the Good Shepherd Church. Negotiations continue with the most westerly residence in Orono. One-half of the Seton Channel bridge deck will be completed today. Bridge railings and approaches will be completed in two to three weeks so that traffic can be rerouted t: 'hat side of the bridge. Construction of the south side of tL-- ridge will commence once the north side is complete. MINUTES OF TEE PLANNING COMMISSION !OUSTING HELD JUNE 6, 1988 ATTEMNUKE 7t23 P.M. The Orono Planning Commission met on the above date with the following members present: Chairman Kelley, Bellows, Moos, and Johnson. Ranson, Cohen, and Brown were absent. The following represented the City staff: Building c Zoning Adminstrator Mabusth, Assistant Planning i Zoning Administrator Gaffron, and City Recorder Peterson. Councilmember Sims was also present. #1289 ROBERT a AM MILL 115 OLD CRYSTAL RAY RD" MDRSH CLASS III PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION PUBLIC HEARING 7t24-7t37 The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. Present for this matter were applicants, Robert s Ann Will, and owner of the property, Vernice White. Mabusth explained the proposed 3-lot plat of a total of 8.03 acres. Each lot satisfies the 2 acre dry contiguous land area requirement and the 200' width to the rear of the front yard setback line. The existing house on Lot 2, Block 2, will continue to use the existing access off Old Crystal Bay Road. The other two lots will achieve access via an extension of Wear Lane North. Septic testing has been done and confirm* adequate area available for sewage treatment systems. Kelley mentioned the issue of putting in a temporary road across Lot 2 to serve the two new lots until such time that Wear Lane North becomes a public road, in lieu of paying the fee to the owner of wear Lane North for the use of the road. Mr. will stated that because of the recommended time deadline, they may eventually have to pay the fee for the use of We-r Lane North in addition to putting in a temporary road. Mabusth noted staff's recommendation for a cul-de-sac from the outlot. Kelley recommended tabling the application until the exact location of the temporary road is determined. Mabusth recommended that the Planning Commission pass the application on to ,he Council because the access may be ar issue the Planning Commission cannot solve and should be resolved by the Council. EIEUTRS Or TSE PLARRING COMMISSION MEETING 'IId JORR 6, 1988 81289 WILL CONTINUED Bellows felt it was the Planning Commission's responsibility to define the access location before passing the application on to the Council. She also noted there is a chance that the temporary access might become the permanent access if the homeowners association denies access from the outlot. Planning Commission stated they would like tc _ee a plan with a cul-de-sac from the outloty and a plan with a 50' easement location for a temporary/permanent driveway access and its impact on the lot sizes. There were no comments from the public regarding this matter. It was moved by Kelley, seconded by Johnson, to table this application pending the above stated information. Motion, Ayes 4, Hays 0. #1025 EDNARD R. BERRICR 4115 EIGHODOD ROAD VARIANCES CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC REARING 7e38-800 The Certificate of Mailing was noted. Present for this matter were Edward and Phyllis Henrich and their attorney, George MacDonald. Gaffron explained that the applicant owns a 0.19 acre lot next to his existing house and would like to build a new house on the lot. Lot area and lot width variances are required to build on this lot. In addition, according to the proposed plan, r:. average lakeshore setback variance and hardcover variance would he needed. Edward Henrich explained his plan to eventually build a house on this property since he bought it noting that a house existed on t' lot until 1975. stated that the adjacent neighbor ,)proves of the +sal. He noted that the proposes house would n-t roach the 0-75' lakeshore setback area, has an existing sewer connection, and they have no plans for a deck or patio -- garage due to the topography of the lot. He stated -as their desire to build a retirement home on this Kelley felt is was inevitable that a future garage would be requested. 2 MINUTES OF TSB PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING SBLO JUNE 6, 1980 #1025 SE•RICS CONTINUED Bellows noted ..at according to the plans, applicant ,roposes a 3-bedroom 2-st-ry home on this lot, which is the smallest lot in tc. rea. She also felt it was inevitable that future requests will come for a deck or porch and a garage. Shs .Meted that applicant has been using this separate lot as part of his homestead lot. She suggested the concept of a mother-in-law apartment as a possible solution in this case. Attorney MacDonald stated that this lot is not dissimilar to the neighborhood and that a fully sewered lot has never been denied buildability in similar circumstances. It was noted that a major fact in this application is that the owner owns adjacent property to thie substandard lot. Attorney MacDonald suggested that the lot line could be adjusted if the 1,000 s.f. is the issue. Attorney MacDonald was advised that t'.iis could not be acccaplished. Attorney MacDonald stated that the Planning Commission and/or Council was bound to address the significance of precedents from previously approved similar applications. There were no comments from the public regarding this matter and the public hearing was closed. It was moved by Kelley, seconded by Bellows, to deny application 01025 per staff recommendation. Motion, Ayes 4. Nays 0. 81207 GENE i CATHERINE SCANLON 2815 CASCO POINT ROAD CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT/VARIANCE PUBLIC SEARING 8:02-8:13 The Affid: -.t of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were not,.... Mabusth reviewed the application to repair the shoreline, deck and boat house damaged in the Julv 1987 storm. She explained the conditzers of variance a')oroval for the deck that previously existed within the 1, -ihore area. Gene and Katherine Scanlon were present for this matter. They shcaed photos of the property and noted that the proposed replacement deck will be no closer to the side property iine than what previously existed. 3 lllan9%E OF THE PIJ MING COMMISSION MEETING HHLD JNNE 6, 1938 11201 SCANiAN CONTINUED Bellows stated the applicants have the right to have reasonable access to the lake, but felt the deck and terracing plan was excessive. She noted that the deck plans were not the same size as applicant's proposal. Kelley and Bellows recommended tabling the application pending accurate information on the deck. There were no comments from the public regarding this matter. It was moved by Bellows, seconded by Moor, to table this application pending receipt of an accurate deck plan that meets safety code standards and does not exceed the originally approved 15'x 11' dimensions; and a site plan wit. lie proposed structure. Motion, Ayes 4, Nays 0. #1268 DONAW PETERSON 3048 NORTH SHONE DRIVE VARIANCE SECOND IG.. LHM Donald Peterscr. was pres"t for this matter. Gaffron explained the revised hardcover calcule:ions from the previous ev.•iew 'ncluding the proposed future deck configuration. Kelley asked applicant what he planned for the area around 1'.e house where the plastic is proposed to be removed Mr. Pete son stated he will probably plant Rastas arourr� the house and assured the Commission that he will not put the plastic back after approval. Kelley reviewed the new facts, Planning Commission's previous recommendati-.s:, and staff recommendation. Mr. Peterson statsS he :elt restriction not •o allow anymore hardcover in tl. 150-500' area ws too restrictive and would not ii !.is addition :I this restriction vas :_!+;?roved. �3e does not want to be this ree;._icted in -ase he may want a future accessory structure. Planning Ccmr:. on felt the app'i.cant's rrquest was reasonable. it was moved by ioh�.aon, seconded by Mcos, to recommend approval of the ::^.arde,,ver variance per staff ,1 recommendation 41 and 42, subject to no additional hardcover being allowed within the 0-250' zone. nation, Ayes 4, Nays 0. MIMOTES OF THE PLAMMIMG COWISSION MEETING HELD JDNE 6, 1988 #1275 DOOGLAS JOHNSON 1399 PARK DRIVE VARIANCES POBWC HEARING 8:26-8:34 The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. Douglas Johnson was present for this matter. Gaffron explained the request for variances for 0-75' hardcover, 0-75' structure, average lakeshore setback, and building height, to allow construction of majc- additions and decks to existing residence structure. He clarified the existing and proposed hardcover calculations. In response to Kelley's question regarding replacing the foundation, Mr. Johnson stated he intends to replace only a portion of the foundation at this stage. He also stated that the neighbors have no objections to his plans and that he does not plan any steps or walkway to the lake. There were no comments from the public regarding this matter and the public hearing was closed. Kelley felt that if it is found that an entire new foundation is needed, the house should be moved to meet the 0-75' and side setbacks. Bellows felt the proposed improvements would ultimately required replacing the existing house. Mr. Johnson stated if he has to replace the entire foundation and/or tear down the entire house, he will move the house to conform with the setbacks, but it is his desire to save as much of the existing house as possible. Fie noted the location of the house and proposed auditions are due to the natural drainage ravine. It was moved by relley, seconded by Moos, to recommend approval per staff recommendation subject to the existing foundation being reviewed by a structural engineer and if the foundation needs to be replaced, the structure will be moved to conform with the lakeshore and side setbacks. Motion, Ayes 4, Nays 0. 5 MINUTES OF THE PLANNING C0M1. LIJH MEETING HELD JUNE 6, 1988 11276 DAVID C. BELL INVESTMENT CO. 3800 WAYZATA BOULEVARD CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PUBLIC HEARING 8:47-8:50 The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. Don Baker was present representing the David C. Bell Investment Company. Mabusth explained the unique history of this property's non -conforming use. She stated that the only change in the current request is a change required by the building inspector with the review of the building plans. There were no comments from the public regarding this matter and the public hearing was closed. It was moved by Bellows, s _conded by Kelley, to recommend approval of the application per staff recommendation. Motion, Ayes 4, Nays 0. #1277 BIG ISLAND BOARD OF GOVERNORS ROORD LOT 1 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT -PHASE 2 SECOND REVIEM Al Wisdorf and Larry Sharpe were present for this matter. Mabusth explained the current review involving the second phase of the conditional use permit that would allow the Big Island Board of Governors to open the facility to the public for day use recreation only. She noted that staff would like to see a detailed plan to accompany the application for a joint use dock permit. Mr. Wisdorf stated they would submit a plan to staff. Bellows felt that the proposed 8'x 8' Big Island Veterans Camp sign to be located by the dock was too large, noting that the sign should be needed only for identifying the camp location, not advertising the camp to the public. Mr. Wisdorf stated they had no problem with reducing the sign to meet the sign standards. Staff recommended that the larger camp sign be located 75' from the lakeshore setback area and that the proposed 31x 5' camp rules sign be located close to the dock. 6 MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD JUNE 6, 1986 #1277 BIG ISLAND BOARD OF GOVERNORS CONTINUED It was mcved by Bellows, seconded by Johnson, to recommend approval of the conditional use permit for phase 2 per staff recommendations 1-9, subject to the 4'x 8' and 8'x 8' camp signs be reduced in size to meet the sign standards for commercial sites and be located 75' from the lakeshore and that the 3'x 5' camp rules sign be placed by the dock. Notion, Ayes 4, Nays 0. #1178 RON TIMM 44--6 NaM SHORE DRIVE VARIANCE PUBLIC HEAttING The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. There were no comments from the public regarding this matter. Due to the absence of the appl:lcant or a representative, it was moved by Kelley, seconded by Bellows, to table Application 11278. Motion, Aye's 4, Nays 0. i1290 MEND? L. WEIRS 1376 BALDUR PARR ROAD VARIANCE PUBLIC HEARING 9:01-9:37 The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. Wendy Weihe and her architect were present for this matter. Ms. Weihe reviewed her request for hardcover and lakeshore setback variances to construct major additions to the existing residence. Shf! stated that the proposal is the only alternative to s )lving the space problem noting that due to water problems, she cannot make improvement to the basement area. Kelley noted that although the plan shows a slight decrease in both the 0-75' and 75-250' zones, the proposal involves adding structural hardcover. Bellows questioned the structural integrity of the existing structure to support the proposed additions. Ms. Weihe stated that they purposely spread the proposed additions out so that the existing structure could support the additions. Kelley felt the structural hardcover was excessive. 7 MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD JUNE 6, 1988 #1280 WEIHE CONTINUED Ms. Weihe stated she was under the impression that a hardcover trade-off would be acceptable to allow her to build her additions. Johnson felt that the applicants proposed hardcover trade-off was consistent with past applications. William Franklin, owner of Lot 1 adjacent to applicant's property, stated that he has a legal easement access across applicant's property and showed the Planning Commission a survey locating the easement. Ms. Weihe stated that according to her legal research, Mr. Franklin does not have a legal easement but has tried to work with Mr. Franklin regarding this issue. She did not feel this issue was relevant to this application. Bellows voiced cc.ncern with recommending approval of the variances prior to resolution of the easement issue. Planning Commission made the following recommendations to applicant regarding her application: The structure -to -structure setback must be 10' if detached, and if an attached garage is built► it must have footings and a firewall. Johnson and Bellows felt tae house could be decreased slightly to decrease the hardcover. Moos felt there were many issues to be resolved before making a recommendation. Kelley felt the structural hardcover should be reduced. Bellows suggested that applicant find out if the existing foundation can support building additions upward rather than outward to create less hardcover. Ms. Weihe felt that by looking at the house, it was evident that the house could not support building upward additions. She noted that she is removing a substantial amount of hardcover which should justify allowing the proposal. There were no other comments from the public regarding this matter. It was moved by Kelley, seconded by Johnson, to table this application pending resolve of the easement issue and for applicant. to review the proposal based on Planning Commission's comments. Motion, Ayes 4, Nays 0. 