Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutProject PacketCITY OF ORONO ZONING FILE: 11-3505 2750 Kelley Parkway P.O. Box 66 NOTICE OF COUNCIL ACTION Crystal Bay, MN 55323 952.249.4600 DATE OF NOTICE: 24 May 2011 TO: Thomas McCune COPIES: 1473 Bay Ridge Road Wayzata, MN 55391 TYPE OF APPLICATION: Variance DATE OF MEETING: May 23, 2011 VOTE: 4 FOR 0 AGAINST Motion: To approve per the findings and conditions of the resolution previously mailed to you. Please arrange to sign the original resolution at the City Offices (Please note: The City is now on a summer schedule. Monday through Thursday 7:30 — 5 PM & Friday, 7:30 to 11:30). All persons with an interest in the property must sign the resolution. Variance approval is limited to the extent shown on approved plan and as noted in the approval resolution. Changes in approved plans are subject to further review by the City. Variance approval expires one year after date of approval. A building permit must be obtained no later than May 23, 2012. If you desire certified copies of the official Council minutes, they are available from the City Clerk after review and approval by the City Council. If you have questions please contact Melanie Curtis, Planning & Zoning Coordinator, at mcurtisftci.orono.mn.us or 952.249.4627 #W Council 05/23/11 Item Description: #11-3505, Thomas & Martha McCune, 1473 Bay Ridge Road Side Yard Setback Variances Public Hearing Application Summary: The property owner would like to reconstruct the roof over the older portion of their home with a slightly steeper pitch to repair damage and prevent ice dams. The proposed increase in height would be an additional 2' 11" from the existing roof. The existing home does not meet the 30-foot side setback as required for principal structures within the LR-1A zoning district. A 16.7-foot setback exists on the south side of the home and a 14-foot setback exists on the north side of the home where 30-feet is required. Planning Commission Recommendation On May 16, 2011, the Planning Commission voted 6 —0 to recommend approval of the variances as requested. Updated Variance Analysis There have been multiple changes to law regarding how a City must review an application for a variance. The "undue hardship" analysis has been replaced with the "practical difficulties" analysis. Staff is currently working on updating the ordinance to ensure that it conforms to the new statutory analysis of practical difficulties. While the current code directs the council to perform a "hardship" analysis; this application will be viewed consistent with the new practical difficulties analysis. Staff Recommendation The applicants' variance request is reasonable and necessary in order to avoid additional damage to their property caused by ice dams. The proposed addition is a vertical expansion that will result in minimal additional massing of the house. No additional living space is being proposed and the applicants' request results in minimal negative impact of adjacent properties. Staff finds the location of the existing home creates a unique circumstance not created by the applicants and that granting the applicants' request is in harmony with the purpose and intent of the ordinance. Granting the applicants' request will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. Therefore planning staff recommends approval of the side setback variances in order to reconstruct the roof as proposed. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED The City Council should open the public hearing and hear any comments from the public. The Council should consider approving or amending the attached draft resolution approving side yard setback variances. 0 5 ME,103)] mv"� q ---0 P&PI-14 Date Application Received: 04/20/11 Date Application Considered as Complete: 04/28/11 60-Day Review Period Expires: 06/27/11 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Date: 18 May 2011 Item No. /d Department Approval: ,, , r' Administrator Approval: Agenda Section: Name: Melanie Curtis �W/ Title: Planning & Zoning Coordinator Item Description: #11-3505, Thomas & Martha McCune, 1473 Bay Ridge Road Side Yard Setback Variances Public Hearing List of Exhibits: Exhibit A. Draft Resolution Exhibit B. Planning Commission Packet - 05/10/11 Exhibit C. Draft Planning Commission Minutes — 05/16/11 Application Summary: In order to repair an ice dam issue with the existing roof the property owner would like to reconstruct the roof over the older portion of their home with a slightly steeper pitch. The resulting increase in height would be an additional 2' 11" from the existing roof. The existing home does not meet the 30-foot side setback as required for principal structures within the LR-1A zoning district. A 16.7-foot setback exists on the south side of the home and a 14-foot setback exists on the north side of the home where 30-feet is required. Planning Commission Recommendation On May 16, 2011, the Planning Commission voted 6 — 0 to recommend approval of the variances as requested. Updated Variance Analysis As the Council is aware, there have been multiple changes to law regarding how a municipality must review an application for a variance. The "undue hardship" analysis has been replaced with the "practical difficulties" analysis. Staff is currently working on updating the ordinance to ensure that it conforms to the statutory analysis of practical difficulties. While the current code directs staff, planning commission and the council to perform a "hardship" analysis; this application will actually be viewed consistent with the new practical difficulties analysis. Staff Recommendation The applicants' variance request is reasonable and necessary in order to avoid additional damage to their property caused by ice dams. The proposed addition is a vertical expansion that will result in minimal additional massing of the house. No additional living space is being proposed and the applicants' request results in minimal negative impact of adjacent properties. Staff finds the location of the existing home creates a unique circumstance not created by the applicants and that granting the applicants' request is in harmony with the purpose and intent of the ordinance and will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. Planning Staff recommends approval of the side setback variances in order to reconstruct the roof as proposed. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED The City Council should open the public hearing, hear comments from the public. The Council should consider approving or amending the attached draft resolution approving side yard setback variances. Council Exhibit A A RESOLUTION GRANTING A VARIANCE TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 78-305 FILE NO. 11-3505 WHEREAS, Thomas McCune and Martha McCune, a married couple (hereinafter "the Applicants") are the owners of 4b.9, property located at 1473 Bay Ridge Road within the City of Orono (hereinafter the "City.iq-id legally described as follows: Attached as Exhibit A, (hereinafter the "P'*operw ); and WHEREAS, the Applicants have ma3do 4-' ication to the City of Orono for a variance to Orono Municipal Zoning "Code. Section 78 30 (B) to allow reconstruction of the roof on the existing home with a slightly higher pitch than the emoting roof resulting in a 16.7-foot setback on the south side of the home arid a 14-four setback on the north side of the home where 30-foot side yard setbacs,ar-6 x ally re4 ed; and WHEAS, after` -de publishQd notice and mailed notice in accordance with Minnesota Statutes and die Qrono,,.,, Minnesota, City Code, the Orono Planning Commission and Orono City .Cecil held "a 1Q. hs on May, 16 and May 23, 2011 at which times all persons , g t 'be heard oc ermng thisapplication were given the opportunity to speak thereo4 NOW, THOW RE JW IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: �. e. v FINDINGS a;p 1. This appligat!-was reviewed as Zoning File 11-3505. 2. The property is located in the T.R-lA One Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District which requires a minimum lot area of 2.0 acres and a minimum lot width of 200' . Page 1 of 4 3. The Planning Commission reviewed this application at a public hearing held on May 16, 2011 and recommended approval of variances based on the following findings: a. The property contains 41,329 s.f (0.95 acre) in area and has 115-feet in width. b. Sanitary sewer is available. c. There is no additional land available °to bring the lot area into conformity. d. No additional living space is proposed. e. The Applicants' request will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood and will result in minimal negative impact on adjacent properties. f. the vertical expansion'.,of the increased roof pitch will result in minimal additional massing of the iiow. g. The AFplicarits' request: is in hai o y with the purpose and intent of the h. The applicants have demonstrated that enforcing the lot area and lot width provisions of e o4ing Ord' a deprive the applicant of the reasonable x :oaf their p06 erty. The City o ncil h ,.:considered this application including the findings and "s„recommenditkft,.of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by applicants opd the public, and the effect of the proposed variance on the hiajth safety anti welfare of the community. 