0 MINUTES OF THE pLAN1TING COMISSION MEETING HELD JUNE 6, 1999 #1281 DENNIS A. MITER 4731 NORTH SHORE DRIVE VARIANCE PUBLIC HEARING 9:36-9s45 The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. Dennis Meyer was present for this matter. Mabusth explained the variance request for the ' rebuilding of a detached accessory structure located on a lot without a principal residence and located 10' off the street right-of-way instead of the required 30' when the doors face out on a street. Applicant has submitted i an engineer's plan to repair the foundation in sections. t The City commenced hazardous building proceedings for this structure in 1987. Kelley felt that if the structure cannot be repaired, it should be torn down. Mr. Meyer explained the foundation work to be done noting that most of the existing foundation will still be intact. Bellows stated it was her professional opinion that the plan effectively consisted of pouring an entire new foundation, therefore, she felt the foundation should be replaced and located to conform with the setback. There were no comments from the public regarding this matter and the public hearing was closed. It was moved by Bellows, seconded by Kelley, to recommend denial of the request based on the extensive nature of the repair, however, allow the rebuilding of the accessory structure meeting all current setback standards. Motion, Ayes 4, Nays 0. 0282 RICNARD MAST 965 T01MMA ROAD VARIANCE/CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PUMC BEARING 8:46-10:05 The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. I Richard blast and his landscape architect, Dale Gustafson, were present for this matter. Kelley noted that staff recommended tabling this application pending additional information. 0j MINUTRS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD JUNE 6, 1988 i1282 MAST CONTINUED Dale Gustafson addressed the wetland issue noting the hardship as the topography of slopes and wetlands. He stated that an alternative location for the tennis court would require relocation of the sewer line and the loss of many trees. Kelley stated he has never and will never approve of filling a wetland area. Planning Commission recommended relocating the tennis court to a location not disturbing the wetland and move the sewer line to accomodate this. Mabusth recommended that the City Engineer review the application and determine the best location for the tennis court. She advised applicant that any plans for grading the shoreline and rip rap work would require a separate variance and conditional use permit. There were no comments from the public regarding this matter. It was moved by Kelley, seconded by Bellows, to table this application per staff recommendation. Motion, Ayes 4, Nays 0. #1283 GARY i BSTH E8CHER 35S6 LIVINGSTON AVENUE AFTER -THE -PACT VARIANCE PUBLIC HEARING 10:20-10 05 The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. Gary i Beth Escher were present for this matter. Mabusth explained the request for an after -the -fact variance to allow a newly constructed shed attached to the existing detached garage. She noted a discrepancy of a lot line stake which made applicant not realize that he was building on the lot line. In addition, applicant felt that a building permit was not required because he was merely replacing an existing shed. Mr. Escher stated that the new shed does not extend any further onto the lot line than the old shed. He stated he talked to the son-in-law (who will be buying the property) of the owner of the adjacent affected property and concern was expressed regarding keeping a 10' setback between the subject shed and their house for fire reasons. Mr. Escher stated that his shed is 19' from the adjacent property's house. 10 !: MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD JUNE 6, 1988 #1283 ESCHER CONTINUED Mabusth noted that because the shed is attached to the garage, a 10' setback is normally required. Mr. Escher proposed moving the shed back, however because of the pilings he would only be able to move the shed back approximately 2' which would place the shed approximately 1 .5' from the lot line. Mabusth noted that a firewall should be required because cf the close proximity of the lot line. There were no comments from the public regarding this matter and the public hearing was closed. It was moved by Kelley, seconded by Moos, to recommend approval of the after -the -fact variance subject to the shed being moved back locating it 1'6" from the property line and subject to a firewall being installed. Motion, Ayes 3, Nays 1. Johnson voted nay feeling the problem should be rectified either by lot line rearrangement or relocating the shed to the side of the garage. #1284 DONGLAS KIRCHNER 1520 HOMES POINT ROAD AFTER —THE -PACT VARIANCE PUBLIC HEARING 10:20-10:35 The Affidavit of Publication and Certif:cate of Mailing were noted. Mr. & Mrs. Douglas Kirchner were present for this matter. Mr. Kirchner apologized f:or his actions involving the after -the -fact nature of its application. Kelley explained the request involving iin after -the -fact average lakeshcre setback and 75-250' hardcover variance to allow a constructed deck. The existing residence extended 11' in front of the average Lakeshore setback and the deck now extends 26' in front of the average lakeshore setback. The 75-250' existingi hardcover prior to the constrL-7tion of the deck consisted of 25.9%, and total hardcover after construction of -:he deck consists of 29.3% (3.4% increase). Bellows noted that the adjacent property owner contacted her voicing cern regarding how fai out the deck is extended, h< this is contrary 'to their written approval to the applicants t!o keep the deck because it do Dt, obstruct their vier. 11 MINUTES OF TM PLANKING COMMISSION MEETING HELD JUNE 6, 1988 #1284 XIRCBWRR CONTINUED Johnson felt that the request should be denied because applicant knowingly violated the procedure and out of respect to the many other residents who follow the correct -procedure. Kel:.ey felt a hardcover trade-off was necessary to c 1.1-ow the deck. He recommended removing 3.4% hardcover within the 0-250' setback areas. There were no comments from the public regarding this matter and the public hearing was closed. z It was moved by Kelley, seconded by Bellows, to recommend approval of the after -the -fact variance to allow the deck per staff recommendation {2, subject to reducing the hardcover 3.4% within the 0-250' setback area and subject to no future additional hardcover or additions to deck being allowed. Approval baked on letters of approval received from the adjacent property owners. Motion, Ayes 3, Nays I. Johnson voted nay. #1295 ERIC PAVWW 2605 NAPLXRIDGE LANE CONDTIONAL USX PERMIT PUBLIC NEARING 10s45-10&46 The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. Applicant was not present for this matter, however, Mabusth asked Planning Commission to take action on this application if they found no problem with it. Mabusth explained the request for a conditional use permit to allow a permanent dock 40' in length to be constructed on the shoreline of Lafayette Bay. Y There were no comments from the public regarding this matter and the public hearing was closed. It was moved by Johnson, seconded by Kelley, to recommend approval per staff recommendation, subject to no navigational hindrance by the dock and no de-icing allowed. Motion, Ayes 4, Nays 0. 12 MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD JUNE 6, 1988 11286 GARY RODERICK CONSTRUCTION INC. 1749 NORTH FARM ROAD VARIANCE PUBLIC HEARING 10:47-10:48 The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted, Applicant was not present for this matter, however, Gaffron recommended Planning Commission take action without the applicant's presence, given applicant's previous comments to staff regarding his request. There were no comments from the public regarding this matter and the public hearing was closed. It was moved by Kelley, seconded by Bellows, to recommend denial of Application #1286 for a variance to allow a 6' fence along the side lot line adjacent to County Road 6. Motion, Ayes 4, Nays 0. #1287 JAMES F. BROOKS 3785 WATERTOWN ROAD VARIANCE PUBLIC HEARING 10:37-10:38 The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. James Brooks was present for this matter. Gaffron explained the request for a side setback variance to construct el room addition. Staff received nc comments regarding this request from the affected property owners. There were no comments from the public regarding this matter and the public hearing was closed. It was moved by Kelley, seconded by Bellows, to recommend approval per staff recommendation. Motion, Ayes 4, Nays 0. #1288 WARD E. EDWARDS 2474 CARMAN STREET RENEWAL VARIANCE PUBLIC HEARING 10:39-10:45 The Affidavit of Publication ant Certificate of Mailing were noted. Ward Edwards was present for this matter. Gaffron explained the renewal request for hardcover and lakeshore setback variance previously granted in 1985 to allow the construction of a house. 13 MIN T ZS OF 2WR PLR=IMG COIOIISSION MEWING HELD DUNE 6, 1969 #1288 mMASDB CO/TIIWW Ther'i were no comments from the public regardi matter and the public hearing was closed. It was moved by Kelley, seconded by Johnson, to recommend approval of the renewal variances per staff recommendation based on the findings and conditions of the previous review and approval in 1985. Motion, Ayes 4, Nays 0. APPROVAL or Miwrss It was moved by Kelley, seconded by Bellows, to approve the Minutes of the May 16, 1988 Planning Commission meeting as submitted. Motion, ]dyes 4, Nays 0. PLAMING CONKISSIOII RSPRESE/TATIVE Johnson was appointed to attend the June 27, 1988 Council meeting. ADJOUR18CM lOS51 P.M. The Planning Commission meeting adjourned at 10:51 P.h. 14 - Lake Minnetonka Coble Communications Commission 443 OAK STREET • EXCELSIOR, MINNESOTA 55331 • 1612) 474-55M p JU j 1 41986 To: LMCCC Commissigners F-om: Holly Hansen ' Date: June 13, 1988 Enclosed please find a copy of the minutes from our May meeting, the Resolution passed by the LMCCC at the May meeting, and some articles I thought you might find of interest. To update you on recent LMCCC activity: Dowden's sale to TRIAX seems to be going smoothly, Regional Channel 6 has arrived in the head -end in Excelsior, but the signal has "ghosting" problems and has not been sent out to subscribers yet. You may have received complaints about cable outages. There have apparently been several outages affecting subscribers served by the Mound head -end due to contruction wor'• on County Road 15. Dowden/TRIAX crews have attemped to respond to *iese outages as quickly as possible. The next meeting of the full commission will be Tuesday, August 16th. Please mark this date on your calendar. I look forward to seei ')u all in August, if you have questions or concerns in the meanti- 1i please call me. Thank you. arrow MINUTES LAKE MINNETONKA CABLE COMAUNICATIONS COMMISSION 5:00 P.M., EXCELSIOR CITY HALI, FULL COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY, MAY 10, 1988 I. CALL TO ORDER Chairman Haggerty called the May 10, 1988 meeting to o.der at 5:14 p.m. ROLL CALL Directors Present Others Present Marietta Jacobsen -Greenwood Tom Creighton -O'Connor & Lois Johnson -Mtka Beach Hannan Lesley Hughes -Seamans -Tonka Bay Kevin Cattoor -Financial Jim Olds -Excelsior Consultant Dean Johnson -Shorewood Holly Hansen -Administrator Tom Anderson -Medina Shelly Quaas -Recorder Dave Stahr -Excelsior Mary Smith-Dowden James Swartwood -Long Lake Lee Sheehy -Dowden's Attorne Peter Berzins -Minnetrista bub Clifford -St. Bonifacius Jim Millis -Greenwood Alan Fasching -Minnetrista Peggy Nelson -Deephaven Lynda Morrison -Mtka Beach Jerry Roehl -Medina Dennis Haggerty-Deephaven Tim Adams -Orono Gerry Schmieg -Victoria II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Motion 5.10.88.1: Olds moved, seconded by Anderson, to approve the minutes of April 12, 1988 as written. Motion carried unanimously. III. CONSIDERATION OF DOWDEN'S COMPLIANCE WITH REGIONAL CHANNEL 6 REQUIREMENT OF FRANCHISE Tom Creighton of O'Connor and Hannan briefly reviewed a recent report that he sent to Commission members. It explained the Transfer of Ownership. Creighton informed the Commission that the Franchise says that Dowden cannot sell the Company without Commission approval. Creighton also explained to the Commission that there is a contingency in the Resolution that is due to the fact that lie has not yet received some material (see page 2 of Resolution). Creighton also told the Commission that he can not find any just reason to deny the transfer, legally it looks good. Creighton also informed the Commission that Jim Vaughn of Triax solved the Regional Channel 6 interconnect. It will consist of a hard -wire interconnect to Brooklyn Park. On the financial aspect of Triax, Creighton feels that there will be some pressure on Triax to get more subscribers and they may have to look at the rate structure. Creighton also feels that Triax has the eAperience to make the system work. Financial Consultant Kevin Cattoor did a financial review of Triax. He feels that the debt to equity ratio is about 3 to 1, many cable systems work on a ratio of 4 to 1. Cattoor said a 3 to 1 ratio is a normal debt to equity relationship in the financial field. T. Creighton then reviewed the proposed Resolution with the Commission (see appendix A). - 1 - LMCCC MINu,rFs May 10, 1988 III. CONSIDERATION OF DOWDEN'S COMPLIANCE WITH REGIONAL CHANNEL 6 REQUIREMENT OF FRANCHISE - CONTINUED D. Johnson asked if Mr. Vaughn of Ti'.ax gave a cost estimate on the hard -wire interconnect to Brook_yn Park. Creighton stated that Dowden and Triax are working out the cost, he does not have a figure as of yet. The hook-up should be up by June 1. T. Creighton's analysis of the Transfer is to enforce the existing franchise requirements. IV. PUBLIC HEARING Chairman Haggerty opened the public hearing at 6:01, no public comment was heard, the public hearing was closed at 6:G2. Motion 5.10.88.2: Anderson moved, seconded by Olds, to accept the Resolution as written on Appendix A. Motion carried unanimously. V. REPORTS A. TREASURER Jerry Roehl informed the Commission that the audit for year ending December 31, 1987 should be completed soon. Motion 5.10.88.3: Roehl moved, seconded by L. Johnson, to approve the Just Claims as written on Appendix B. Motion carried unanimously. B. ADMINISTRATOR Hansen would like W.F. Denny & Co. to perform a limited Financial review of DowdenIs year ending December 31, 1987 on a few specific items including Franchise Fee calculations. There• is money budgeted for this purpose. T. Adams would like Hansen to come back to the Commission with a written proposal from W.F. Denny & Co. explaining what they will be doing. Hansen informed the Commission of the NFLCP (National Federation of Local Cable Programmers) conference coming up July 14-16 in Tampa, Florida. The cost per person would be approximately $750.00. This conference is based on local access. Also there is a conference coming up June 15-16 at Madison, Wisconsin co -sponsored by the University of Wisconsin and Miller -Young and Holbrooke. Tile cost per person would be approximately $300.00. Motion 5.10.88.4: Anderson moved, seconded by D. Johnson, to authorize up to 3 Commission members to attend th conference in Wiscon,,;in. Motion carried unanimously. C. DOWDEN CABLE SYSTEMS M^ry Smith handed out her monthly report. Net gain from January 1 through April 30, 1988 was 495. D, Johnson asked Smith what the costs would be for hard -wire int rconnect to Brooklyn Park. Smith said that additional costs would be approximately $30,000.00 to $50,000.00. VI. ELECTION OF OFFICERS Motion 5.10.88.5: Adams moved, seconded by Johnson, to approve thr, following: Chair - Dennis Haggerty Vice Chair - Tom Anderson Treasurer - Jerome Roehl Secretary - Lesley Hughes -Seamans Motion for the above officers was carried unanimously. Motion 5.10.88.6: Hughes -Seamans moved, seconded by Nelson, to place Birbara Brancel, Jim Olds and Tim Adam; for nomination of the Ell-�cutive Committee at large. Motion carried unanimously. VII. ADJOURNMENT: Motion 5.10.88.7: Anderson moved, seconded by D. Johnson, to adjourn the May 10 1988 meeting at 6:22 p.m. Motion carried. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTPD, Sheliy Quaas -2- LMCCC JUST CLAIMS 4/13/88 - 5/10/88 CHECK N DATE PAYABLE AMOUNT ACCOUNT 10077 4/15 Holly Hansen $ 717.08 10078 4/15 Monique Basart 21.31 10079 4/15 William St wn 47.94 10080 4/15 Patricia Ward 107.62 1652 4/15 P.E.R.A. 85.94 1653 4/15 P.E.R.A. 9.00 1654 VOID 1655 VOID 1656 4/29 Commissioner of Revenue 131.58 10081 4/30 Holly Hansen 726.08 10082 4/30 Monique Basart 155.29 10083 4/30 William Strohm 7.99 1657 4/30 P.E.R.A. 85.94 1658 5/10 Shelly Quaas 60.00 1659 5/10 Gross Office Supply 9.23 j 1660 5/10 Wager's Inc. 40.47 1661 5/10 Bank Excelsior 591.30 1662 5/10 Commissioner of Revenue 136.94 1663 5/10 MN Suburban Newspapers 43.48 1664 5/10 Paychex 34.05 1665 5/1C N.W. Bell 61.88 1666 5/10 O'Ccnnor r; Hannan 1,464.71 1667 5/10 Monique Basart 6.30 1668 5/10 Holly Hansen 26.84 1669 5/10 U.S. Postmaster 22.50 1670 5/10 Gross Office Supply 123.12 TOTAL CLAIMS $4,716.59 BANK EXCELSIOR Beginning Balance $19,255.46 ` Claims (4,716.59) /' Jck Triax Tfr. Deposit 5,000.00 Miscellaneous Income 60.nn Adj. per bank 06 ENDING BALANCE $19,593.93 STATE CAPITOL CREDIT UNION Balance* $ 6,256.29 *Does not reflect 2nd qtr. interest C.D.'s 90 day @ 6.5% due 7.'8/08 $23,000.00 180 day @ 7.0% due 10/8/88 20,000.00 Payroll ray roI 1 Payroll Payroll P.E.R.A. P.E.R.A. Life MN Payroll Taxes Payroll Payroll Payroll P.E.R.A. Sect'l. Svcs. Office Supplies Office Supplies 941 Taxes MN Payroll Taxes Trznsfer Exp. Sect'l. Svcs. Telephone Transfer Exp. MilP:ge Mileage Postage Office Supplies l LAKE MINNETONKA CABLE COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.,t22.I APPROVING THE SALE AND TRANSFER OF OWNERSHIP IN CABLE SYSTEM AND TRANSFER OF CABLE FRANCHISE OF DOWDEN CABLE PARTNERS, L.P. TO TRIAX MIDWEST ASSOCIATES, L.P. WHEREAS, Dowden Cable Partners, L.P., a Delaware limited partner- ship, (hereinafter "Dowden") owns, operates and maintains a cable television system (the "System") for the Lake Minnetonka Cable Communications Commission (hereinafter the 11 Commission" ) pursuant to the terms and conditions of a Cable Communications Franchise Ordinance, as amended; and WHEREAS, the Commission has the authority and responsibility to adopt, coordinate, administer and enforce the Cable Communications Franchise Ordinance and the right to approve any transfer of said Cable Communications Franchise Ordinan and WHEREAS, Dowden desires to sell and otherwise transfer substantially all of its business and assets used or useful in connection with the ownership and operation of the System and the Cable Communications Franchise Ordinance to Triax Midwest Associates, L.P., a Missouri limited partnership (hereinafter "Triax"); and WHEREAS, Triax agrees to continue to manage, operate, and maintain the System in substantially the same manner as Dowden and to assume all Dowden Franchise obligations mnd execute and accept the Cable Communications ordinance, as amended; WHEREAS, Dowden and Triax have requested the consent from the Commission to a sale of the System and transfer of the Cable Communications Franchise Ordinance of Dowden to Triax; and WHEREAS, the Commission considered Triax's technical ability, financial condition, and legal qualifications in a full public proceeding after due notice and a reasonable opportunity to be heard; and WHEREAS, the Commission finds no reasonable basis to deny the request for transfer to Triax under the terms and conditions set forth below. F NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Lake Minnetonka Cable Communications Commission that: t 1. The Commission hereby approves the transfer of the System and transfer of the Cable Communications Franchise Ordinance of Dowden Cable Partners, L.P. to Triax Midwest Associates, L.P., conditioned upon a review by the Commission's legal counsel as to the legal sufficiency of the organizational and creation documents of the limited partnership prior to closing and subject to an actual closing of the transaction on or before August 31, 1988, pursuant to the terms and conditions as evidenced by the 9 information submitted by Dowden end Triax to the Commission. 2. The Cable Communications Franchise Ordinance requires that the franchisee under the Cable Communications Franchise give notice to the Commission prior to any assignment or transfer of such Franchise and give the Commission the right under certain circumstances to purchase the Cable Communications Franchise. The Commission hereby approves such assignment and transfer and waives its right to purchase the Cable Communications Franchise arising as a result of any assignment and transfer of the Cable Communications Franchise from Dowden to Triax. Pursuant to and consistent with the terms and conditions of the Cable Communica- tions Franchise Ordinance or Section 238.083, Minnesota Revised Statutes, Triax shall have the authority to pledge and collaterally assign, and to grant a security interest and lien with respect to, the Cable Communications Franchise to any lender of Triax as security for payment of the debts of Triax, and any such lender shall be entitled to all of the rights of a secured party under the Uniform Commercial Code of the State of Minnesota. 3. That the Commission consents to and approves the transfer of the System and transfer of the Cable Communications Franchise Ordinance from Dowden to Triax subject to the following conditions: a. Triax shall accept the Cable Communications Franchise Ordinance by giving written notice of acceptance to the Commission and thereby agreeing to perform all of the terms and conditions of the Cable Communications Franchise Ordinance, within thirty (30) days of such transfer and assignment, unless the time for acceptance is extended by the Commission. b. With its acceptance, Triax shall furnish to the Commission and in accordance with the requirements of the Cable Communications Franchise Ordinance, the performance bond, evidence of insurance, letter of credit, and such other items required by the Cable Communications Franchise Ordinance. C. Triax shall agree that the remaining provisions of the Cable Communications Franchise Ordinance remain in full force and effect following the completion of the transfer and assignment. -2- d. With its acceptance, Triax shall pay all costs and expenses of the Commission, including legal and other consulting fees, incurred as a result of this process and to the extent such costs and expenses have not previously been reimbursed. e. Dowden shall have completed the activation in the member Cities of Commission of Regional Channel 6 to the satisfaction of Commission. f. Triax shall agree for the term of the Franchise to designate cable channel 8 as the Government Access Channel, cable channel 20 as the Public Access Channel, and cable channel 32 as the Educational Access Channel, and further, not to utilize these channels for any other purpose except with the prior written consent of the Commission. 4. That Triax shall, within sixty (60) days after the closing, file with the Commission a copy o: the deed, agreement, mortgage, lease or other written instrument evidencing such transfer of ownership and assignment of said Cable Communications Franchise Ordinance, certified and sworn to as correct by Triax. 5. That in the event Triax or Dowden fails to comply with any of the above requirements within the time specified, unless the time is extended by the Commission, this Resolution and any and all approvals set forth herein shall be null and void. 6. The Cable Communications Franchise Ordinance is in full force and effect, and there have been no amendments or modifications to the Cable Communications Franchise Ordinance, except for those on file in the office of the Commission. The above listed resolution was moved by Commissioner Thomas Anderson and duly seconded by Commissioner James R, Olds Jr. The following Commissioners voted in the affirmative: UNANIMOUS , and 1988. The following Commissioners voted in the negative: Passed and adopted this 10th day of May LAKE MINNETONKA CABLE COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Chair �• engis%, .a gerty T easurer Jerome Roehf Cable Ops Need Editorial Control my TAsmsa I. Satin ol" DENVER — The continuing fracas in Kansas City over an attempt by the Ku Klux Klan to run a racist program on the local cable eystem's access channel raises some fundamental issues about the nature of cable television and its status under the First Amendment. It also should serve as a warn- ing to other communities around the country about what happens when cities intervene in the program- ming decisoos of cable y systems. Like many com- munities, Kansas City insisted in its cable ' t franchise that the system .J provide access to any group wishing to run a program 'When, when one of ti• , turn- ed out ; •' lan, and one of those programs turr,.ed t•t '. Xsl version of Race & Reason, the oomka-i sold feet. Some City Council members prt chang- ing the access channel to a local -origination chan- nel so that the cable system would have the authority to reject the Klan's program. The American Civil Liberties Union then got into the act and said it would sue if the proposal is passed because the action had clearly been aimed directly at the Klan program and was, therefore, a violation of the Klan's civil rights. It would seem the ACLU might have a pret good case. To get the Klan's abhorrent ideology] out of the picture, imagine that city had intervened in the efforts of a community group to nun a program about equal housing opportunities. The point is that if the aim of the city is to provide' equal access for n.t voices, then it must provide access for all voices, not just those that are popu- lar. But there is another choice, a better one. That would be to allow the cable system to do what good newspapers do — to make an editorial decision about which shows should tun and which should .iot. A newspaper does that every day, deciding which stories deserve more and which deserve less +pace. Newspapers every day turn down both irticles and advertising they regard as offensive or n bed taste. Cable systems ought to have the same -fight. And the cities ought to recognize that it is in heir own best interest to ensure that cable systems uve that right. There is no reason, for example, that a cable ystem in ManhattAn should have to carry quasi - pornographic programming because the guts forces it to provide seem to any group that wants to nun a show. And there is no reason that the system in Kansas City should have c run a program from the Klan that violates every stan- dard of taste and morality. Because, after s!1, it is the cable system which subscribers hold respon- sible for distributing such trash. Most cable systems are less than eager to challenge the cities on these access issues, knowing that the cities have the power to deny franchise renewals. But the Kansas City case should make it abundantly clear that the fight for editorial control by cable systems is the cities' fight, too. For if municipal authorities want to get into the business of deciding what shows will or will not run, they invite a hornet's neat of lawsuits charging govern- ment interference with First Amendment rights. Other cities might be well advised to pay atten- tion to what is happening in Kansas City mid take steps now to avoid such a fracas in their own towns. And the beat way to do that is to rewrite franchise provisions to vent editorial control over the cable system in the hands of the cable operator, where it belongs. O /1Le.t v ael.,�,,r't , -� 6 ' Cable Penetration Hits 52%: Nielsen NEW YOR K — Cable pen- etration reached 52.0 percent in May, up from 51.1 percent in February and 49.2 percent a year earlier, scoor'iing to es- timates released last week by Nielsen Media Research. The figures marked the larg- est February -to -May increase since 1984. The U.S. now has 46.3 million cable households. Nielser said, compared with 45.5 million in February and 43.3 million -in -Man 1987. ❑ Continental, NoroWest Battle In IVIN Court Over Franchise my Larry is"" ST. PAUL, MN — In a jury trial that began At U.S. District Court here on April 18 and is expected to continue for at least another week, lawyers for this city and Continental Cablevision Inc. traded arguments with the attorney for Nor -West Cable Communica- tions over the letter's right to operate a second franchise in the city. The case's outcome is viewed as having wide implications for the cable industry at large because Nor -West's lawyer, Harold Farrow, claimed his client's First Amend- ment rights were violated and thus is challenging the constitutionality of the franchising process. According to sources familiar with the case, the trial has been "p-instakingly slow," during which the defead"nts — St. Paul and Continental — have called "well over" 20 witnesses, while at least 15 witnesses have testified on behalf of the plaintiff, Nor -West. Amos Hostetter, chairman of Continental, the nation's third -largest multiple systems operator, testified in April before a con- gressional subcommittee that the company has spent more than $1.5 milliwm dtfending itself in the cam. The city's attorney, Ernest Reveal III, has tried to discredit Nor -West for not challeng- ing the franchising process when the city first solicited bids. Nor -West realised that the city was granting only one franchise, Mr. Reveal told the jury recently. The suit has been in the courts for five years. In 1933, the City Council selected Poor -West as the winning franchisee, but Mayor George Latimer vetoed hoice, which he said was the inferior sp, .t, and the council then seler:ed Continental. Nor -West t 6 i suit against the city and Continental the next year, but