5. The Cif routs finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do`n`t Ply 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 practical 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. Page 2 of 4 CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants variances to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-305 (B) to allow construction of a new roof on the existing home with a slightly higher pitch than the existing roof resulting in a 16.7- foot setback on the south side of the home and a 14-foot so ok on the north side of the home where 30-foot side yard setbacks are normally required, su 0 to the following conditions: 1. Council approval is based on the survey and bonding plans submitted by the Applicants and annotated by City staff, attached to this Resolution as Exhibits B & C. Any amendments to the site plan which are ,not in conformity wah City codes will require further Planning Commission and City -Council review. 2. No hardcover variances are granted. 3. The building plans submitted for bj � ding permit will be reviewed to ensure compliance with the City's building height and nui3O*, of stories regulations. 4. Authorities granted by tl is resolutions run w i the property not with the Applicants, but are permissive pr ly and must be ex cased, y obta g a building permit for the new construction and commeno;g construdnoti°of said project. A framing inspection must be completed within dr e year o the date oft, uncil approval, or the variance will expire on that dAw {May 23, 2-`012). 50ation of or now-complce with any of the terms and conditions of this resolution w _`:.,,constitute a vii` ono >t ie zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority grad herein, and salt be purihable as a misdemeanor. 6. The und6rOgned Applicants have read, understand and hereby agree to the terms of this resolution ad on behalf`=of, the Applicants and the Applicants' heirs, successors and assigns, herebthe recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Page 3 of 4 Adopted by the Orono City Council on the 23rd day of May, 2011. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Property Owner(s) STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN Lili Tod McMan, Mayor Notary Public day. of _ , 2011, by day of , 2011 by, Page 4 of 4 Exhibit A Resolution No. Legal Description (As contained in Certificate of Title No. 74093) Tracts E and N, Registered Land Survey No. 192, Files of Registrar of Titles, County of Hennepin, State of Minnesota. Together with an easement for driveway purposes over Tracts J, K, L, M, O, P, Q and R, all in Registered Land Survey. No. 192 as shown in deed Doc. No. 569269, Files of Registrar of Titles; Subject to an easement for driveway purposes over said Tract N as shown in deed Doc. No. 569269, Files of Registrar of Titles; Subject to a public easement in the Highway known as County Road No. 7 as to Tract E; Subject to the portion of said land between the high water mark and the low water mark of Lake Minetonka to the public right, including the right of the State of Minnesota to use or reclaim said portion for any public purposes now authorized by law; (as to Tract E). Also known as PIN No. 10-117-23 34 0005 6 0 Ld ~f� h�3Q QDCVA �NJ11aMa z #k ac ch z 'n C30W 1 �. `� .LL S Lin W 6 -,, cc QQS F• 4 I Goom ry �e N>rj ' • N az QooM - F ; ,` 0 ,I c N JNil13A , F La asaz N C t O t m w 13 13 s W oa mt +°� � m o c a m i o f mE ol a c n E `a a m N m a — O ` C aLe c u C q Z «� a C ;c �i to o O It Q m S p ? m F �KZ FE U ', N MI (!f O z y � 3 U m J Y o m � y o d d u m w a �. ° � W Z q OEn m �v 2ri a >d gV Y v c U 7 C � w ro 4 p m L0L m v rn n. o lCEZ z a a_• a w c o lL O < y w u= O IL o d[ G, �2 c r Q P .. r K LLf Q I I 'I Q {f N al ml�m i G Council Exhibit B Date Application Received: 04/20/11 Date Application Considered as Complete: 04/28/11 60-Day Review Period Expires: 06/27/11 To: Chair Schoenzeit and Planning Commission Members Jessica Loftus, City Administrator From: Melanie Curtis, Planning & Zoning CoordinatorV Date: 10 May 2011 Subject: #11-3505, Thomas & Martha McCune, 1473 Bay Ridge Road, Side Setback Variance Public Hearing Zoning District: LR-1A, One Family Lakeshore Residential, 2-acres/200' Lot Area: 0.95 acre / 41,329 square feet Lot Width: 115' Application Summary: The applicant is requesting variances from the 30-foot side yard setback requirement in order to construct a new roof on the existing home 2'11" taller than existing. The pitch of the roof would be increased. A 16.7-foot setback exists on the south side of the home and a 14-foot setback exists on the north side of the home where 30-feet is required. Staff Recommendation: Planning Department Staff recommends approval of the side setback variances as proposed. Pertinent Zoning Ordinance Sections Sec. 78-305. Area, height, lot width and yard requirements. (a) Height. No structure or building in the LR-1A district shall exceed 2 1/2 stories and shall not exceed 30 feet in height except as provided in section 78-1366. (b) Lots. The following minimum rpauirpmpntc shall hp nhcpr,rorl- Lot Area Lot Width Front Yard Side Yard i Side Yard Rear Yard (acre) (feet) (feet) (feet) Adjacent to Street (feet) (feet) 2 200 150 30 150 50 List of Exhibits Exhibit A. Exhibit B. Exhibit C. Exhibit D. Exhibit E. Exhibit F. Exhibit G. Application Hardship Documentation Form Survey Proposed Elevations Aerial Photo Property Owners List Plat Map 157627v2 FILE # 11-3505 10 May 2011 Page 2 of 3 Background In order to repair an ice dam issue with the existing roof the property owner would like to reconstruct the roof over the older portion of their home with a slightly steeper pitch. The resulting increase in height would be an additional 2' 11" from the existing roof. The existing home does not meet the 30-foot side setback as required for principal structures within the LR- 1A zoning district. Technically the increased roof height in the substandard setback is considered an expansion of an existing nonconformity; side yard setback variances are required in order to do the project as proposed. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ LOT ANALYSIS WORSHEET Lot Area/Width: LR-1A Lot Area Lot Width Required 87,120 s.f. (2 acres) 200' Actual 41,329 s.f. (0.95 acre) 115, Setbacks: LR-1A Required Existing/No Change Proposed Lakeshore 75' 185' Rear 50' 175' to Bay Ridge Road South Side 30' 16.7' North Side 30' 14.1' Average Lakeshore The existing home meets the average lakeshore setback. Side Yard Setback Variance The applicants' property is nonconforming with respect to area and width. The existing home does not meet the required 30-foot side setback on either side lot line. The applicants are attempting to alleviate a water/ice dam issue caused by the low pitched roof over the older portion of the existing home. In order to do so an increase in height and pitch is proposed. No additional living space is being proposed. The 2' 11" increase in height within the substandard side setback area will not encroach closer than the existing home to the properties on either side of the applicants' property. Updated Variance Analysis As the planning commission is aware, there have been multiple changes to law regarding how a municipality must review an application for a variance. The "undue hardship" analysis has been replaced with the "practical difficulties" analysis. Staff is currently working on updating the ordinance to ensure that it conforms to the statutory analysis of practical difficulties. While the current code directs staff, planning commission and the council to perform a "hardship" analysis; this application will actually be viewed consistent with the new practical difficulties analysis. 1s7627v2 2 FILE # 11-3505 10 May 2011 Page 3 of 3 Hardship Statement Applicant has completed the Hardship Documentation Form attached as Exhibit B, and should be asked for additional testimony regarding the application. Hardship Analysis In considering applications for variance, the Planning Commission shall consider the effect of the proposed variance upon the health, safety and welfare of the community, existing and anticipated traffic conditions, light and air, danger of fire, risk to the public safety, and the effect on values of property in the surrounding area. The Planning Commission shall consider recommending approval for variances from the literal provisions of the Zoning Code in instances where their strict enforcement would cause undue hardship because of circumstances unique to the individual property under consideration, and shall recommend approval only when it is demonstrated that such actions will be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Orono Zoning Code. The applicants' variance request is reasonable and necessary in order to avoid additional damage to their property caused by ice dams. The proposed addition is a vertical expansion that will result in minimal additional massing of the house. No additional living space is being proposed and the applicants' request results in minimal negative impact of adjacent properties. Staff finds the location of the existing home creates a unique circumstance not created by the applicants and that granting the applicants' request is in harmony with the purpose and intent of the ordinance and will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. Issues for Consideration Are there any other issues or concerns with this application? Staff Recommendation Planning Staff recommends approval of the side setback variances in order to reconstruct the roof as proposed. 157627v2 3 Apr 2011 09:47a Pelican Bay Pack & Ship 939-325-8534 PC Exhibit A City of Orono # 3 5 0 Variance Application Strwf Address: 2750 Kelley Parkway Orono, MIN 55356 Main: 952-249-4600 fax: 952 249-4616 Marling Address: P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323-MM Application # J1 3 6-0-5- Date Received: yl Staff : Fee: $700 Renewal: $350 After -the -fact: $1,400 Double Fee Escrow Fee: $6001$2,500 This application form must be completed in full. Applicant will be notified within 96 days as to the status of the application. Incomplete applications will not be placed on Planning Commission Agendas. PROPERTY INFORMATION: Site Address: 6-• i' .k Lf(L 3 t Property Identification Num PI ): v n2-'g45605 Date Property Acquired (monthlyear): 19� ❑ Yes, I awn he adjacent parcels. Zoning District: _ APPLICANT INFOR ON: {Com leis legal nai Name: S t• (�k c Phone (home): Complete Address: City, State & ZIP Email I: -h') An G Lf-A? (9L M., 4 OWNER INFORMATION: (Comple egat names Name: ru 'l� e.uutr I1fPrlrr�i r, Phone (home): _r Complete Address:W7 4- City, State & ZIP 55 Email: 4� n>,r, ill Al�_�.,� and marital status required for each interested party) }.l C, Phone (work): - D marital us re uired for each intereste partyj� o r a CL g.IV Ll to 6FLc Ph a (work):Ge el Fax: DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: Describe the request in detail (attach additional sheets if necessary): The existing center portion of our home is a 65 It x 26 ft, SQ year old rambler. The roof structure is simply 2x8 roof rafters with sheetrock on the bottom, 6 inches of insulation in the non - ventilated cavity and US boards & shingles on top. We experience significant ice dams and some water infiltration in this area. As a corrective measure, we propose to install new, low profile trusses to allow for additional insulation and space to ventilate the roof. This ridge in this area will be raised approximately 35 inches and will be about 8 inches higher than the ridges of the additions added in the mid 1990's. None of the work will be outside the footprint of the existing roof, which was constructed in 1960. This roof is partially in the current 30 ft side setback on the north and south sides of the 100 ft wide lot. The sole purpose of this project is to irnnrnvn rnnf inci latlnn and rnnff uantilatinn Apr 2011 09:47a Pelican Bay Pack & Ship 939-325-8534 p.3 REQUIRED SUBMITTALS: Ali of the following information must be submitted by the application application to be processed. deadline date in order r your Enclosed ❑ © 0 Not able Applicable ❑ ❑ ❑ Escrow Agreement signed Escrow received Pre -Application Form ❑APplication Form ❑ ❑ Hardship Documentation L7 ❑I Certified Proa Owners List 0 Survey meetin ALL requirements shown on P@ges 5 - 6 © 0 P ed Plans ❑ ® Hardcover Calculation(s) ❑ 0 Septic S em She Evaluation: Report 0 Wetland Delineation E3 Wetland Buffer Evaluation 0 M Buffer Improvement Plan 0 p APPLICANT ANDVOR OWNER: Agree to provide all information required or requested by the Planning Department, Agree to pay additional fees (staff time not covered in the original fee payment) and/or consultant expenses incurred in review of this application, and Certify that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. The applicant and owner recognize that they are solely responsible for submitting a complete application being aware that upon lallure to do so, the staff has no alternative but to rgject it until it is complete or to recommend the request for denial of the request regardless of Its potential merit. Acknowledge the Escrow Agreement is completed and signed. The Owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City Staff, consultants, agents, Commission and Council Members for purposes of investigation and verification of this request. Applicant and/or Owner acknowledge they must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant and/or owner is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized representative attend in place of the applicant/owner and advise the City Planner assigned to your project. Some or all of the information that you are asked to provide on this application is classified by State law as either private or confidential. Private data is Information which generally cannot be given to the public but can be given to the subject of the data. Confidential data is information which generally cannot be given to either the public or the subject of the data. Our purpose and intended use of this information is to annually update our records and records of other governmental agencies required by law. if you refuse to supply the information, the application may not be issued. Applicant's Signature: D Dam: 6 r a / Applicant's Signature. �.,� Date: Owner's Signature: Date: Owner's Signature: Date: -14- a 1473 ES&y Ridgg, !load HARDSHIP DOCUMENTATION FORM PC Exhibit B This form Is a required submittal for ALL variance applications. An application will not be considered complete or placed on any meeting agendas until this form is complete and submitted to the City. Minnesota State Statutes Section 462,357, Subdivision 6(2) requires that a hardship be demonstrated in order for a variance to be granted. The hardship must be unique to the property as variances run with the land and not the landowner. Personal and economic situations are not considered valid hardships. In order for an application to be heard by the Planning Commission and City Council a hardship having merit must be demonstrated - HOW DO t PROVE A HARDSHIP? This form has 12 points outlining the basis City staff uses to determine if a hardship exists and how the variance will affect the surrounding community. To prove a hardship, address all the relevant points listed below and answer them as clearly as possible. Since you are requesting the code exception, you have the burden of proving that the variance is justified. The information the City receives is what is used in determining a denial or approval recommendation. If you leave something out it will not be considered. Please address each of these hardship criteria as they relate to the request, if they do not aMly, write N/A in the space provdded: 1. "The property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under conditions allowed by the official controls." See Hardship Statement on next page. 2. "The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his property not created by the landowner. - This roof problem was created by the original builder/land owner in 1960 and the 1960 house was built in accord nce with setback requirements in place at the time. 3. "7 h< 4,,irianc;e, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality." . This change will in no way alter the character of the locality. ` 4. "Economlc considerations alone shall not constitute an yr t, ue hardship if reasonable use for the property exists under the terms of the Zoning Chapter." To the contrary, we are spending money to correct a design flaw. S. "Undue hardship also includes, but is not limited to, inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Variances shall be granted for earth sheltered construction as defined in Minnesota Statutes, Section 116.1.06, Subd. 2, when in harmony with this Chapter." Not applicable 6. "The Board of Appeals and Adjustments or the Council may not permit as a variance any use that is not permitted under this Chapter for property in the zone where the affected persoWs land is located." T Our single family home is the approved use in this zone. RECEIVED -17 AP' P11 i [ OR 7. "The Board or Council may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one -family dwelling as a two-family dwelling." Not applicable 8. "The special conditions applying to the structure or land in question are peculiar to such property or irngxe ."ply adjoining property" e special conditions we have f e unir, .re to our property and I am quite sure no one else on our 8-home dead-end street has this similar problematic roof condition. — 9. "The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures ii : the district in which said land is located.' This is not a general condition in the district. 10. "The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant." _ — our situation is a poor original design and is energy inefficient and has resulted in — annual ice dams creating interior and exterior damage. — 11. "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." It will absolutely not. 12. "The granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable hardship or difficulty." It is not simply a convenience. It is the only solution to alleviate a problem caused by a roof design�that would not be allowed under today's building codes. Hardship statement Should you feel the hardship cannot fully be described in the above criteria, describe the unique hardship, practical difficulty or unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Ordinance requirements in the following lines (attach additional sheets if necessary): The original 65`x26' fifty year old rambler portion of our house has a poorly insulated roof and no attic cavity to ventilate which causes annual ice dams and water infiltration in many areas. The old roof has a poor design with 2x8 rafters only, sheetrock on the under side, 6 inches of insulation in the cavity, 1x8 boards and shingles on top, and a flat 3:12 slope. The entire house was re -roofed in 2009 using heavy Ice & Water Shield underlayment on the entire old house area, but the problems continue. The solution is to raise the roof 2' 11" on the old portion of the house only, through the use of scissors trusses, to create space to add insulation and provide a cavity for ventilation (to create a cold roof) and to have a steeper roof pitch. A variance is needed since part of the 1960 structure is in the current 30' setback on both sides. The 1960 structure was built in accordance with zoning and setback regulations in effect in 1960. The proposed work will not be any closer to lot lines then the original (existing) roof and will not be outside the existing footprint. The tallest part of the house will now be 8" higher than the highest ridge prior to the subject change. The total height of our home will be under 17' , which is well below the 30' limit and much shorter than 3 of our 4 nearest neighbors. -17 - 4 7 -ORONO I� SITE.PLAN GRAbING PLAN 0 APPROVED - AWREVISlO VS ❑ APPROVED W BY D AT �y c,� 9IIPIN5.EAST ---"-`�---— 430.14 I � G� f l � o B L A C K T O P ! 