it was dis- missed by Chief Judge Donald Alsop, who is presiding over he current trial. Mr Farrow appealed to the 8th U . S . Circuit Court of Appeals, raising the issue of the First Amendment right of freedom of the preen. The appellate court remanded the came Vsck to Judge Alsop after the 11. S. Supreme Court ruled in the "erred Communica- tions case that cable operators have some First Amendment rights, but those rights must be balanced the legitimate concerns of cities. In that came, Mr. Farrow also rep- resented a company that didn't win ■ franchise. House Committee Okays Bill Limiting Kids -TV Ads ft Jwm ws Averse WASHINGTON — In a 39-3 vote. the House Energy d Commerce Committee last week passed a bill that would limit .he amount of advertising a 'rV station can air when broa3astiag children's pro - WOMBS. who the aurrsmdy Proposed advertising restrictions was .accepted in place of reinstating tho FCC's former guidelines. The subcommittee also had scrapped a controversial por- tion in the original bill which would have required broad- casters to air one hour of educational programming a day for children Isee Muki- channef Neer, May 23• page 9). Without thoa: changes NAB probably would have flatly op- posed the children's television bill, the association said. According to the bill, broad - asters would not have to adhere to the advertising re- strictions until Jan. 1, 1990. Rep. Edward Markey 1 D- MA1, chairman of the telecom- munications subcommittee, said the effective date of the restrictions "should give (bcoadasters) adequate time to make adjustments in pro- gramming and practices. •' The bill also allows the FCC to modify the advertising time restrictions if necessary after Jan. 1, 1993, to respond to any changes in the video market- place. The bill, which passed the telecommunications subcom- mittee just one week before the committee's action, was sent to the House. It is expected to be voted on soon after the House returns from its Memorial Day recess on June 1. Supporters of the package expect it to be passed by the House, but it was unclear last week how the Senate might respoa,' -he bill. Unfit ,ropos• 1, TV na- tions woul., be able to broad- cast 10 1/2 minutes of com- mercials an hour on weekends and 12 minutes an hour on weekdays. The legislation does not apply to cable We - vision. Currently, children's pro- grams are not subject to any advertising restrictions. The Federal Communications Rep. Thomas Tauke (K- iA). ■ First Amendment purist, blasted the bill as being "clearly unconstitutional . " Advertising and other com- mercial speech, he said, is pro- tected under the First Amend- ment. To shrink that zone of peOtaction, the federal govern- saeot must &pwoustrate a "substantial government interest" (part of the courts criteria in judging First Amendment issues), Rep. Tauke said. He mid no re- search has been submitted to either of the committees to show what commercials if any caws harm to children and low many commercials may cause harts young viewers . Rep. Tauke suggested that the TV industry set its own guidelines in this area. He of- fered an amendment to the bkll that would have allowed vari- ous members of the TV indus- try to write their own advertis- ing code, but it was shot down in ■ 4-16 vote by the Energy Committee. Another provision of the bill would direct the FCC to re - ,new how well a station has served its children's audience at license -renewal time, every five years. The bill allows the FCC to develop the criteria to be used in such a review. The hill also would instruct the FCC to come up with a set of standards that would assure adequate separation between program content and com- mercial content. A children's television bill offered by Sens. Howard Metzenbsum (D-OIl) and Timothy Wirth ID -COI would in part reinstate the FCC's for- mer advertising restictions. U Commiawoe used to reqube that bro.aa tere only air 9 1/ 2 minutes of advertisements an hoar on churen's television during the week and 12 minutes an hour on weekends. Those restrictions were drop- ped by the agency in 1964. The National Association of Broadcasters said it would neither support nor oppose the bill, which made it through the committee without changes. The bill had undergone several revisions in the subcommittee, MN Passes Fairness Law regarding Cable Overbuilds by Larry jeffs ST. PAUL, MN — Minne- sota Gov. Rudy Perpich has signed into law a measure that says oompeting second cable franchisees must abide by the same requirements as incum- bent operators. The law was passed over- whebmineiy by the state Legia- lature in response to concern among the slate's cable opera - ton over the threat of unfair competition by potential sec- ood franchisees, much sa util- ides. according to Michael Martin, executive director of the Minnesota Cable Commu- nications Association. While the law does not pre- vent overbuilds from occur- ring, it does make sure second cable companies must compete on equal terms, such as paying franchise test to munici- palities, servicing the same geographic area as the incum- bents and providing public, education and governmental socess channels and facilities, Mr. Martin maid. Under the Legislation, which takes effect Aug. 1, cities will be free to require more stringent provisions in other terms of the second system's franchise. Such provisions — added at the request of munici- pal organizations — could in- clude requirements for a fi- beroptic system, specific chan- nel capacity, and letters of credit or performance bonds, Mr. Martin said. In addition, the law prohibits utilities from creating incentives for their customers to subscribe to their cable ser- vices instead of the existing companies', he said. And the law prohibits utilities from dis- criminating against existing cable companies on pole-ot- tschment fees. "The law is not designed to keep out anyone," Mr. Martin said. "If the city desires to issue a second franchise, the terms of the agreement have to be equal. It's not a protec- tionist measure; we went to erasure a level playing field," he added. The law will apply to any entity seeking to build a mecood cable system and will ensure a level of fairness between franchises serving the same community, Mr. Martin said. Although Minnesota has no overbuilds, MCCA decided to lobby for the law because the slate has some of the same conditions that led Florida to establish a similm law last year, he amid. In Florida, investor-uwned power utilities created submidiaries to get into the cable businew Mr. Martin said, adding that such entities ••create an economic rate bow that makes it difficult to man- pete." "In Minnesota, there have been some large investor - owned utilities that have got- ten into telecommunications in the Northwest, such as fi- beroptic links between cities." Mr. Martin said. He said MCCA has "taken a lesson" from the.Florida cable association, and adopted some of the language it used for that state's legislation "before we get into an overbuild situ- ation . " Mr. Martin pointed out that the new law "did not oomme di-ectly out of" the current federal court trial going on be- tween Continental Cablevision Inc., which operates the St. Paul. MN, cable system, and Nor -West Cable Communica- tions, a losing applicant for the same franchise (see related story, page 32). The association has not taken sides in the case, and "is absolutely a bystander," Mr. Martin said. The new Minnesota law closes an apparent loophole which would have permitted satellite master antenna tele- vision systems to expand into the orrnmunity from the build- ings Where they operate and reroa.a unregulated if they serve fewer than 1,000 homes. Mr Martin said. $, doming the loophole. SM/.TV systems would be subject to similar terms and coat itions of traditional cable synt-mns if they expanded bey-ond from an apartment or conaominiurn coomplex, he a". O m� J(cAa.,11J , dr� G 88 - HBO to Switch ;satellite Feeds NEW YORK — Home Box tNfice Inc. said It will switch the satellite positions of its meet Coast feed and its East .'.oast "combo feed," which in- -ludes promotions for Cinemax provarmoing, this summer . Bob Zitter, HBO via p reel - dent, network ---does, maid the chaoW•,by patting the combo feed 66 a different satel- lite than the regular East Coast feed, will give systems a backup in case of transmission failure. HBO's West Comet feed is now on Satcoar 3R, Transpon- der 13, and the East Coast combo feed on Galaxy I. Tran- sponder 1. The company said the tran- sition will be phased in July 1- Aug. 1S as follows: A duplicate combo feed will start July I on Satcom 3H, Transponder 12, with the cur- rent east combo feed to be de- activated on July 14. On July 18, the new west feed will start, with the current west feed being deactivated on August 4. On Aug. 8, the new east combo feed will start, with the duplicate feed being deac- tivated on Aura. 1S. ❑ r LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT M UGL-- V A G E N D A Regular Meeting 7:30 p.m., Wednesda , June 22, 1988 TONKA BAY VILLAGE HALL 4901 Manitou Road (County Road 19), Tonka Bay 1. Manages nt Plan Advisory Committee - 5:30 p.m. 2. C�11 to Order 3. Roll Call 4. Minutesi May 25, 1988 5. Financial Condition: A. Monthly Financial Report B. Bills 6. Committee Reports A. Water Structures & Environment Committee B. Lake Use Committee C. Advisory Committee D. Public Relations & Education Committee 7. Other Business A. 1989 Budget B. Other 8. Adjournment 6-17-88 LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT REGULAR MEETING TONKA BAY VILLAGE HALL May 25, 1988 The regular meeting of the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District CALL TO was called to order by Chairman Rascop at 7:30 p.m. of Wednesday, ORDER May 25, 1988 at the Tonka Bay Village Hall. Members present: Richard Garwood (Deephaven), Robert "J ilsbury (Min- ATTENDANCE netonka), Jan Boswinkel (Minnetonka Beach), John Lewn.an (Minnetris- ta), Tom Reese (Mound), Robert Rascop (Shorewood), tiarvin Bjorlin (Tonka Bay), John Malinka (Victoria), and Robert Slocum (Woodland). Communities represented: Nine 191. MINUTES: Boswinkei Moved, Bjorlin Seconded that the minutes of the MINUTES April 27, 1988 regular meeting be approved. Motion, Ayes [91, Nays [01. Bjorlin Moved, Garwood Seconded that the minutes of the May 16, 1988 special meeting be approved. Motion, Ayes 191, Nays [0]. DNR DREDGING POLICY: Judy Boudreau, DNR Area -drulogist, outlined DNR the DNR dredging policy; the Department's emphasis is on minimal DREDGING impact. They promote the use of seasonal docks in muck before al- POLICY lowing new excavation. While the law mandates their forwarding ap- plications to cities and watershed districts, but makes no mention of notifying the LMCD, the DNR has been including the LMCD in its review of dredging applications; Wildlife and Fisheries should also be included in reviews. The DNR feels that some dredging could be beneficial to fish, especially around docks, and no dredging applica- tion has been denied. A good control needs to be devised to minimize sediment, seepage, and containment; there is limited DNR staff and time to make adequate inspections on the Lake. MCWD BRIEFING: New Watershed Managers C. Woody Love and Bob Erickson invited Board members to attend Managers' meetings. FINANCIAL REPORT: Reese Moved, Bjorlin Seconded that the monthly FINANCIAL financial report be approved; that the bills be paid; and that the REPORT 1987 Financial Statement be approved and distributed. Motion, Ayes [91, Nays [0]. WATER STRUCTURES 6 ENVIRONMENT C0*D1ITTEE: Lewman Moved, Garwood Seconded that the Water Structures and be accepted. Motion, Ayes [9], Nays (0]. Environment Committee report Cliff Reep appeared for Bill Niccum's development on Seton Lake. NICCUM The committee had forwarded the application to the Board without DEVELOPMENT recommendation, subject to Mound city action. Reep reported to the Board that the site plan submitted hae the dock going through the island, not by-passing it; however, to comply with DNR requirements, the proposed dock must by-pass the island. That being the case, LMCD Board Minutes May 25, 1988 Page 2 Niccum would need a variance from the LMCD for length. Reep will submit a new site plan or apply for a variance. Pillsbury Moved, Garwood Seconded that in the Rockvam matter, the ROCKVAIM Crder be amended to indicate amenities as they appeared on the orig- ORDER inal rerliest. Motion, Ayes [91, Nays [0]. Boswinkel Moved, Reese Seconded that the Jennings Cove amendment, JENNINGS reducing the structure WSU in agreement with the City's action, be COVE approved. Motion, Ayes 191, Nays [0]. AMENDMENT DNR Shoreland Management Rules were distributed with the Board packets. LAKE USE CO`LIITTEE: Water Patrol's Deputy Chandler reported that factors contributing to the recent fatality in Smith's Bay were rough winds, the ejection of a detachable seat in the small fishing boat, and no life jacket. Another incident, a skier tun over by a propel- ler, is under investigation. Charter boat inspections will be com- pleted soon; there are 5 more to inspect out of 16 boats. The Water Patrol appreciates the dock spaces provided at Rockvam Boat Yards, City of Excelsior docks, and Grays Bay Marina; variances may be needed for emergency use, however. The Water Patrol is planning an Open House for the public on Saturday, June 11; various agencies, including the LMCD, will be represented. Pillsbury Moved, Garwood Seconded that the Lake Use Committee report be accepted. Motion, Ayes 191, Nays [0]. Garwood Moved, Bjorlin Seconded that (1) the renewal Special Event Permit application for the Lake Masters Swim Club's five -mile swim on July 23, 1988 be approved; and (2) the new Special went Permit application by the City of Mound for fireworks from the Lake on June 19, 1988 be approved with the following stipulations: A. The barge must remain 300 feet from shore. B. Four chase boats must be provided by the City. C. Marker buoys be placed at 7 p.m. and removed after ,)oat traffic leaves the bay. D. Removal of fireworks' debris must be included in the cleanup. Motion, Ayes [9[, Nays [0[. Reese Moved, Garwood Seconded that the 1988 liquor license to the Queen of Excelsior, Inc. be approved. Motion, Ayes 191, Nays [0[. Pillsbury Moved, Garwood Seconded that the following renewal charter boat registrations be approved: DNR SHORELAND RULES W.P. REPORT SP EVENT PERMITS: LAKE MASTERS SWIM, 6 CITY OF MOUND QE LIQUOR LICENSE LMCD Board Minutes May 25, 1988 Page 3 Al 6 Alma's I Al 6 Alma's II Al & Alma's III Al 6 Alma's IV Al 6 Alma's Choral "C." Karob I Lady of the Lake Miss Deduction North Shore Charters The Sunboat WhyKnot III and the following new charter boat registrations be approved: Al & Alma's VI Small World Arbitrage Sunboat II Dowager Empress Motion, Ayes [9), Nays [0). CHARTER BOAT REGISTRATIONS Pillsbury Moved, Garwood Seconded that the inspection report be ac- DEPOSIT cepted for the Holiday -Johnson Crappie Contest and the deposit REFUND refunded. Motion, Ayes [9], Nays [0]. OTHER BUSINESS: Garwood Moved, Pillsbury Seconded that the Chairman PR appoint a committee to meet with Kelvin W. Miller, the Public Rela- COMMITTEE tions Consultant. Motion, Ayes [9], Nays [0]. Reese Moved, Garwood Seconded that the subcontract between Arndurfer ARNDORFER/ Associates and Barr Engineering for the Comprehensive Management BARR SUB - Plan for Lake Minnetonka be approved. Motion, Ayes [9], Nays [0). CONTRACT Bjorlin Moved, Pillsbury Seconded that resolutions transferring the setting of fees by resolution according to the new Code be approved as follows: (1) Resolution No. 61 setting fees for licenses for multiple docks, FEE mooring areas, launching ramps and docks in excess of 100 feet RESOLUTIONS and for Special Density licenses. (2) Resolution No. 62 setting fees for licenses or permits for per- manent docks, variances, District Mooring Areas, deicing, special events, and charter boat registrations. Motion, Ayes [9), Nays [0). Boswinkel Moved, Pillsbury Seconded that the effective date on the CONTRACT Consultant Contract with Frank Mixa be moved from March 1 to August DATE 1, 1988. Motion, Ayes [9), Nays [O]. Executive Charters announced that Will Washburn had withdrawn all interest in the company, that Brad Hoyt is still the liquor license EXECUTIVE applicant. CHARTERS LIQUOR Lewman Moved, Pillsbury Seconded that a temporary liquor license LICENSE be granted the Executive Charters until the July Board meeting. LMCD Board Minutes May 25, 1988 Page 4 Motion, Ayes [6), Nays [3); Boswinkel, Lewman, Malinka, Pillsbury, Rascop, and Slocum voting Aye, and Bjorlin, Garwood and Reese voting Nay. Boswinkel Moved, Reese Seconded that a temporary beer -and -wine AL 6 ALMA'S license be granted to Al 6 Alma's until the July Board meeting, and BEER & WINE that if necessary, the investigation be done in cooperation with LICENSE the Mound P.D. to facilitate the license process. Motion, Ayes [9), Nays [0]. The Chairman welcomed John Malinka of Victoria as Director to the Board. Malinka is completing the term of Peter Hill. The Chairman will address the Spring Park Council about its concerns reglyding the resolution proposed by the City of Minnetonka is support of the LMCD's comprehensive Plan. ADJOURNMENT: Pillsbury Moved, Boswinkel Seconded at 8:57 p.m. that ADJOURNED the meeting be adjourned. Motion, Ayes [9), Nays [0]. Submitted by: Approved by: Carl H. Weisser, Secretary Robert Rascop, Chairman DATE: June 17, 1988 TO: Officers Bruce Anderson and Dan Fischenich FROM: Chief Mel Rilbo SUBJECT: Letter of Appreciation Mr. Burton Thies of 440 Virginia Avenue in Long Lake, stopped this officer and wanted to relay to me the good feelings he had towards the police department's response to the medical involv- ing his son on May 22, 1988. His son has since then died. He mentioned the fact that Officer Fischenich was at his house before he hung up from 911 and that Officer Anderson was there within a minute later. He wanted to express how grateful he is for the response of the po�,ce department, stating that they deserve compliments as they no doubt, many times, have criticism brought against them. C' • I gilt.,✓ /G• /%si' L Ao W% azea �•:c�c a�art7..c.av w,i�/ie4��uxr� e! '�'u`" G•' yi(�/ c'U! clQu v w�zo klr zx ew" 7-iV, / C / 41; �J ..%�,, Qzc1'� J�I�Ec-t,� /I�-� '�• j It �ctlru-, G...O 4% a Qe.G 3� cuGa / a.. X/, ,�4 Ca 4.e, ,,�.r .u�c..�ds Ykt�• c:� C'Ert.xl�1� ri �.c.r. ac zc� Aelvi x4e e,�; v,%6 . ev lilt et d' Ham' .rn :"v ril ezx.( a :-el �iJl u�4.s} ,cJc'tt u,c!✓ .rlr+a � �.4.C'ly� f,! ,�i�rl�c-J /..tuJ LS June 17, 1988 Mr. Grant Wenkstern Lakeview Golf Course 405 North Arm Mound, Minnesota 55364 Dear Mr. Wenkstern, 1'olel,h,nie a ; a ;111 Ih.1,.,,,h ',a.1 "•,iI i nu,F,-lit City of ORONO Post Office Kot. Hh • (instal Ki%. MLnne.—to _'' • \luni„1,.,! Otli„, On the North Shore of Lake 31innrton ka Police Department L. ng 1_akt. %I\ .. Mif. kit HO Ch,c(„f Police I wish to thank you for having your people well organ- ized, with one on County Road 19 and one on the golf course, to lead our squads to Mr. James Spensley, who suffered a heart attack on the 16th at 12:10 p.m. Our officers appreciated having this diiz-tion available to them. It would appear that you have your staff very well pre- pared to handle such an emergency situation. Sincerely, Melvin Kilbo Chief of Police MK: cjh jin Servrng N:-1h Lake A9rnnctonka Communitrc _ c.r Oroni i o•;r, t Ak( Vaiir •• •,: ; Ej� rr1, •• ;y'7r,t,•+ f"del i {:In. r� .�� � .• t Citjy of ORONO I'u llilu. I{��\ •� • ( •�,t..t I:.. �inu,r.. �.. _ • �I'. ;t, �I..t Ir'k . Orr Ih, .\rrrth Slur•,• (if Lake llimietu:rka Police Department June 17, 1988 Mr. Lyle Thernell 5737 Sheridan Avenue South Minneapolis, Minnesota 55410 Dear Mr. Thernell, On June 16, 1988 at 10 minutes after 12 noon, the Orono Police Department received a call of a medical at Lakev+ -w Golf Course. Upon arrival Mr. James A. Spensley was unconsci- ous, with Mr. Oser, Mr. Grooms, and Mr. Therness doing CPR on Mr. Spensley. They stated that they had him breathing on his own 4 or 5 times. Our officers applied oxygen and the Heart -Start and the patient was responsive and talking when loaded onto the North Memorial Air Care helicopter. The patient was in defibbed and was shocked twice before the ground rig from North arrived and twice after. �t ll. Ail {t!1 I want to especially thank each of you for being alert and having the training to keep Mr. Spensley responsive until med- ical help arrived. Mr. Thernell is a retired Minneapolis Police Officer and lead the others in CPR. Your actions made it p:)s- sible for Mr. Spensley to make it to the hospital. Sincerely, Melvin Kilbo Chief of Police MK: cjh { . It: •r'. I:d r P el %tt C.o•nrrnr'uhc u! U-can.+. I :. 1016 ! • ,•t, ' . t". —If t • St•'r• ; Pat.' i.i 'r r June 17, 1988 Mr. Russell T. Asleson 2394 Blaine Avenue, Apt. 2 Wayzata, Minnesota 55391 Dear Mr. Asleson, Ih•I�r I. •1i'r'�'1 City of ORONO 1'n.t 11l1u�• �{..� rr. • 1'r�.I.r� 1{.•� \iu;•rr .,�r,. _ • \i �1 rt;i.. On dw Nnrtb Short, of Lakr 'limn lonka Police Depart meii t 1,s �1.11 All HI) On June 16, 1988 at 10 minutes after 12 noon, the Orono Police Depart7ent received a call of a medical at Lakeview Golf Course. Upon arrival Mr. James A. Spensley was unconsci- ous, with Mr. Oser, Mr. Grooms, and Mr. Therness doing CPR on Mr. Spensley. They stated that they had him breathing on his own 4 or 5 times. Our officers applied oxygen and the Heart -Start and the patient was responsive and talking when loaded onto the North Memorial Air Care helicopter. The patient was in defibbed and was shocked twice before the gr� and rig from North arrived and twice after. I want to especially thank each of you for being alert and having the training to keep Mr. Spensley responsive until med- ical help arrived. Mr. Thernell is a retired Minneapolis Police Officer and lead the others in CPR. Your actions made it pos- sible for Mr. Spensley to make it to the hospital. Sincerely, Melvin Kilbo Chief of Police MK: cjh �` r. ('. .. •r. ."r(. C'r :1' f r' (K�' r.i• .,,.r..•rr. h:..r• r, h' 7 �(Ilr .r {',1 fc h i.l �tm: 47.. 7 ; In June 17, 1988 Mr. Ladd Oser 8115 West 35th Street St. Louis Park, Minn. 55426 Dear Mr. Oser, city' of ORONO On tl,r.Vor& Shute n` I.akr.tttuurtauka Police, Department ��;,. 12t IIIJI. KII Bpi Chic! of 1'0.c On June 16, 1988 at 10 minutes after 12 noon, the Orono Police Department received a call of a medical at Lakeview Golf Course. Upon arrival Mr. James A. Spensley was unconsci- ous, with Mr. Oser, Mr. Grooms, and Mr. Therness doing CPR on Mr. Spensley. They stated that they had him breathing on his own 4 or 5 times. Our officers applied oxygen and the Heart -Start and the patient was responsive and talking when loaded onto the North Memorial Air Care helicopter. The patient was in defibbed and was shocked tvfice before the ground rig from North arrived and twice after. r I want to especially thank each of you for being alert and d having the training to keep Mr. Spensley responsive ut:til med- ical help arrived. Mr. Thernell is a retired Minneapolis Police 'r Officer and lead the others in CPR. Your actions made it pos- sible for Mr. Spensley to make it to the hospital. Sincerely, ;i '. Melvin Kilbo Chief of Police 1 MK: cjh June 17, 1988 Mr. George V. Grooms 3065 North Shore Drive Wayzata, Minnesota 55391 Dear Mr. Grooms, Cit" of oRoNo Oil t1w .Vard, Slofire (,f Lik,• 11tn,1,•tm;k,t Pol ice Delia rt ixieil t �,� a I. 11 dl •.� I �-,•. On June 16, 1988 at 10 minutes after 12 noon, the Orono Police Department received a call of a medical at Lakeview Golf Course. Upon arrival Mr. James A. Spensley was unconsci- ous, with Mr. Oser, Mr. Grooms, and Mr. Therness doing CPR on Mr. Spensley. They stated that they had him breathing on his own 4 or 5 times. Our officers applied oxygen and the Heart -Start and the patient was responsive and talking when loaded onto the North Memorial Air Care helicopter. The patient was in defibbed and was s►locked twice before the ground rig from North arrived and twi after. I want to especially thank each of you for being alert and having the training to keep Mr. Spensley responsive until med- ical help arrived. Mr. Thernell is a retired Minneapolis Police Officer and lead the others in CPR. Your actions made it pcs- sible for Mr. Spensley to make it to the hospital. Sincerely, Melvin Kilbo Chief of Police MK: cjh UHUNO POLICE DEPARTMENT f MESS KEY CONTROL NUMBER (OCA) CONT AGENCY NCIC (DENT. (CAG) DATE/TIME REPORT MADE E C 1 / / I M N 10 1 2 1 7 / e-- Sk L N!R DATE RE►ORTEO (R►D) TIME MPD ITR►) LOCATION GRID NOR It GN) DAY; S M T W T 0 / s / / PLACE COMMITTED (PLC) HAD Codes vI m L NOR HMO SOUAD OR BADGE (SON) TIME ASIG. (TAS) TIME AMR. (TAR) TIME CLM. (TCL) M 00 Z / /.1, / Is — ►hone O W / fZ / A — Radio L NOR ISN UCS OFFICER ASSIGNED JASSISTED BY A — Alarm I — to Peon UOC _ may C., / / / I V — Visual L R UCIC I M— Mail M5/ / / _ T — Other OFFENSE ❑ OR INITIAL COMPLAINT ` OTHER PRINCIPAL: _ // Zl/ 244L I / LAAL, f�s�'.��r T J COMPLAINT[:] OFFENDE A ❑ VICTIMJJ " D.O.O. OU NESS ADDRESS BUSINESS PHONE HOME ADO SS HOMEPHONE /t4,u• iN S a S OTHER REPORTS INCLUDED Impound ❑ Prop Inventory ❑ Implied Consent ❑ Accident Report ❑Tqs ❑ Influonce Meport ❑ Photos ❑ REPORTING PEMSON❑OFFENOEA❑VICTIM ❑ D.O.B. BUSINESS ADDRESS BUSINESS PHONE HOME ADDRESS HOME PHONE / 1 SEE CASE FILE ROLL CALL l] Warn 6 Release Dept. Assist Message Delive, Treated 6 Transported Advised Citation Issued Detail Completed G.O.A. 1a flo s,�n - To (� -�- z - 6 X I I Ira S f _ Y • G RC)6 wa.z 0 I 30 G ' T. h�SLCJ �af� y- 1,3 z35 Q>r- M Qa. �+ E, M Lc- �� t3 -y t .r 3a - z 6 , 3 7 I+-�.�- S >� ,UF�z � �9t 237 s to � f M �� / I� :� a zip ,, " - e Z: 6- - "K COPY TO: List CO ATTNY ❑ CIT ATTNY ❑ COURT ❑ CHIEF OTHER. DISPOSITION Unfounded Cleare¢iby arrest Ref. other agency Inactive Other OFFICER_1 I SUPERVISOR'S SIGNATURE '` .1 ORONO I�OLICE DEPAR CM NT I Form 3 FOLLOW UP/ CONTINUATION REPORT OFFENSE F 1 N COMF'IAINANT 2 O ADDRESS ADDITIONAL CITAILS01 vflSS )F IN,,ESTIC.ATiONS. E)C S_- i DISPOSITION. Unloundod L� Cloo,.d by o„os, f i i._ PRO 14 FOR '/ EIATi Un , , E•c. Cl,d. R.1 olh., ogr�cy j Inoc+,.o I Olho, SI(INI I) _ % y 0 off. — DISPOSITIONS. Unlo..nd•d CI•a.•d by o,,•.- _ f E+c. CI,d. i R•l. o�Ivr op•-ncy Ino(I-e ORONO INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 278 INDEPENDENCE • LONG LAKE • MAPLE PLAIN • MEDINA • MINNETONKA BEACH • ORONO MS OLD CRYSTAL BAY ROAD LONG LAKE, MINNESOTA UM DR. THOMAS B. MICH M.A. PENHOLT SUPERINTENDENT OF SCHOOLS ASS'T. TO THE SUPERINTENDENT (i12)473-7313 (612)473-7313 May 25, 1988 Patrolman Chuck Schauss Orono Police Department P. 0. Box 86 Crystal Bay, Minnesota 55323 Dear Patrolman Schauss, I want to thank you for participating in our Law Unit. Your spending an hour with our 6th graders will help them to think of the Consequences of destroying property, shoplifting or drinking at parties. Si n e �y, Herb Wolner Orono Middle School i DR. It.l. MINTER N.V. NELSON MRS. MARV[L A. SONGART SIGH SCHOOL PRINCIPAL MIDDLE SCI100I. PRINCIPAL ELEMENTARY SCHOOL. PRINCIPAL (612)473-5472 (612)473-7301 (612)473-7317 C. NAYNE SMIT11 RONALD E. GILBERT ASSOC. HIGH SCHOOL PRINCIPAL INTERMEDIATE SCHOOL PRINCIPAL (612)473-5472 (612)473-7301 v 1 June 10, 1988 Chief Melvin Kilbo c/o ORONO POLICE DEPARTMENT 445 Willow Drive Long Lake, MN 55356 Dear Chief Kilbo: In recent months, I have had the opportunity to see first hand, how professional, capable and dedicated, a number of your officers are to their chosen profession. I spent the most time with Officer Bruce Anderson and must say "thank you" to him for accepting and answering any and all questions asked of him. I'm sure it is not the easiest task to perform your job and remain as intense and aware of what is happening around you when someone is in the squad car with you. We did have a chimney fire occur during Bruce's shift as well as a DWI. Bruce's handling of both incidents was commendable. The thorough steps Bruce took in explaining each process and test used to determine whether a DWI citation is to be issued were done with courtesy and proficiency. In getting the opportunity to to spend time with Bruce, I discovered there are specialized areas of interest which he has in the law enforcement field. I hope when opportunities arise for him to pursue those areas that he is able to do so and bring that knowledge back to the Department to serve the citizens of Orono. I also had the opportunity to spend time with Mark Moran, Jim Morrow, and Jim Morowczynski. The time spent with Officer Morowczynski was for a special traffic detail. Although I realize people never appreciate being stopped for a traffic violation, those persons stopped within Orono on this particular afternoon, were treated with respect by Jim whether it be for a warning or a moving violation. Jim is an officer whose qualities I believe the residents of Orono appreciate. I, for one, d�. There was also a personal injury car accident in Minnetonka Beach while with Jim. The help shown to those people injured before the North Ambulance arrived by both Jim and Officer Larry Tomczyk who also responded, was very gratifying to watch. Both officers took control of the situation with confidence and worked together. During my time with Mark Moran, I had the opportunity to go from one end of the spectrum to the other with two very different incident's. One, a littering citation in Long -Lake and the other, a felony arrest warrant in Wayzata on a drug charge. Although the degree of seriousness for these offenses was different, both parties were treated with respect. Mark's professional ability in his chosen field is to be commended. r Although I thought it might be difficult or uncomfortable for Officer Jim Morrow to have someone riding along with him since he is the newest member of the Department, I was wrong in thinking that way. I was pleased to have the opportunity to get to know Jim better and I hope that he remains with Orono for a long time to come. I know he gives 100% to this community after observing his work. Chief, to sum it up, thank you for giving me of Orono's finest perform under difficult everyone of your officers could be commended They should all be proud of the work they do. to know that such competent and personable themselves daily to