92.88 t_ H 270.13 r ti D R I V E W A Y .—SET IRONS—__ 4 as - N � 403.43 °' C4 N WEST 29.2 M .N 42.14 z 8.69' W 8.69PC Exhibit C w � . 3 ` g to `'`-GRADE LEVEL DECK Lot f e7 6.82 P C ' R • ` !. !f f 26.80 !` k,' ►: ?o o� "',`SET IRON, t�+�6 ` ' x --- J 60.00 ill"14 Amoo. �Cv .' p ' cF C /L AZ CDRNER OF CONCRETE IS 122.11',,Y LUG. FT.t FROM LAKE SHORE Q .r 162.11 ----- ,/ craf ; v~ NAIL /r�/ r .y z 4.9 _.t uJ of 0 o s� J J Y i U � LU OD ! r 0 f 3. J` `-ABOVE GROUND DECK SURVEY FOR: TOM MCCUNE PROPERTY ADDRESS: 1473 Bay Ridge Road, Orono, Minnesota. LEGAL DESCRIPTION-. (As contained in Certificate of Title No. 74093) Tracts E and N, Registered Land Survey No. 192, Files of Titles, County of Hennepin. NOTES: 1. The orientation of this bearing system is based on the westerly line of Registered Land Survey No. 182 which is assumed to have a bearing of North 16 degrees 50 minutes 00 seconds. 2. This survey does not purport to show all improvements to the property. Together with an easement for driveway purposes over Tracts J, K, L, M, 0. P. 0 and R_ oil in RenirztgrPci I and Sijrvpv Ni, 100 nQ a6%u,', tf, Aa 4 3. Complete title work was furnished for the preparation of this survey to verify the existence of any easements or encumbrances. r , • . ....mac � South *Jy II.QA id Po l�.�rrtG n_r 40:.. , F Proposed — ��� r.,. Existing, r+a �.,�i•-� �• "'� ,:� _. - ,ram � .. �r A 2 West SIt9nr6r PC ExhibitE � �.� :A . 2 V. - . . . . PL ? _ L ��- . _f � ��- ± ' - ML;i-y 4 f RUN DATE: 4/20/2011 HENNEPIN L-,)NTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM (PROPERTY 6V,,,LRS LIST) PC Exhibit F 38 10-117-23 11 0002 HENNEPIN CO REGIONAL RR Ai iH 38 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED HENNEPIN COUNTY REGIONAL RAILROAD AUTHORITY 417 5: H ST N SUITE 320 MINNEAPOLIS MN 5540: 38 10-117-23 34 0004 DES PROPERTIES LLC 1461 BAY RIDGE RD DES PROPERTIES LLC 1461 BAY RIDGE RD WAYZA-A MN 55391 38 10-1:7-23 34 0007 TWILA B GERMANSON ET AL 1501 BAY RIDGE RD TWILA B GERMANSON DONALD M GERMANSON POBOX91 LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 10-117-23 33 0006 GREGG WIDENISE E STEINHAFEL 2285 NORTH SHORE DR GREGG W/DENISE E STEINHAFEL 2265 NORTH SHORE DR WAYZATA MN 55391 38 10-117-23 34 0005 T R & M H MCCUNE TRUSTEES 1473 BAY RIDGE RD THOMAS & MARTHA MCCUNE 787 TRAMORE LA NAPLES FL 34108 I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENT A ACCU ND TRUE REP SENTATiON OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE R a�ORI 1F H UNTY C AYER SF R E5 DEPARTMENT. DATE: A R 2 9 701 a BYp` 38 10-117-23 34 0003 A D SAMPLE & M D SAMPLE 1449 BAY RIDGE RD ANNE D & MICHAEL D SAMPLE 1449 BAY RIDGE RD WAYZATA MN 55391 38 10-117-23 34 0006 SUSAN M KERBER & JOHN C HOLM 1485 BAY RIDGE RD SUSAN M KERBER &:OHN C HOLM 1485 BAY RIDGE RD WAYZATA MN 55391 RECEIVED APR Z G 1011 CITY OF ORONO ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS'ACKNOWLEDGEMENT FORM 64Y M C1 ?Olt �qFc I (we) i.+s� of �Q�Q [print name(s)] rint a ss] ve vie d th plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the property located at � also referred to as Land Use Application No. I (we) un rstand 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. Property Owner Date Date 2 I (we) of [print name(s)] [print address] have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the property located at also referred to as Land Use Application No. i (we) understand that in executing this acknowledgement, I (we) am (are) not asked to declares approval or disapproval of the property or use but merely to confirm for the City Council that I (we) am (are) aware of the improvement plans and that the proposed neighbor's project or use requires Council approval. Property 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 &,Zoning Office at least 10 days prior to the scheduled meeting date. 15- ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS' ACKNOWLEDGEMENT FORM i (we) 6M W of jL�- [ l t name(s)] [print address] h ve vie ed the plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the property located at / 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 disappro al of the property or use but merely to confirm for the City Council that I (we) am (are) aware of the improven ent plans and tha a proposed neighbors project or use requires Council approval. Prop wn Date er I (we) [print name(s)] Of 5 /24`t. [print address] have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the property located at also referred to as Land Use Application No. I (we) understand that in executing this acknowledgement, I (we) am (are) not asked to declare approval or disapproval of the property or use but merely to confirm for the City Council that I (we) am (are) aware of the improvement plans and that the proposed neighbor's project or use requires Council approval. Property 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 & Zoning Office at least 1 ❑ days prior to the scheduled meeting date. 15- PC Exhibit G Hennepin County Mailing Label Map Provided By: Taxpayer Services Department i For ,more informal -or. contact: Hennepin County GIS Di+rsion 300 South 6th Street MinneapoUs, MN 55487 gis.info@co. rennepin.mn. us Map Comments: -Type Comments Here rat Print Date: 4/20/2011 Map Scale: 1" = 168' Buffer Size: 150 feet irl :j�31 Map Legend Water Major Beads Park Minor Roads Parcel If Buffer Region 11. Selected Parcels Att, t U L tj 1 i CITY OF ORONQ JIMEL h lrl ped MINUTES OF THE Council ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Exhibit C Monday, May 16, 2011 6:30 o'clock p.m. Schoenzeit moved, Schwingler seconded, to bring the recommendations of the Planning Commission regarding community/donation gardens and private, residential gardens on a vacant lot forward to the City Council. VOTE: Ayes 6, Nays 0. 4. 11-3505 THOMAS McCUNE,1473 BAY RIDGE ROAD, VARIANCE, 8:10 P.M. to 8:16 P.M. Thomas McCune, Applicant, was present. Curtis stated the applicant is requesting variances from the 30-foot sdde yard setback requirement in order to construct a new roof on the existing home 2711" taller thanpjisttig. The pitch of the roof would be increased. A 16.7 foot setback exists on the south side of tho home and a 14-foot setback exists on the north side of the home where 30 feet is required. In conjunction with repairing an ice dame issue with :the existing roof, the property owner would like to reconstruct the roof over the older portion of their home with a slightly steeper pitch. The resulting increase in height would be an additional 2711" from the existing roof The existing;home does not meet the 30-foot side setback as required for principal structure$ withip the LR-lA zoning district. Technically the increased roof height in the substan6rd setback is considez�d an expansion of an existing nonconformity. No additional side yard setlac variances arerequiredin order to do the project as proposed. As the Planning Commission.s,aware, there hake been fiiatip to law regarding how a municipality must review -ail. application for a valance . 'he �Iut dite hardship" analysis has been replaced with the "practical difficulties" analysis. Staff is ctey working ova updating the ordinance to ensure that it conforms to the stiLWtpry analysis, of practical fficulties. While the current code directs Staff, Planning Commission and the. Council,t,0 perform a ha oship analysis, this application will actually be viewed cons] with the neir practical d tculties ana is. ar The a ts' variance rce Wst is ieawable and necessary in order to avoid additional damage to their property ed by ice dams.,. "The proposed addition is a vertical expansion that will result in minimal additional � g of the house No additional living space is being proposed and the applicants' request results in min aia jiegative impa6f:-of adjacent properties. Staff finds the location of the existing home creates a unique erro stance not elated by the applicants and that granting the applicants' request is in harmony with the pose and inteatof the ordinances and will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood." Planning Staff recommends h p . al of the side setback variances in order to reconstruct the roof as proposed. Alexander stated in her view the request is reasonable. Levang, Schwingler, and Leskinen agreed with Commissioner Alexander. Tom McCune stated the house is a 1,700 square foot rambler with no ventable attic space and very little insulation. All the builders he has spoken to have said that he needs to ventilate it and put more insulation in there along with a steeper pitch. McCune indicated he does not want to encroach on the property line. Page 18 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COAUMSSION MEETING Monday, May 16, 2011 6:30 o'clock p.m. McCune pointed out there are two or three other homes in the neighborhood that encroach closer to the property line than his house. McCune stated he would like to fix an ice dam problem with this project. Chair Schoenzeit opened the public hearing at 8:15 p.m. There were no public comments concerning this application. Chair Schoenzeit closed the public hearing at 8:15 p.m. Thiesse moved, Levang seconded, to recommend approval of Application 011-3505, Thomas and Martha McCune,1473 Bay Ridge Road, granting of side setback variances. VOTE: Ayes 6, Nays 0. 