protect and serve the Please extend my thanks to them all. sincerely, c Barbara A. Peterson Councilmember, City of Orono the chance to see some conditions. I am sure at one time or another. It is a real pleasure officers are giving of residents of this area. WAYNE O.POPMAM RAYMOND A. MAIII POOCR W. SCMNOSPICN DE N11Ca KAUr MAN ROSCaT A. MONISM NOLrt A. W0RD(N O.MAMC WMITCMtAO SPUCE o.WILLIS rwtotRICA S. MICNAR Df O. ROSCRT JOMNs ON OARV R. MwCOMfCR R06CRT S.6URa MUOM V.PLUN11(YT.111 /wCoe a ICK C SROWN TMO'4AS K. DEw6 JAME6 P.STCILEN JAM[f 6. LOCKMAft ALLEN W. MINDCOAK ER C L1I►ORD M. OP[CNE D. WILOAM KAUFMAN MICMACL O. ►RCCMAN AGWAXO SAM MYCR6.111 LAN D. to PCL JANIC 6. NIATEMON THOMAS J. 6ARRETT POPHAM, HAIK,SCHNOBRICH 61 KAUFMAN, LTD. � 3300 PIPER JArrRAY TOWER MINNEAPOLIS. MINNESOTA SS402 JAMS A. PAYNE TELEPHONE D. RANDALL NOYER GREGORY a. SCOTT DAVID A JONES SIR -]]]-4600 SRIAN N.JOMNSON ROSANNC 0.2.10CNWtsER LEE C.OMCCMY TIMOTHY W. KUCK P06CRT C. CAS•TLCO ALAIN rMCCON T[l[COPI[R CAROL a. SWANSoN TMERCSE M. MANKtL LCSLIC OILLCYYC It31 OIR-334-8713 •RUC[ A PCT[Rf ON JULit rLEMINO-WOLFC All CM AtL t. NILAM (]21 *1&-234-2761 JULIE A. SWEITZCR DE DOMAN A. OTSON Postal M. LYNN THOMAS C.MIELtNHAUSCN RACMERY M. JONES THOMAS M. SIPK1Ne 1211612-234-2603 MICMACL D.CMRISTCNSON DCNSON K. WNIYNET ROMERT C. MOILANEN J. MICMAEL SCHWARTZ KATHNYN M. WALKCR 7MOMA0 r. NELSON TOOD M JOHNSON OEOROC J.SOCMA TMOM As J. PA010 Su ITC 2400 JCr/RtY P. CAIRNS 6MANC R. KCLLCY DAVID L.MASMMALL Moo SCVENT[ENTM STREET LOUIS P. SMITH SUSAN M. Wtls RATMLECN M.MARTIN DCNVCR, COLOAAOO 00202 6RUCC M. LITTLC MARK I.TCN tYCK JOHN C.CNILOS T[LC/NONE ]O]-Ss]-It00 HANK F. PALMA DUANC R. NO[CKCM DOUGLAS P. SCATON RUSSELL S.PONCSSA TMOMAS C.SANPIC0 TELCCOPICR 3OZ-092-2104 6RYAN L.CRAW/ORO wI CHARD A. KARLAN AIATTMCW C. DAMON •RUC[ 6. MC►M [[T[RS SUITE 300 SOUTH JOMN W. PROVO SCOTT C. RICHTER 1600 M STREET, N. W. CLLEN SUE PARKER or COUNSEL PAUI J. ION STROTM WAeMINOTON, D. C. 8003e OR[OORY O. •ROOK[R IRED L.MORMISON SCOTT A. $MIT" TCLCPMONC 908-ORS-5300 WIL►IA61 M. OJILC. JR. DONALD M. L[WIf C LII ADCTM ^.THOMPSON T[L[COP1[w tOt•6t6-SL6 TCRRANCC A. COSTCILO JOSEPM D. VASS KCITM J. NALLCLANO DIRECT DIAL NUMBER 60IAN W.OMM AAOMITTEO 1N 10.. MARK S. PCTERSON STEVEN A. CMCLESNIK .AOMITTLO IN ILLINOIS 612-334-2642 May 24, 1988 Officer James Cornick Orono Police Department P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Dear Jim: I just wanted to take a minute to compliment you on your report in the recent "in control" DWI case against Neal Anderson. In these in control cases, the most difficult thing is often to convince the jgty that the defendant was engaged or might engage in some driving conduct. Your initiative in checking under the hood to see if the engine was warm and checking for fresh tire tracks added some nice evidence to the file to help convince the jury on this issue. These kinds of minute details often make the difference between winning and losing a jury trial. For you and all of the officers - keep up the good work. Very truly yours, 4 Scott E. Richter cc: ✓ Chief Melvin 7.11 o MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE SCHOOL BOARD OF ORONO INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 278 HELD ON MAY 17, 1988 The regular meeting of the School Board of Independent School District No. 278 was held on Monday, May 17, 1988. Present: Dave McKown James Franklin Thomas Mich Don Anderson John Maresh William Fenholt Kitty Crosby Lucie Taylor Dr. Mich reported tkat a successful Junior/Senior Prom was held on Friday, May 13; that the Norwegian Independence Day, Syttende Mai, was celebrat9d today at Schumann Elementary with elementary students serving/hosting nicety-tnree Senior Citizens; that on Thursday, May 19, Dr. Ernie Stachowski will be in the District as part of the staff development program with principals; that John Julsrud and Pat Jones are in charge of an activity day for 8th graders for the close of the year; that the National Honor Society/Scholarship evening held at the high school prior to this meeting was definitely a highlight of the school year and he expressed congratulations to the students and appreciation to all who so generously contribute to the scholarship fund for our students. Dr. Mich expressed appreciation to Kitty Crosby for all of her work/efforts for the district scholarship fund. Dave McKown also expressed appreciation to Kitty Crosby for representing the Board at the Awards Night at the high school and the effort/time she devotes in the scholarship area. Member Jim Franklin introduced the following Resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION DETERMINING THE NECESSITY FM AND AUTHORIZING TBE ACQUISITION OF CERTAIN PRDPERTY BY PROCEEDINGS IN EMINENT DOMAIN WHEREAS, Independent School District No. 278 is the owner of an elementary school site located in Maple Plain, Minnesota; and WHEREAS, the School Board has previously leased the property; and WHEREAS, the School Board has heretofore determined that it is necessary for Independent School District No. 278 to obtain additional elementary school space; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the School Board of Independent School District No. 278 as follows: 1. Acquisition by the School District of all interests in the following described property is necessary for.the purpose of providing required elementary school space for educational instruction: The East Rods at South 16 Rods of the North 20 Rods me Southwest 1/4 of the Southeast 1/4 and East 40 Rods of the North 30 Rods to the South 60 Rods. Also the North 16 Rods of the South 76 Rods of the West 16 Rods of the East 40 Rods, all in the Southwest 1/4 of the Southwest 1/4 of S 24, Twp 118, R 24. 2. The School District attorney is authorized and directed on behalf of the School District to acquire all interests in the real estate described by the exercise of the power of eminent domain pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 117 and is specifically authorized to notify the owners of intent to take possession pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 117.042. The School District attorney is further authorized to take all actions necessary and desirable to carry out *he purposes of this Resolution. The Motion for adoption of the foregoing Resolution was duly seconded by Member Don Anderson , and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Kitty Crosby, John Maresh, Lucie Taylor Jim Franklin, Don Anderson, Dave McKown and the following voted against the same: None whereupon said Resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. STATE OF MINNESOTA) ) as. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN) I, the undersigned, being the duly qualified and acting Clerk of Independent School District No. 278, Orono, hereby certify that the attached and foregoing is a full, true and correct transcript of the minutes of the School Board of Independent School District No. 278, duly called and held on the date therein indicated, so far as such minutes relate to eminent domain proceedings regarding the Maple Plain Elementary School site, and that the Resolution included therein is a full, true and correct copy of the original thereof. WITNESS MY HAND officially as such Clerk this 17th day of May, 1988. aIM a ah6ol Board Dr. Mich reported on the progress of the renovation of the middle school and informed the Board that plans, materials, etc. were available in the Board Room for their comments/suggestions. He stated that he erred in previously noting that the renovation included classroom carpeting. The cost for carpeting classrooms is budgeted separately from the carpeting for the hallways and the renovation of the intermediate/middle school office, both of which are part of the summer project on renovation of the middle school. Bill Fenholt provided the Board with information regarding the roof situation at the middle school. He stated that, according to experts, roof replacement could take place every twelve to thirteen years but, even though the middle school building dates back to 1950, there has never been a roof replacement. Resaturation has been done and the costs have been kept at a minimum through preventive maintenance. An infra -red roof scan was completed showing that it is necessary that replacement take place on the East, 1961 Addition to the Middle School. UPON MOTION by Jim Franklin, seconded by John Maresh, the Board of Education authorized the administration to take bids on the replacement of the roof on the East, 1961 Addition to the Middle School. UPON MOTION by Kitty Crosby, seconded by Jim Franklin, the annual School Board Election returns as submitted by the Election Judges were approved as follows: Dave McKown 100 Lucie Taylor 85 Write-in votes 5 Total votes cast were 104. WHEREUPON Dave McKown and Lucie Taylor were declared elected to Board membership for three-year terms. UPON MOTION by Don Anderson, seconded by Lucie Taylor, the meeting was adjourned. C Kather ne F. Crosby, Clerk Approved: ice, .. Dave McKown, Ct6irman BULLETIN association of metro olitan munici alities June 21, 1988 TO: AMM Member City Officials FROM: Gary Bastian, President and Maplewood Councilmember RE: MEMBERSHIP ON AMM LEGISLATIVE POLICY COMMITTEES -BE PART OF THE AMM VOICE -BECOME INVOLVED -MAKE YOUR CITYS' POSITION FELT IF YOU ARE NOT CURRENTLY A MEMBER OF AN AMM LEGISLATIVE POLICY COMMITTEE , please take a few minutes to read the brief descriptions of the five standing committees (on back) and volunteer a small amount of your time to make an impact by filling in and returning the attached form. The committees will begin meeting in late July and will meet every other week through September. The Board of Directors will be making committee appointments on July 7th. and wou.Ld like a clear indication of those officials who are willing to devote time and energy to serve on one or more of these committees. Mayors, Councilmember, Managers, and Administrators will receive this Bulletin individually. However, if other city employees such as finance directors, housing officers, planners, etc. would like to serve, please submit their names. The Board would also welcome suggestions for specific issues or concerns to be studied by the committees. Please contact either Roger Peterson or Vern Peterson in the AMM Office (227-4008) if you have questions. NOTE: PRESENT COMMITTEE MEMBERS WILL CONTINUE FOR ONE MORE YEAR AND NEED NOT RESPOND TO THIS BULLETIN. �1LE �.JIJ 2 4 183 university avenue cast, st. paul, minnesota 55101 (612) 227 COMMITTEE DESCRIPTIONS: 1. METROPOLITAN AGENCIES COMMITTEE (Kevin Frazell, Chair) Considers legislative issues and non -legislative issues related to the Metropolitan Council and Metropolitan Commissions. The Committee monitors the structure and relationship between the regional entities and local units of government and reviews amendments to Metropolitan Development Guide Policy Chapters or any new chapters developed. In past years, the Committee has developed policy on land use planning, metropolitan significance, solid waste management, surface water management, etc. 2. MUNICIPAL REVENUES COMMITTEE (Larry Bakken, Chair) Considers any matter concerning revenues, taxes, and city expenditures. Included are state aid formulas, state aid dollars, levy limits, property tax and fiscal disparities. The Committee will be looking very carefully at the effects of the 1989 property tax system changes, distribution of state revenues, etc. 3. HOUSING AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT (Mark Bernhardson, Chair) Concerns itself with all issues related to economic development and housing including subsidized housing, affordable housing, and activities of the Metropolitan HRA. Reviews all amendments to the Metropolitan Council's Housing Guide Policy Chapter. Will carefully review existing tax increment financing (TIF) law and the laws defining local development/redevelopment authority. u. TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE (Duke Addicks, Chair) Studies all major issues related to transportation and transit at the metropolitan, state and federal levels. The ten (10) elected officials who represent the AMM on the Transportation Advisory Board (TAB) and the e:.ght (8) city staff officials who represent the AMM on the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) are encouraged to be members of this Committee along with other city officials. 5. GENERAL LEGISLATION COMMITTEE (Karen Anderson, Chair) Examine issues which have impact on metropolitan area cities outside the scope of other AMM committees. In the past, this Committee developed policy on municipal self insurance, municipal consolidation, pensions, cab:.e communications, PELRA Amendments, etc. ASSOCIATION OF METROPOLITAN MUNICIPALITIES (Please return by not later than July 1st.) NAME CITY POSITION CITY PREFERRED MAILING ADDRESS (street) (city) zip code PREFERRED TELEPHONE CONTACT NUMBER PLEASE INDICATE COMMITTEE CHOICE 1st. and 2nd. MUNICI?AL REVENUES METROPOLITAN AGENCIES HOUSING AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT GENERAL LEGISLATION TRANSPORTATION SUGGESTED ISSUES TO BE STUDIED: PLEASE RETURN TO: Association of Metropolitan Municipalities 183 University Ave., East. St. Paul, Minnesota 55101 Attention: Carol Williams as ociation of Igo , metropolitan 0 municipalities June, 1988 183 University Ave. East, St. Paul, Minn. 55101 NO. 30 AMM Anneal Meeting - 1988 The fourteenth Annual Member- ship Meeting of the Association of Metropolitan Municipalities was held at Nicklow's Greek Restaurant in Crystal, Minnesota the evening of May 18, 1988. Annual Meetings con- sist of a social hour, meal function, and business meeting which includes election of officers, reports, and guest speaker. In the past several years, the Board has attempted to provide a unique theme to make this annual end of May outing memor- able. Once again the feedback from attendees was positive. Nicklow's specializes in Greek and American Cuisine so naturally, authentic Greek delicacies were provided throughout the evening. The food ranged from authentic Gyros to Athenian Chicken to Baklava. In addition to authentic Greek food, traditional Greek danc- ing and music were provided to en- liven the social hour. Tom Aaker, Mayor of Crystal, wel- comed the record number 149 regis- tered city officials and guests repre- senting 42 member cities to the four- teenth Annual Meeting. Mayor Aaker indicated that although Nicklow's was in Crystal, it did serve a tri-city function since Robbinsdale was across the street and Golden Valley just three or four blocks away. The AMM does wish to express its grati- tude to Mayor Aaker and the host city of Crystal for graciously provid- ing the delectable Greek hors d'oeuvres during the social part of the meeting. The main speaker for the evening was Assistant Commissioner of Re- venue for Tax Policy, John Tomlin- son. Mr. Tomlinson spent 14 years in the House of Representatives, 1973 through 1986, during which time he became an expert on tax issues. He John Tomlinson was Tax Committee Chair in 1983 and 1984. John's main task of the evening was to discuss the 1988 