5. 11-3506 ORONO PUBLIC SCHOOLS, 685.OLD CRYSTAL BAY ROAD NORTH, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, 8:16 P.M. — 8:21 P.M. Curtis stated the Orono Public School intends to construct a new softball field area;and is requesting a CUP in order to conduct filling and grading activity on the propel:..: The Orono Schools intend to improve an area of:ahe southernmost property on campus for a new softball field. As a result of the City's Old Crystal Bay Rproject, there will be soil material exported out of the roadway area. The school would like to Mize tie "ss materia1 to improve the grade to prepare for the new softball field. Due to.tlte amount of malcrial proposed,, a conditional use permit is required. Planning Staff recommo�4ds approval,of the CUP. A11 of the City Engineer's requirements, including erosion control measures, 1- :ll be addressed with the administrative land alteration permit following CUP approval. Schoenze�6�d � tltiieir,approval 4uld not be contingent on the road project. Curtis iod ated that would'be appropriate; John Osland, 6C0no Schools, indicated he is here to answer any questions the Planning Commission may have. The scho4i- Wtempting to pttt in a new ball field. The school removed two ball fields last year and they are commi{d:to construcg a new field. This field likely will be a junior varsity girls field and it will need to be cl a in the near future. Once the school learned then �uld be excess materials from the road project, they felt this would be a great opportunity to construct the ball field. Osland noted the school will not be accepting any contaminated soils. Chair Schoenzeit opened the public hearing at 8:18 p.m. There were no public comments regarding this application. Chair Schoenzeit closed the public hearing at 8:18 p.m. Page 19 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION CITY OF ORONO 2750 Kelley Parkway ZONING FILE: 11-3505 PO Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 952.249.4620 DATE OF NOTICE: 20 May 2011 TO: Thomas McCune COPIES: 1473 Bay Ridge Road Wayzata, MN 55391 TYPE OF REQUEST: Variance DATE OF MEETING: May 16, 2011 The Orono Planning Commission voted on a motion to recommend approval. VOTE: 6 FOR 0 AGAINST Applicant's next meeting is tentatively scheduled as: Monday, May 23, 2011 This is a City Council meeting. The meeting begins at 7 PM If you desire certified copies of the official Planning Commission minutes, they are available from the City Recorder after review and approval by the Planning Commission. If you have questions, please contact Planning & Zoning Coordinator, Melanie Curtis at mcurtis ci.orono.mn.us or 952.249.4627. 05/16/11 PC Subject: #11-3505, Thomas & Martha McCune, 1473 Bay Ridge Road, Side Setback Variance Public Hearing Background In order to repair an ice dam issue with the existing roof the property owner would like to reconstruct the roof over the older portion of their home with a slightly steeper pitch. The resulting increase in height would be an additional 2' 11" from the existing roof. The existing home does not meet the 30-foot side setback as required for principal structures within the LR- 1A zoning district. Technically the increased roof height in the substandard setback is considered an expansion of an existing nonconformity; side yard setback variances are required in order to do the project as proposed. Side Yard Setback Variance The applicants' property is nonconforming with respect to area and width. The existing home does not meet the required 30-foot side setback on either side lot line. No additional living space is being proposed. The 2' 11" increase in height within the substandard side setback area will not encroach closer than the existing home to the properties on either side of the applicants' property. Updated Variance Analysis As the planning commission is aware, there have been multiple changes to law regarding how a municipality must review an application for a variance. The "undue hardship" analysis has been replaced with the "practical difficulties" analysis. Staff is currently working on updating the ordinance to ensure that it conforms to the statutory analysis of practical difficulties. While the current code directs staff, planning commission and the council to perform a "hardship" analysis; this application will actually be viewed consistent with the new practical difficulties analysis. The applicants' variance request is reasonable and necessary in order to avoid additional damage to their property caused by ice dams. The proposed addition is a vertical expansion that will result in minimal additional massing of the house. No additional living space is being proposed and the applicants' request results in minimal negative impact of adjacent properties. Staff finds the location of the existing home creates a unique circumstance not created by the applicants and that granting the applicants' request is in harmony with the purpose and intent of the ordinance and will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. Staff Recommendation Planning Staff recommends approval of the side setback variances in order to reconstruct the roof 16.7 feet on the south side lot line and 14 feet on the north. Tim �CCi�,�►G 157627v2 Affidavit of PubV ition State of Minnesota, County of Hennepin. Keith P. Anderson, being duly sworn, on oath says that he is an authorized agent and employee of the publisher of the newspaper known as the THE PIO- NEER, Mound, Minnesota, and has full knowledge of the facts which are stated below: A.)The newspaper has complied with all the require- ments constituting qualifications as a qualified newspaper, as provided by Minnesota Statute 331A.02, 331A.07, and other applicable laws, as amended. B.) The printed City of Orono Planning Comission Hearing: May. 16, 2011 which is attached was cut from the columns of said newspaper, and was printed and published once each week for 1 successive weeks: It was first published Saturday, the 7th day of May 2011 , and was thereafter printed and published every Saturday, to and including Saturday, the 7th day of May _ _2011 ; Subscribed anVav, o to me on day of Authorized Agent Notary Public N01WA R. cARSTENSEN NOTARY PUBLIC. MINNEWTA My Comm. Exp. Jan. $1, 2014 Rate Information (1) Lowest classified rate paid by commercial users for com- parable space: $15.50 per inch. (2) Maximum rate allowed by law for above matter: $15.50. (3) Rate actually charged for above matter: $7.96 per inch. Each additional successive week: $5.79. a C N _ �aE.0 pia" :. m- °o o � �p,IDcE"Cc$CD 3c N_' E =YS cd �iBy� OQ .. = G c°r`�� cc �A 0�LTo7' c Eb'�mF; mU0. Sim-- 2c .mm�� ? ,'En m m �. m a.� c m e E'm.' oa' G'c a m m m-cmrr.m m c 9Vn 1. �l r o am$'�cm'�.ca��Lia_ U.m -fib 1?a Z �a mY m c m,-S xuj mr-.c m C T]' .L 3CL E� m Luc C) E �IDEp Cm cmo°'am =S mi= ®m a�� a9m '6 2 A3 amm g 16� ~0D�'�-tE�a'mm o442t-g?c.rp�.fiMam— E'4goo m CUE— -E m:m 3.2ROM��r a@'oxg rmao1E a �v.`m$ai�.00_25 m w.cvCC� o.c -6 =•:,I 10 2 _ N E m G E _ c O LCo' E�ymc.�o gm�j ma wed o Tj�0T®'—:5m=� 2.9m= 1�c Z3-W a ,�,t t �42 Q � 13 Oe�Zq— moo- ELc�4.o$_ �E A -0. m'.eo W 0 c U m a FE rC E0QmJUEDmm5a arcE—od_c.L -m --m_ mmimmm7 -a I =m ; ` IY7D baV 21d'% CERTIFICATE OF MAILING STATE OF MINNESOTA } COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) ss. } CITY OF ORONO ) I, Monica Fadness, of the City of Orono, Hennepin County, Minnesota, do hereby certify that a Notice of Public Hearing concerning the matter of #11-3505, was mailed to the attached list of property owners. 2011. In Witness Whereof, i have hereunto set my hand and seal this fig" day of May, oni a A. Fadness CITY OF ORONO 2760 Kelley Parkway, P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Phone (952) 249-4600 Fax (952) 249-4616 NOTICE The Orono Planning Commission will hold a public hearing in the Orono Council Chambers at 2780 Kelley Parkway on May 16, 2011, beginning at 6:30 p.m. on the matter of reviewing the following land use applications. A public hearing will also be held on these applications by the City Council on May 23, 2011, beginning at 7:00 p.m.. 11-3503 City of Orono is considering an amendment to the zoning code regarding Accessory Uses in Residential districts concerning private docks. The purpose of the amendment is to clarify the current regulations regarding private, residential dock .rental. 11-3504 City of Orono is considering an amendment the zoning code to allow private, residential gardens as a permitted, principal use in Residential districts. 11-3505 Thomas McCune, 1473 Bay Ridge Road, LR-1A zoning district, requests variances from the required 30-foot side yard setback in order to increase the pitch on the roof of the existing home with an existing 14-foot setback on the north side and an existing 16.7-foot setback on the south. 11-3506 Orono School District # 278, 685 Old Crystal Bay Road S, RR-1 B zoning district, requests a conditional use permit to import over 500 cubic yards of clean fill in order create a level surface for a new softball field. All persons wishing to be heard are encouraged to attend these meetings. This is not a final agenda and is subject to change prior to the hearings. Written comments are accepted and should be submitted to the City of Orono by, May 11, 2011 if possible. Interested persons may review the application at City offices. For an appointment, please calf (962) 249-4620. City of Orono By: Planning Commission Melanie Curtis Planning &Zoning Coordinator To be published in The Laker & The Pioneer Newspapers on May 7, 2011. Posted at: Orono City Offices Crystal Bay Post Office Long Lake Post Office Navarre Post Office RUN bAT$: 412=01I BiENNSPIN ,, ITY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM (PROPERTY O. ...Yt5 LLS'I'). PAGE-. I 38 10-117-23 11 0002 HENNEPIN CO REM09AL RR AUTH 38 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED HENNEM COUNTY REGIONAL RAILROAD AUTHORITY 417 5TH S T N SUITE 320 MINNEAPOLIS MN 55401 38 10-117-23 34 0004 DM PROPERTIES LLC 1461 BAY RIDGE RD DES PROPERTIES LLC 1461 BAY RIDGE RD WAYZATA MN 55391 38 10-1I7-23 34 0007 TWILA B GERMANSON ETAL 1501 BAY RIDGE RD TWQ.A B GERMANSON DONALD M GERMANSON POBOX91 LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 IN] 17-23 33 0006 GREW W/DENISB E STEINHAFEL 2285 NORTH SHORE DR GREGG W/DENISE E STEINHAFEL 2265 NORTH SHORE DR WAYZATA MN 55391 38 10-117-23 34 0005 T R & M H MCCUNE TRUSTEES 1473 BAY RIDGE RD THOMAS & MARTHA MCCUNE 787 TRAMORE LA MAPLES FL 34108 I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REP RES A TRUE REP ATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DA ON THE�0 H UNITY AYER SHR DEPARTMENT. DATE: APR 2 Gall BY. 38 10-117-23 34 0003 A D SAMPLE & M D SAMPLE 1449 BAY RIDGE RD ANNE D & MICHAEL D SAMPLE 1449 BAY RIDGE RD WAYZATA MN 55391 38 10-117-23 34 0006 SUSAN M KERBER & JOHN C HOLM 1495 BAY RIDGE RD SUSAN M KERBER & JOHN C HOLM 1485 BAY RIDGE RD WAYZATA MN 55391 RECEIVE[ APR [ u Zol I CITY OF ORONO CITY of ORONO Municipal Offices Street Address: Mailing Address: 2750 Kelley Parkway P.O. Box 66 Orono, MN 55356 Crystal Bay, MN 55323-0066 2 May 2011 Thomas McCune 1473 Bay Ridge Road Wayzata, MN 55391 SUBJECT: Zoning Application #11-3506 The City of Orono is required to notify you within fifteen (15) business days as to the status of your application for variances for property located at 1473 Bay Ridge Road. Our preliminary review indicates that your application is complete. Your application is scheduled to appear before the Planning Commission on Monday, May 16, 2011. The meeting begins at 6:30 p.m, Please make sure that you or your representative is available to attend the meeting.. You will be mailed a staff report regarding your application prior to the meeting date. Please note, as we discussed the new variance bill/law has been passed by both the House and the Senate. It is currently awaiting Governor Dayton's signature before it is passed into Law. If that fails to happen prior to the May 16`' Planning Commission date, I recommend tabling your application until the June 201h Planning Commission date. I will keep you apprised of the situation and you may follow along yourself at h_ ttg:l/www.leg state.mn.us/lea/leafs aspx and search "HF 52" under the House. Please call me at 952.249.4627 or by email at mcurtis@ci.orono.mn.us should you have any questions. Sincerely, City of Orono r b6&( Melanie Curtis Planning & Zoning Coordinator Telephone (952) 249-4600 • Fax (952) 249-4616 www.ci.orono.mn.us CITY OF ORONO C , 2750 KELLEY PARKWAY ORONO, MN 55356- 952 249-4600 FAX: (952) 249-4616 ADDRESS : 1473 BAY RIDGE RD PIN : 10-117-23-34-0005 LEGAL DESC : REG. LAND SURVEY NO. 0192 : LOT 000 BLOCK 000 PERMIT TYPE ESCROW FEE — APPLICANT PROPERTY TYPE RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION TYPE : ESCROW FEE — APPLICANT NOTE: ESCROW PAYMENT FOR VARIANCE APPLICATION 11-3505 MCCUNE, THOMAS 1473 BAY RIDGE RD WAYZATA, MN 55391— OWNER MCCUNE, THOMAS 1473 BAY RIDGE RD WAYZATA, MN 55391— sl AGREEMENT AND SWORN STATEMENT The work for which this permit is issued shall be performed according to the approved plans and specifications, applicable City approvals, and the State Building Code. This permit is for only the work described and does not grant permission for additional or related work which requires separate permits. All provisions of laws and ordinances governing this type of work shall be compied with whether or not specified herein, This permit will expire and become null and void if construction authorized is not bomme aced within 180 days of the date of issuance, or if construction is ,suspended for a period of 180 days at any time after work has commenced. The applicant is responsible for assuring all required inspections are requested in conformance with the State Building Code. This permit may be revoked at any time for due cause. I I PERMIT NO.: 2011-00260 DATE ISSUED: 04/29/2011 ESCROW FEE - APPLICANT TOTAL 700.00 700.00 .Applicant Permitee Signature Date —� Issued By Signature Date SEPARATE PER'VIITS REQUIRED FOR WORK OTHER THANT DESCRIBED ABOVE. RECEIVED APPLICATION ESCROW AGREEMENT APR 2 4 Z L? Zoning Application #-. I - 3-6-6s-_ - CITY OF ORONO AGREEMENT made this ZQ day of r.c. 2 is 20-LI-I by and between the CITY OF ORONO, a Minnesota municipal corporation ("City") end a t;-n p-, [a corporation - opdona4 ("Applicant"). Recitals 1. Appli nt has filed Zoning Application # l - 3,0 formally requesting the City to review plans for 0.v L located at f' d- t-- ro,7o the "Subject P perty') a more fu y shown and described on Exhibit "A" attached hereto. 2. , F Applicant requests the_City to review said plans which requires City approval including 3. The City is willing to commence its review of the application and incur costs associated with said review only if the Applicant establishes an escrow to ensure reimbursement to the City of its costs. NOW THEREFORE, THE PARTIES AGREE AS FOLLOWS: 1. DEPOSIT OF ESCROW FUNDS. Contemporaneously with the execution of this Escrow Agreement, the Applicant shall deposit $ ©c)- owith the City. All accrued interest, if any, shall be paid to the City to reimburse the City for its cost in administering the escrow account. 2. PURPOSE OF ESCROW. The purpose of the escrow is to guarantee reimbursement to the City for all out-of-pocket costs the City has incurred (including planning, engineering, or legal consultant review) or will incur in meeting with the Applicant, reviewin the plans, and preparing agenda packet material for City Council review of application #. l! - 35Q= . Eligible expenses shall be consistent with expenses the Applicant would be responsible for under a zoning and subdivision application. 3. MONTHLY BILLING. As the City receives consultant bills for incurred costs, the City will in turn send a bill to the Applicant. Applicant shall be responsible for payment to the City within 30 days of the Applicant's receipt of bill. 4. DISBURSEMENT FROM ESCROW ACCOUNT. In the event that the Applicant does not make payment to the City within the timeframe outlined in #3 above, the City may draw from the escrow account without further approval of the Applicant to reimburse the City for eligible expenses the City has incurred. The City shall notify the Applicant of such draw and the nature of the expense for which the reimbursement is being made. If the Escrow amount falls below 75% of the original escrow amount the Applicant shall deposit additional sums as directed by the City, or the City shall discontinue all review. 5. CLOSING ESCROW. The Balance on deposit in the escrow, if any, shall be returned to the Applicant when the review has been completed. 