property tax bill in terms of admini- stration goals and impacts. He went into some detail on how the various aid formulas worked which is ex- plained in a summary bulletin distri- buted to each city May 20th. The tax bill failed in some important aspects. It did not provide enough Cil property tax relief while it did provide more homestead relief than was needed in outstate. It provided too much relief to outstate and not enough to metro, particularly suburban metro. Relief was not balanced by need. It did not provide simplicity It did go far in equalization but it went too far in that cities with the same mill rates were not treated the same. It did provide significant property tax relief to offset some of the large school tax increases and farm land devaluation. Mr. Tomlinson felt that the bill left much to be done next year. Neil Peterson in his closing duties as AMM President thanked the many officials who served the AMM on committees and recognized the retir- ing Board members with special certi- ficates. Those leaving the Board this past year are John Drew, St. Paul Councilmember, Boo Thistle, former Coon Rapids City Manager and AMM Past -President, and Benno Salewski, former St. Paul Assistant to the Mayor. Neil briefly reviewed the highlights of the AMM year including some comments on the legislative wrap up. He recognized the officials attend- ing from the new member cities of West St. Paul and So. St. Paul and Jim Kelly, the first intern coordinator of the new AMM legislative contact program. He commented that while increasing activities and communica- tion through well attended outreach breakfasts, dues were held to a 3% increase, the same as levy limitation for cities. A record number of officials participated in AMM committees, 130 officials representing 52 cities, and over 60 persons attended the first Annual AMM 'Shank and Tummy' social. Although the AMM did not gain Fiscal Disparities changes, the effort of working together and com- promise to develop unity was un- paralleled and based on some of the legislation enacted this past session there is even greater need for future unity. He concluded his remarks by recognizing the Board Director atten- dees and the five committee chairs. He noted the record turnout and thanked everyone for the support given him this past year. President elect Gary Bastian made a few remarks and as his first o" cial act presented retiring President Neil Peterson with a plaque containing a copy of the Athenian Oath. He thanked Neil for his dedication, ser- vice, and leadership during the past year. AMM Officers Elected for 1988-89 Gary Bastian President Gary Bastian, Maplewood Council - member, was elected President of the Association of Metropolitan Muni- cipalities for the 1988-89 year at the Annual Meeting held May 18, 1988. Chosen for Vice -President was Rob- binsdale City Manager Walt Fehst. Also elected were eight Board Direc- tors. Gary Bastian was elected to the Maplewood City Council in 1979 and ayain in 1983 and 1987. He has served on the AMM's Board of Directors since 1982 and Chaired the AMM's General Legislation Com- mittee from 1985 until his election to Vice -President in May 1987. This past year Gary was also a member of the AMM's Executive Committee and Legislative Coordinating Committee. Gary currently serves on the Board of Directors for the East Communi- ties Family Center and is Chairperson of the Maplewood Arts Task Force. He was a Board member of North St. Paul -Maplewood -Oakdale Chamber of Commerce from 1979 to 1983. Since October 1985 he has been the project director for the Minnesota School Labor -Management Commit- tee operating out of the Bureau of Mediation Services which has been funded under federal and state grants. Under the grant he has been responsible for identifying and start- ing 20 pilot labor-management com- mittees in public schools throughout the state. He serves as the vice- chairman of the Minnesota School Labor -Management Committee, a state- wide group of fifteen employer and employee organizations. Gary is a member of the Minnesota State Com- mittee on Labor -Management Rela- tions and is a frequent lecturer on labor-management relations and com- munication and team building skills. Prior to heading up the school Walt Fehst .. Vice President LMC program, Gary served as the Research Staff Director for the Sen- ate Independent -Republican Cau- cus. His service with the caucus began in 1974. He also served the Legislative Commission on Em- ployee Relations as a staff person and authored the 1985 local govern- ment collective bargaining report. In April of 1987, Gary began his own law practice focusing on three areas —public sector labor law, local government law and art law. In addi- tion to his practice of law, Gary is the regional representative for two na- tionally known artists. He also oper- ates framing and landscaping busi- nesses. Gary earned his Bachelor of Sci- ence degree in 1970 from the Univer- sity of Wisconsin -Fiver Falls and graduated from William Mitchell Col- lege of Law in 1974. He was admitted to the Bar in 1975. Gary and Kristine have two sons —Alexander (8) and Christopher (3). In his spare time he likes to paint in watercolor, run, bike and play racquetball. His goal is to change careers one more time and become a full time artist. Walt Fehst, City Manager of Rob- binsdale since 1979, was elected to the Board of Directors in May 1984. After serving for many years on the AMM Revenue Committee, Walt was appointed its Chair in 1985. He see ved this past year on the Legislative Coor- dinating Committee and will be a member of the Board Executive Com- mittee in the coming year. Walt is a graduate of the University of Notre Dame where he received a Bachelors in Business Administration. He re- ceived his Masters in Business Ad- ministration from Northwestern University. He also serves as Execu- tive Director of the Robber ,dale Hous- ing and Redevelopn ant Authority. He served as the chief negotiator on behalf of the City and the RHRA in providing for the $2.5 million First Robbinsdale Bank Redevelopment Project in the downtown area using Tax Increment Financing. This 40,000 square foot building will serve as the prime anchor in the redevelopment efforts of Robbinsdale's Central Busi- ness District. Also, several senior citizens housing developments and handicapped housing developments have been built over the past few years in redevelopment districts. Prior to coming to Robbinsdale, he was the Administrative Assistant to the City Manager at Joliet, Illinois. There he was instrumental in recom- mendations for Capital Programs. He also performed the bulk of pre- paratory work for collective bargain- ing with the City's five unions. He was Executive Director of the Com- munity Relations Department and Finance Director and Comptroller. Walt has been active in the Rotary Club, Minnesota City Managers Association and served on several committees for the League of Minne- sota Cities. Fie enjoys fishing, golf, jogging, scuba -diving, canoeing, wil- derness camping, and Great Books Discussion Club. He is married and has one child. Eight officials were elected to serve on the Board of Directors for two- year terms. Eight Directors have one year remaining. TWO-YEAR TERM Karen Anderson, Minnetonka Councilmember Mark Bernhardson, Orono, Administrator Ed Fitzpatrick, Fridley. Councilmember Kevin Frazell, Mendota Heights Administrator Carol Johnson. Minneapolis Councilmember Gerald Marshall, Brooklyn Park Councilmember Gloria Vierling. 1,hakopee Councilmember John Walker, Newport Mayor CONTINUING BOARD MEMBERS Mentor (Duke) Addicks, Minneapolis Legislative Liaison Larry Bakken, Golden Valley Councilmember Bob Long, St. Paul Councilmember Sharon Klumpp, St. Louis Park Asst. City Manager Diane Lynch, St. Paul Asst. to the Mayor Donald Ramstad, Maple Grove Councilmember William Saed, Inver Grove Heights Mayor Leslie Turner, Edina Councilmember PAST PRESIDENT Neil Peterson. Bloomington Councilmember Contact Calling Proves a Plu; 1988 marked the first year of AMM's Legislative Contact Program. The program originated with the desire to get each municipal member of AMM active in the legislative process. Relying on the theory that direct participation magnifies interest and results. AMM began by urging each cityto choose from among its admini- strators and councilmembers one representative. This representative was to be responsible for interacting between the AMM staff and the mem- ber's local senator and district repre- sentatives. The intent was the develop a broader lobbying effort, and to increase an awareness among legisla- tors of the strong interest with metro cities concerning the issues. This increased awareness among legisla- tors would consequently multiply the effort of any lobbying activity. The process would begin with a phone call from the legislative intern at AMM; the call usually concerned one or two particular topics. The contact Rep would then call the senator or representatives of his or her district and express the concerns of AMM and its member cities directly to the law makers. A senator or representative might then receive calls from many contact Reps of various metro area cities —each sen- ator or representative would then experience the full weight of every important issue. There are, occa- sionally, moments when a plan put into practice operates according to its theory. The contact calling pro- gram proved to be one of those plans. Each round of calls from AMM normally concerned one or two parti- cular topics. On any given issue, it was usual for every one of the six'y contact reps to be reached direct) Y within 48 hours or at the very least to have had a message left at their office. The contact reps themselves should be complimented on their interest and response. More often than not, city contact representa- tives who were not available when the initial calls were made, returned calls back to AMM that very same working day. The willingness to ini- tiate liaison with the lawmakers was also apparent. There was never a sign of delay or hesitancy. The im- mediate willingness of contact reps to hegm their canvassing was a satis- fying indication of the program's potential. The AMM would like to thank Miller -Schroeder Financial Inc. for hosting the social hour which pre- ceded the Annual Meeting. Estimations on the actual effective- ness of the Legislative Cc itact Pro- gram for the 1988 Legislative Session are still being made. There is some speculation that a more profound effect could have been realized con- cerning some issues had the legisla- tive contact program begun earlier in the year. Nevertheless. the report from every corner is that the program operates very smoothly and promises to be a productive tool for AMM lobbying efforts in the future. Legislative Summary Bulletin Although a record number of offi- cials attended the AMMAnnual Meet- ing and received a copy of the AMM Bulletin summarizing major legisla- tion, including the property tax bill, many of you could not be there. A copy has been sent to each member city Manager, Administrator to share with Mayors and Councilmembers of the city. If any member city official would like an additional copy or more information, please feel free to contact Carol, Vern, or Roger at the AMM office at 227-4008, and we will forward same ASAP. Uniting to Help Those In Need by Barbara K. Mednick United Way of the St. Paul Area John Walker, a Volunteer (Area Government Section) to the United Way of the St. Paul Area, submitted the following article. It is irate inform elected and appoints of the mission of the M6, major United Way organiza . John is also the Mayor in Newpu, ,, Washington County, and was recent- .y elected to the AMM Board of Directors. He has seen and personal- ly experienced the many ways that United Way giving strengthens our areas. United Way is people helping people. It is away for people to unite to help others in need and to solve community problems. There are two major United Ways located in the seven -county metro- politan area of Minneapolis and St. Paul. Each United Way is an indepen- dent organization staffed by profes- sionals and governed by a local board of volunteers. Through a single com- munity -wide campaign, each United Way raises funds to heip meet local health and human service needs. Second only to government, United Ways support the greatest variety of human services in the country, reach- ing people from all walks of life and all income levels. For 1988, $42,911,323 was reinvest- ed into the seven -county metropoli- tan area and distributed to a variety of local health and human service programs. The United Way of the Minneapolis Area allocated funds to 364 programs at 116 agencies and the United Way of the St. Paul Area distributed funds to 201 programs at 74 agencies. A spectrum of programs are sup- ported by the United Way including rehabilitation, services for seniors, drug abuse treatment, health educa- tion, recreation, shelters 'or horne- less people, rape crisis relief, com- munity health clinics, lood banks, information and referral hotlines and many, many others. Unitr ' Ways are one of the most efficient charitable organizations. An extensive network of volunteers allow for about 90 percent of all funds raised to go directly to needed ser- vic.