6. CERTIFY UNPAID CHARGES. If the project is abandoned by Applicant, or if the eligible expenses incurred by the City exceed the amount in escrow, the City shall have the right to certify the unpaid balance to the subject property pursuant to Minn. Stat. §§ 416.01 and 366.012. APPLICANT/OWNER- ?e t f-, b j By:-' U CA J . c Cu na- ItS., r)e- emu. T Lt -10- ! c EXHIBIT "A" LEG; DESCRIPTION 1473 Bay Ridge Road Wayzata (Orono) Minnesota, 55391 Property I.D. # 10-1 1 7-23 34 0005 i wili provide the iu-11, detailed legal description if requested. -11- CONSENT TO ESCROW AGREEMENT r l 0TO 101? _ %9L4 j7ivVUas . �tda 0VVI �5 PAO6uf�7e�"usf nelf and v� 1 ("Property ProppryyOwners") are the owners in fee simple of all or part of the property more particularly described in the foregoing Application to Escrow Agreement, and for good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, do hereby join in, consent to, and agree to the terms and conditions subject to the foregoing Application to Escrow Agreement. PROPERTY OWNER(S): Its. r u ee- Its: STATE OF MINNESOTA )ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foreg ' g instru ent was acknowledged before me this 6 da of 20�, by 6/Xk,5 A— - , husband of 11-age the Property Owner;/ rr,,�'s ree- � e Notary Public LESUE C. MARCUM STATE OF MINNESOTA ) .t NotNy W1, SM 1 )SS. MyCpnninleei BpYnJ08%gMS COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) he fore sing ins entwas acknowledged are met 's ae) day of 20 jl/l � R u e- wife of If o Apt !iA e ,t�2L , the Property Owner,*/ 11-u St e- STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN This instrument was [title of ofFcer], of the otary Public MWE Q MARCUM Nab" Prr fflemb a oo�r )ss. ) acknowledged before me tnis oay of 2008 by [name of officer], the [entity's name], a [entity's designation, e.g. a Minnesota corporation], on behalf of [entity's designation]. Notary Public -12- easy K*ilw La®els ; Send along line to i Use Avery® Template 51600 �f. Feed Paper expose Pop -Up EdgeTM All A, 5160® i A, 38 :0-117-23 11 OOD2 HENNEPrN COUNTY REGIONAL RAILROAD AUTHORITY 4I7 5TH ST N SUITE 320 MINNEAPOLIS MN 55401 38 10-117-23 34 0004 DES PROPERTIES LLC 1461 BAY RIDGE RD WAYZATA MN 55391 38 10-117-23 34 0007 TWILA B GERivIANSON DONALD M GERN.ANSON POBOX 91 LONG LAKE MN 55356 Etiquettes fadles A peler ' 1 r r*1119— la . -k-11; AVCOV® rqg:fl® � 38 10-117-23 33 OOD6 GREGG W/DENISE E STEINHAPEL 2265 NORTH SHORE DR WAYZATAMN 55391 38 10-117-2334 D005 THOMAS & MARTHA MCCUNE 787 TRAMORE LA NAPLES FL 34108 A Repliez A to hachure afin de � Sens de -&"i r io —h-M Pnrs I In- � 38 10-117-23 34 0003 AN'NE D & MICHAEL D SAMPLE 1449 BAY RIDGE RD WAYZATA MN 55391 38 10-117-23 34 0006 SUSAN M KERBER & JOHN C HOLM 1485 BAY RIDGE RD WAYZATAMN 55391 RECEIVED APR 26 2011 CITY OF ORONO g www.averycom 1-RMGMAVERY Hennepin County Mailing Label Receipt Provided By: Taxpayer Services Department Print Date: 4/20/2011 9,13:43 AM Company or homeowner Name: Thomas R. McCune (toTOTAL COST: $25.00 Contact Person: ' Contact Address: 1473 BAY RIDGE RD Orono, MN 38 Contact Phone:239-591-1381 Comments: Buffer Distance: 150ft Mail Label Count: 7 PID LIST: 38 10-117-23 110002, 38 10-117-23 33 0006, 38 10-117.23 34 0003, 38 10-117-23 34 0004, 38 10-117-23 34 0005, 38 10-117.23 34 0006, 38 10-117-23 34 0007, YOUR RECEIPT THANK YOU 04/25/2011 11.53AM 12 000000#7202 CrISHIER2 20 $1.25 PLU0026 $25.00 ITEMS 200 CHECK $25- 00 RECEIVED APR 2 G 2011 CITY OF ORONO 3509, City of Orono 2750 Kelley Parkway Orono, MN 55356 Attention: Melanie Curtis Date: April 20, 2011 Re: Variance Application - 1473 Bay Ridge Road Dear Melanie, I have completed all of the documents that you requested for my variance application, per the following list: 1. Variance Application faxed to your attention 4/20/11. 2. Variance Application fee ($700) paid by credit card on 4/19/11 by phone through Monica Fadness. 3. Escrow Agreement - signed and notarized and mailed to you. 4. $700 Escrow application check has been mailed to you with Escrow Agreement. 5. Hardship Documentation Form (mailed to you with roof plans). 6. Comparison drawings of proposed new roof and existing roof. 7. The Certified Property Owners List and Map are being mailed directly to you from Hennepin County. I have mailed a check for this directly to the county. I appreciate your help with this process. Sincerely, -rm Tom McCune RECEIVED APR 28 Mil #3505 ciTv of oRONo Melanie Curtis From: Tom Mccune [tmmccune@me.com] Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2011 4:02 PM To: Melanie Curtis Subject: Re: 1473 Bay Ridge Rd Melanie, I talked with Monica and paid the $700 app fee. I will fax the application in the morning. Thanks, Tom McCune On Apr 19, 2011, at 1:09 PM, Melanie Curtis wrote: Tom The variance you would be requesting would actually be a side setback variance (you're not asking to exceed our height requirements). You can fax your application or scan and email — whichever is easiest. I will need you to submit the completed application form and fee before noon tomorrow the remaining items needed to complete your application are as follows: • $700 application escrow. (Since you are not expanding outside the existing home's footprint the normal escrow of $2,500 is not required); • Escrow agreement (attached); • Completed hardship documentation form; Certified property owner list and map from Hennepin County; and a Plans for the new roof and the existing roof — for comparison. Ideally I would have the remainder of the application materials by May 2" d We can accept a credit card payment for the $700 application fee. However I will need you to mail a check for the escrow. I'm sorry I forgot that we can't accept credit cards for escrow payments. Contact Monica at 952.249.4604 to pay the application fee over the phone. Let me know if you have any questions. Melanie MG1AniG {,�tvfii5 R52.2'�q.�b2'� ®m�ur�orr o.fnnnu5 From: Tom Mccune [mailto:tmmccune@me.coml Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2011 11:20 AM To: Melanie Curtis Subject: Re: 1473 Bay Ridge Rd Dear Melanie, I sincerely appreciate your prompt response. While the sole purpose of the proposed work is to correct ice and water problems due to the poor design of the 50 year old part of the house, I understand the technical requirement for the variance. As I understand it, we would be asking for a height variance for the ridge of the old roof to do the corrective work, even though we aren't actually making any encroachment toward the side lot lines. #3505 To do new trusses over the existing old roof and provide an adequate air space and pitch, the old ridge would be 30- to 36 inches higher than it is now, which would make it only 3 to 9 inches higher than the ridge currently on my newer additions. You indicated that we shouldn't need a new survey since you have one that shows the old house set -backs and we shouldn't need new hardcover calculations since there are no changes to the ones previously approved. I talked with Lyle Oman today and he said he would not need new energy envelope calculations ,since he has the approved ones from before and we will only be increasing the roof insulation. I would like to submit the variance application before noon 4/20/11. I assume I can fax it? Do you need anything other than the completed Variance Application and payment of the application fee at this time? What will I need to submit before the Planning Commission meeting date? Plans? Neighbor list and signoffs? Escrow Agreement and payment? Hardship form? Other? Would I need to be at the Planning Commission meeting on 5/16? I am out of town then. I can be at the 6/13 Council meeting. Again, I believe my request to be very straight forward and I don't want to incur any more expenses than necessary since the cost of corrective measures will be expensive enough. Thanks again for your assistance! Regards, Tom McCune On Apr 18, 2011, at 2:48 PM, Melanie Curtis wrote: Hello Tom I have read the letter you sent to Lyle Oman, and have reviewed your property file. I also received your voicemail from this morning. Your property is located within the LR-1A zoning district. The zoning code relating to this zone may be found here. When looking at the survey in your file (dated 1995) it appears that your home sits f16-feet from the south, side lot line and approximately f14-feet from the north, side lot line. The required principal structure setback from the side lot lines in this district is 30-feet. If your project will not increase the height of the roof from what is existing (at all) in the area of the 30-foot setback it can be done with a staff issued building permit. From my reading of your project description it seems the roof pitch would be increased and the portions of the roof within the 30-foot side setback would get taller. Is this correct? If so the approval is a bit more involved; a City Council -approved variance would be necessary. I believe you went through the City's variance process in 1995 with the addition to your home. Today's process is a bit more entailed than the process in 1995 and there are some additional factors at play. Last summer the State Supreme Court made a ruling on a variance appeal which caused the granting of variances to be put on hold. I can discuss this with your further if you'd like but for all intents and purposes the type of variance you would be requesting would not be able to be approved today. The Legislature is currently reviewing a bill which would allow Cities to grant variances again. Our latest update says this may be adopted and put into law around Easter. Again, we can discuss this more if you'd like but essentially my advice to you would be to make an application for a variance by our April 20t' deadline so you are not held up a month if the law is approved next week. If the law gets hung up and for some reason doesn't pass quickly we can hold your application an additional month or so until it passes. I know this is a lot of extra information you probably weren't expecting. Please call me so we can discuss further. Thank you - Melanie Melanie Curtis Planning & Zoning City of Orono 2750 Kelley Parkway Orono, MN 55356 Direct [dial: 932.249.4627 Fax: 952.249.4616 Planning & Zoning Office 952.249.4620 Email. Curtis i.orono.mn.us Website: www.ci.orono.mn.us Variance Application - entire packet 2011.pdf> Escrow Agreement Land Use Application (3).pdf> CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCI L NO. 3 6 5 1 A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTIONS. 10.23, SUBDIVISION 6 (B), 10.22, SUBDIVISION 2, AND 10.56, SUBDIVISION 16 (L) FILE NO. 2084 WHEREAS, Thomas R. McCune (hereinafter "the applicant") is the owner of the property located at 1473 Bay Ridge Road within the City of Orono (hereinafter "the City") and legally described as follows: Exhibit A attached (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City for a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section. 10.23, Subdivision 6 (B) to permit the construction of a garaaelbedroom/bath addition to be located 10' from the side lot line where a 30' side setback is normally required, and construction of a sunroom located 27' from the side lot line where a 30' setback is normally required, and a variance to Sections 10.22, Subdivision 2 and 10.56, Subdivision 16 (L) to allow 26.7% hardcover in the 75-250' zone where only 25% hardcover is normally allowed. Minnesota: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, FINDINGS l . This application was reviewed as Zoning File 42084. 2. The property is located in the LR-lA Single Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District. ;. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on. November 20. 1995 and recommended approval. of the proposed variances based upon the following findings: A. T"ne proposed side setback of 10` for the garage and 27' for the sunroom instead of the required 30', is consistent with other development in the neighborhood. Page 1. of 6 04 o�o ti CITYof ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO.—R _6._1— B. The new garage addition will result in the removal of the existing detached garage which is located less than 3' from the south side lot line where current standards for a detached garage would require a 10' minimum setback, thereby eliminating this non -conforming structure. C. The proposed location of the garage/bedroom/bath addition in the northerly half of the property will minimize the amount of driveway hardcover in the 75-250' zone. D. The proposed sunroom is over an existing deck and therefore constitutes no new hardcover in the 75-250' zone. Further, the proposed sunroom does not encroach on the average Lakeshore setback, and its location 27' from the lot line will have no impact on neighboring properties. E. The increase in hardcover on the property from 23.9% to 26.7% is being minimized by removal of a portion of the existing deck, as well as removal of the detached garage and existing sidewalk. Hardcover irr the 250-500' zone of 19.9% where 30% would be allowed also is a positive aspect of the proposal. F. Because the existing septic system is located in the area of the proposed garage/bedroom/bath addition, and because that septic system must remain in use until/unless municipal sewer is provided to the property, it is appropriate that construction of this addition be delayed until such time that sewer is available, while the sunroom addition will not be hindered by the septic system location. 4. The City Council has considered this application including thefindings 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 tie community. Page 2 of 6 a O -: W CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 8651 5. Tl-►e City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variances would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicant; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.23 Subdivision 6 (B) to allow a side setback of 10' for the garage/bedroom/bath addition and a side setback of 27' for the sunroam addition, where 30' side setbacks are normally required, and grants a variance to Sections 10.22, Subdivision 2 and 10.56, Subdivision 16 (L) to allow hardcover, in the 75-250' lakeshore setback zone at 26.7% where only 25% hardcover is normally allowed, subject to the following conditions: 1. Hardcover in the 75-250' zone shall not exceed 5,425 s.f. or 26.7% per the hardcover schedule and diagram attached to this resolution as Exhibit B. All hardcover to be removed in the existing deck area shall be removed prior to footing. inspection for the new sunroom. Occupancy of the new garage/bedroom/bath addition shall not occur until the existing detached garage, blacktop driveway and sidewalk have been removed. Applicant is advised that any future proposals for hardcover in the 75-250' zone will require a variance application, and might be approved only in conjunction with concurrent removals of existing hardcover, resulting in no hardcover increase. The standard 30% hardcover allowance in the 250-500' zone shall be reduced by the 350 s.f. overage in the 75-250' zone. 2. The new driveway to be located along the north lot line shall be constructed no closer than 5' from the north lot line to allow for snow storage, etc. Page 3 of 6 CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL_ NO. 3651 3. A permit for the garage/bedroom/bath addition shall not be issued by the City until such time that municipal sewer is available for connection to the property or until such time that a new conforming septic system has been installed. 4. A construction permit for the sunroom shall not be issued until one of the following occurs: a. Applicant executes a "Septic System Upgrade Agreement" and provides the required Letter of Credit to ensure that the septic system will be upgraded in a timely manner absent the installation of municipal sewer; or b. The City Council has ordered the installation of municipal severer to serve the property; or c. A new conforming septic system has been installed on the property. S. Authorities granted by this variance ran with the property not with the applicant, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit within one year of the date of Council approval, or this variance will expire on that date (December 11, 1996). 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 has read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of himself, his heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agrees. to the recording of this resolution in the Chain of Title of the property. Page 4 of 6 CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION Of THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 0651 Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held on the l lth day of December, 1995. ATTEST: orothy M(411in, City Clerk 1 Property Owner (s) STATE OF MINNESOTA ) } 55. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN } Edward J. Cal an, Jr., Ma or The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this llth day of December, 1995 by Edward J. Callahan, Jr. and Dorothy M. Hallin, Mayor and City Clerk of the City of Orono, a 1viinnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary blic �? JAMIE L. SOSMA PS j NOTARY PUBLIC-MINNESOTA .Y ' HENNEPIN COUNTY 1 •••• My Cammissicn Expim Jan. 31, 2000 Paee 5 of 6 CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 3651 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this day of , 199 ( before me a Notary Public within and for said county, personally alp red known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument,and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. ----------------- JAMIE L. BQSMA NOTARY PUBLIC-MINNESOTA HENNEPIN COUNTY My Commission Expires Jan. 31, 2000 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) 5s. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this Jgi4, day of (3 h and for said county, personally appeared _ known to me to be the person(s) describ acknowledged that he (they) executed the PAI It .. �rl�rr✓lyrr✓'�.rr�ifl�r���.r�.ii../S NOTARYP BLIC . 199{ before me a Notary Public within d in and who executed the .foregoing instrument,and same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC Page 6 of 6 Exhibit A Resolution No. 3651 Legal Description (As contained in Certificate of Title No. 74093) Tracts E and N, Registered Land Survey No. 192, Files of Registrar of Titles, County of Hennepin, State of Minnesota. Together with an easement for driveway purposes over Tracts J, K, L, M, O, P, Q and R, all in Registered Land Survey No. 192 as shown in deed Doc. No. 569269, Files of Registrar of Titles; Subject to an easement for driveway purposes over said Tract N as shown in deed Doc. No. 569269, Files of Registrar of Titles; Subject to a public easement in the Highway known as County Road No. 7 as to Tract E; Subject to the portion of said land between the high water mark and the low water mark of Lake Minetonka to the public right, including the right of the State of Minnesota to use or reclaim said portion for any public purposes now authorized by law; (as to Tract E). Also known. as PINS No. 10-117-23 34 0005 z l -7 s -v5D' .6yjSTluV ' VC15MG FLARP OVE3z E`T 2 � x Z m A. Hm= Fiam Lead _ SC� B. Gmee (PIutTJwL'� x X zz C. Drive"y a x D. Sidc-gk- x E. P-olDezE piwk pp"T�, ® G. Otb= TOTAL HAFcDCDVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE - g z?D r,_ OD = A &o �o xloo _e S.F. �— •„ J S.F. S.F. •�i.r � s ••-Y LJ � J S 6 S_x. �3 O SS.F. a 5 0 S.F. Cl S.F. w �x,WrTNovT PaaL z3,9 9/o w,rm P-1- HORE r'7 ' r - mare. 75- 2SD r AfPaDV r�"nncrn AARDCO R "fit' x 0 p• gausr Widen = x © 5�>y RXpM x © rl&e.J E.R.1$J4Tk�� x 3 IL /$ x— I C. Drivtwey J D. Sidewall; x _ /G1 E puiolilecic x _ z G G. othr5 KEP TOTAL UA=CDVER IN 20NE - TOTAL PROPERTY ARC IN ZONE S/G y5 B 2� X. 100 a Asy� s 1 7�, 13 o X JRQ ( POOL SJRFAco YlX2`015F) OF DEC" RS J -�, � + 3 Z 5.F, S_F. S.F. ���•�tl S.F. 1 S.F. S.F. o s� S.F. 1JG1 �� S_F. �. r� S_F. $ �xWRr+avT FI�oL 26,7 % WITH poo4 j r317. 7115 T7ny G ;J,.�L� t.avalL .r , PAMTr) C✓ .� r2 X/S� AfAof _ Z 50 r5b0 A'u-r'UaAfQ C-r-- (f:�LTUC)6 r �13P I f^I�pD � � r�?�r`•� s?�. 3a s �, a,� C