>s i:. tho c : - lunteers also- • Assess current and future needs. • Bring organizations and people together to address those needs. • Distribute resources, through a volunteer citizen review process. where they are needed most. • Recruit and train other volunteers. • Put people in touch with the ser- vices they need. • Offer management and technical help to a wide range of community agencies. United Ways recognize that fund raising alone cannot solve communi- ty problems, so they are taking an active role in confronting the issues facing communities today. Both the Minneapolis and St. Paul United Ways have identified areas of need requiring special attention by the community. For 1988, the United Way of the St. Paul Area designated specific dollar for distribution to current and new programs in these special focus areas: • Increasing the self-sufficiency of low income parents through im- proved access to q, rality, low cost child care. • Increasing self-esteem and cop- ing skills that help prevent serious problems among preteen youth. • Increasing public, privateand non- profit partnerships that affect poli- cies and improve services for the poor. For 1988, the United Way of the Minneapolis Area designated funds to address the following needs: • Early childhood deprivation • Long-term unemployment • Inadequate housing • Chronic malnutrition • Improving services in Anoka. western Dakota, northern Scott and Carver Counties and western Hennepin County. As we move toward the'90s, limited resources are available to address growing needs. To meet these chal- lenges, United Way is working in collaboration with business, labor, education, government, social ser- vice and civic organizations to solve community problems. For example, the United Way of the St. Paul Area convened a task force of community leaders to devel- op a comprehenF-ve plan to combat the complex problems of hunger and homelessness in Dakota. Ram- sey and Washington counties. The problems of youth unemploy- ment are being addressed through the Youth Initiatives Partnership Pro- ject, a collaborative effort of the United Way of St. Pau!, the City of S; Paul and the St. Paul Public Schools In January of 1988, the United Way of the Minneapolis Area launched "Success By 6," a com- munity -wide initiative in early child- hood development. This collabora- tive effort is spearheaded by 25lead- ers from business, labor, government and the non-profit sector. "Success By 6" will study the bar- riers that keep children and families from obtaining quality early develop- ment and then develop strategies for eliminating those barriers. "A Fair Of The Heart," The Twin Cities United Way official campaign kickoff event, will be held on Sept. 11. During this exciting event, local corporations team up with agencies to provide qame booths, rides and activities that highlight programs re- ceiving United Way funds. For more information on United Way, contact Biz O'Mara in St. Paul at 291-8306 or Angela Carter in Min- neapolis �,t 340-"l.568, J Y KEUY Jim Kelly, .,ned the AMM Staff as an intern in IateJan-,ary forthe 1988 legislative sessio- As a graduate student in Public Administration Pro- gram at Hamline University, he was in a good -osition to take advantage of the jot .s legislative coordinator. Jim graduated from Hamline School of Law in May, 1987, and continued on with school this follow- ing academic year in order to finish his master's degree. He came to Minnesota :n 1981 after coming off active duty with the U.S. Marine Corps with which he is still affiliated as a reserve officer. He worked for the Hartford Group, and the the Northstar Hotel w' ade pre- paration for enter )ol. He was then hired by tht vern- ment, and has serve cer with the Immigrati^n tli- zation Service overthe la rs. Jim also holds a b: he. .:e from Boston College whe ma- jored in Philosophy and Engli-. - Liter- ature. While at law school, he served in a field placement with the Henne- pin County attorney's office, and was a finalist in the Hamline School of Law Client Counseling competi- tion. He presently serves on the Ham - line MPA student affairs committee. President's Corner by Gary Bastian AMM is beginning its 15th year in Ju!y. State and national events may have overshadowed our incorpora- tion in 1974. Governor Wendell Ander- son was running for re-election against John Johnson while the legislature considered what to do with the first of many "surprise" surpluses. Fiscal Disparities was ruled constitutional. Hank Aaron hit his record -shattering home run, and retired v.ith a career total of 735. Richard Nixon resigned about the time our papers of incorporation were being filed. That was 1974. We are not in anyone's shadow today. Today AMM represents sixty-six cities in the seven county metropolitan area. Our sixty- six cities contain some 1.8 million people. Our nineteen person board, selected by you, comes from all classes of cities. Our diverse mem- bership and our format of consensus building has allowed us to carve a respected niche. In a real seise, we are a metropolitan council providing leadership for, assistance to and representation of local government at state and regional levels of gov- ernance. We have been successful because of the hard work of AMM's staff, board of directors and, most impor- tantly, our member cities. The hard, focused work will have to continue. We have to contend with mid-term House elections at the state level and a presidential election nationally. We will have our hands full with the 1989 legislative session, as posturing begins for the 1990 elections. We must face the growing concerns of state legislative leaders about the number of groups repre- senting local governments and the expenditures of tax dollars to fund the lobbying efforts. Finally, within our very own membership " 5 been concern exprPc,;nr- basic composition of AN. Let me make m� pot, clear: There is no other orgai IikeAMM with its expertise, its mem- bership, and its ability to get diverse interests to sit down and not only discuss problem, but to come to a resolution of those problems The political reality is we need each other working toS;ther to build a better metropolitan area, a better state. The answer is not to continue the trend of splintering into numerous parochial interests. Instead, we must keep our coalition strong and work toward positive goals to benefit the people we have been elected or selected to serve —the taxpayers. In order to meet our problems head-on, I want to challenge you to get involved —see what we do and how we do it. There are a number of ways to make AMM even more effec- tive First of all, we are going to continue our area breakfast meet- ings. In July we will sponsor five breakfast meetings to meet with you and have issues and concerns dis- cussed. Secondly, our consensus building committee process will begin de- veloping our 1989 legislative program this summer. Sign up for one of AMM's five committees —Transpor- tation, General Legislation, Munici- pal Revenues, Housing and Eco- nomic Development and Metropoli- tan Agencies. Bring your knowledge of problems facing your own city or our local government community to the table. Work with other city repre- sentatives to find solutions to those Policy Committees To Resume Meeting For 1989 The AMM Policy Committees will resume meeting the last week of July to begin development of new policy or changes to current policy for the 1989 Legislative biennium. The five AMM standing committees are Gener- al Lenislation, Housing and Economic Development, Metropoli- tan Agencies, Municipal Revenues and Expenditures, and Transporta- tion. All city officials currently serv;ng on tht:;., committees will continue as members. However, any elected or appointed official may and is en- couraged to volunteer to serve on a committee. If you are not now part of a committee but would like to become a member, please contact Carol, Vern, or Roger at the AMM office at 227-4008. problems and to propose statutory changes. Participate in AMM's Legislative Coordination dnd Con,act System. This program was created as a result of interest expressed at the area breakfasts in 1987. The Board, through the leadership of Larry Bakken, devised a system that was tested in the 1988 mini -session. The Board is committed to continuing and improving this service to Our member cities. BLit, we need you. There is a special committee chaired by Walt Fehst that will begin meeting to review our 1988 efforts and begin planning and organizing our 1989 efforts. Finally, I am committed to provid- ing educational opportunities to mem- ber cities. I would IikeAMM to spon- sor seminars on current topics. I believe our cities hold an un-tapped lode of experience and knowledge. That wealth should be utilized to make us all better decision and policy makers. Good policy making, at any level, is not a spe--tator activity. Govern- ment in Minnesota works because public officials work hard. If AMM is to continue to have success as an organization, we neea full partici- pation from all member cities. Thanks for the opportunity to lead AMM this year. Let's have a fun and productive year together. AMM to 7 Ad Member, Outrei r Meetings For the third year in a row, the AMM will sponsor regional located Outreach breakfast meetings in the metro area for member city officials. The five meet i—is will be held du. ing the weeks of July 11 and July 18. These meetings are primarily for the member city officials to provide input on issues and priorities for the legislative policy committees agen- das for the 1989-90 legislative ses- sions. This opportunity gives all city officials, especially those unable to otherwise participate on the commit- tees, a more direct method of input into the policy making process. The give and take discussion of past years has proven extremely valuable tc the AMM Board and Policy Commit- tees and city officials are urged to attend. Watch for the official notice in the next few weeks. Metropolitan Sig�ni�icsnce: An update written by Kevin Frazell, Mendota Heights City Administrator and Chair, AMM Metropolitan Significance Subcommittee In the January newsletter, I report- ed on the efforts of our committee to monitor and have input to the Metro- politan Council's proposed revisior of the Metropolitan Significance Rules. Metropolitan Significance is the process by which the Council can review development prcjects for impacts on the regional systems (i.e. highways, sewers, airports, etc.), or on government subdivisions other than that in which the project is to be sited. After several months of deli- berations, we have nearly completed our work and issued a report of Comments and Recommendations. During the course of our review we met numerous times with Metro- politan Council staff and the Metro- politan Community Development Com- mittee (MCDC), and came up with about a dozen issues of concern to cities, some of them major, others minor. Many of our recommenda- tions have already been accepted by the MCDC; others have not. I want to share two of our major concerns with you, then offer an overall obser- vation about Metropolitan Signifi- cance. The biggest cont;ern our Commit- tee addressed was the possibility of the process being extended to in- clude "economic" impacts. Early drafts of the revised rules included a significance criteria of "whether a proposed publicly subsidized project may have a substantial impact on existing regional markets." "Publicly subsidized" was defined so broadly that we felt the Council could find itself becoming embroiled in literally every Twin Cities development pro- ject of any size. The MCDC was persuaded by our position, and dropped this provision. A second major issue was who will conduct the hearings, make the find- ings of fact, and ultimately determine whether a project is of metropolitan significance. The rules as drafted assign the job to a Significance Re- view Committee, which is a panel composed of Metropolitan Council - members and members of the Land Use Advisory Committee (local elect- ed officials). The Committee, at .s discretion, may delegate some of the job to an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ). Our committee felt that any party to the review (the Council itself, the local government in which the pro- ject is sited, or another affected local government) should be ableto dictate that the hearing will be conducted by an ALJ. The MCDC has strongly resisted this recommendation. based on the pi emise that they do not want to g re away responsibility for a process and finding for which they will u.tirnately be held accountable. Underlying these and other issues is a fundamental philosophical ques- i.or: Is Metropolitan Significance a legal process, or is it a political one? In more practical terms, should a finding of metropolitan significance be based solely on the determination of objective facts, and the application of those facts to a predetermined set of criteria? Or should the process involve at least some level of policy judgment by a body whose purported purpose is looking out for the overall welfare of the entire region'? I think it's fair to say that our r.ommittee members lean toward the former view, while the MCDC: takes the latter. A finding of metropolitan signifi- cance is not insignificant! The Coun- cil emphasizes a medidtior rind con- ciliation role to resolve tyre issues that led to a significance finding. However, in the most extreme case, a project suspension of up to one year can t ^ imposed. At a minimum, that cot st a developer and a commtl good deal of moeny, and at t, might kill a project altogeth r. A public hearing on the proposed rule changes will be held in late summer. If Metropolitan Significance sounds like something your com- munity should be interested in, I encourage you to call the AMM offices for a copy of the proposed rules and our committee's report. Then contact your Metropolitan Coun- cil representative with your concerns. New AMM Members: South St. Paul West St. Paul The Board of Directors and staff welcome two new members to the AMM family of cities. West St. Paul and South St. Paul, both in Dakota County, have long been sought out for membership. West St. Paul, lo- cated straight south of St. Paul and home to the famous Robert Street strip, has a 1987 population of 18,194. The Mayor is Ken Kube, Counc.imem- bers are Joe Fenton, John Jakway, Robert Kelly, James Kennedy, Lee Walker, and James Wazlavvik. The City Manager is Bill Craig. South St. Pau!, also located south of St. Paul, is bordered by the Mississippi River and is the historic home of the upper midwest stockyards. The 20,434 people are governed by Mayor Bruce Baumann, Councilmembers Kathy Gaylord, Wayne Johnson, John LaGoo, Edwin Oster, Dwight Peter- son, Thomas Seaberg, Katherine Trummer, and City Administrator Gary Word. Their participation and input in policy and AMM events is looked forward to with much anti- ,ation. Board Meets Every Mouth � The Association of Metropoli- tan Municipalities' Board of Direc- tors meets on the first Thursday of every month (except when a holi- day comes on or near that date) Meetings start at 7:00 p.m. and are held in the conference room at the Association office, 183 University Ave. East, St. Paul. Al. city officials are welcome to attend the Board meetings, ex- press their views on any subject and Lring any subject to the atten- tion of the Board. Due to security regulations, the building front door must be locked at 8:00 p.m. Anyone arriving after that time, please ring the doorbell and wait a few minutes for staff to open the door. Call the AMM at 227-4008 for further information. • wog 100& 517E P�!4N I���,OI �e Y OIM�N510N4rFOM 'WKWr fMr iC1�ONG)� ORIIVING C�ICp ��pD Yi/Ib/(aL 6�! jN�M11M�rION rFOM Mit.lb �+6W�fNNGm'SR� 6MDM0 PV�N' DrcTfDrt/I-4� 6q Diy[K'NG 4 ru5N71N6 IN!"01tMMTION I'IL:D M6161N4D OY vos� cbFplV�cNfb. r�/Kt� CITY Or- IAN6 :.Mf F BIRJCK, moacA FAI'LO, Olt :;WOFAnVs ML-OCA J-n. P,;1- aomat4r6 56=K— 'NE61`-sy Base and Cover FecatieB" WashingtonS.Olantiflo Industries' =a VOW -=: 3 a LT " —3- ADDITION MMS-IWS AAAfCW*Y— p k enBTG dA'GK �� 10ABGIA I&A. M. AI.M MflV5 � � 6%6Tia P.ANTWE6 REMAiJ I'AlWNS MOM "ICK WORTH (rl(3HNM( 112) r',.5VA•rlON STET.- [,oW q "Ms �S� ®RICM� Tor LAND A:IERNAT!JE Ct19RH6 NEW o� -t 30, Awe Rao! --�--- WKICK, I-ASUA PA�O 5 Cfk DeCCAA-v? 5'.=K rm BAND --� W MVM&RcK----. NOW P:ANTIrk55 70MATC41 ks J� Base and Cover Fac des ` Washington !Scientific Industries g�,UrilitfniEtlN6 CM of ONOW THE VOOT 000NMRATION Y mmrrma t o� Gwa wrtr r. Y� V aiL w iMa OOI�IA7Yq �I�� awonwr•��r•�awol► ' �PIr�a1,11�Ya0, I cotaPMOV� �— \ RJR1TWb O WCgT ADVANCE SMEYING & '.MTHEERIVG CO. WASHINGTON SCIENTIFIC INDUSTRIES INC. -, ONE INCH EOMS SO FEET All that ­t of th.svuU i1a af tt.. N-th ... t 1/4 f S-- dl— 11 t t. th N— I 1� It th. —th t/2 r .1d polo[ t,"­=M. K—ht-t. . Geld—t !Noce tebvacaMr - ". I . s Y e . . , ', e - ". , ". ., , " . JillOjtt ;#0-? "%LYL WEM Aw 2719ee C" IV aft I 121MLA,