The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About10-24-1988 - Agenda Packet City Council - regular meetingPUBLIC ATTENDANCE CITY OF ORONO MEETING DATE ILL V PLZASE FILL OUT THE INFORMATION REQUESTED BELOW FOR OUR CITY RECORDS. NAME OR NUMBER NAM Ipleasr print) ADDRESS PRZSZNT FOR (from agenda) A L 2. 3.•,- 4. ,- I T IL 1� AGENDA FOR COUNCIL MEETING SET FOR MONDAY, OCTOBER 24, 1988, 7:00 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 whic2i may be obtained upon request from the Recorder. ROLL CALL 1. COLISENT AGENDA* APPROVAL OF MINUTES * 2. Regular Meeting of October 10, 1988 LAKE MINNETONRA CONSERVATION DISTRICT REPORT - 3. Gene Strommen a.) Eurasian Water Milfoil b.) Water Conservation c.) LMCD Comprehensive Plan d.) DNR Shoreline Regulations PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS - Sara Moos Representative PUBLIC COMMENTS - (Limit 5 Minutes Per Person) ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT "APPLICANTS" Immediately after the Council has reviewed your application please sign the three (3) original resolution copies. 4. 4 990 5. 41309 6. #1310 7. 41311 8. 01323 9. #1328 10. # 1330 11. 41335 12. #1339 13. 41345 14. 41346 MAYOR'S REPORT Ward Ferrell, 3411 Watertown Road - Variance Gerald Nelson, 1629 Bohn's Point Road - After -the -Fact Conditional Use Permit/Variance - Resolution Howard Eisinger, 3245 Wayzata Boulevard - Conditional Use Permit - Resolution John 6 Susan Purdy, 1975 Fagerness Point Road - Variances - Resolution Jon Papas, 3369 Crystal Bay Road - After -the -Fact Variance Howard Johnson, 1635/1675 Concordia Street - Subdivision Fullerton Properties Inc., 880 Townline Road - Preliminary Subdivision - Resolution Woodhi l l Country Club, 200 Woodhi l l Road - Conditional Use Permit - Resolution David Lee, 2695 Casco Point Road - After -the -Fact Convcitional Use Permit/variance John Theobald, 4017 North Shore Drive - Variance - Resolution Einar Hagberr,, 740 North Arm Drive - Variance - Resolution CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT 15. Recycling Proposals 16. Budget Adoption - 1989 17. Dangerous Weapons - Ordinance .Amendment 18. Hazardous Building Proceedings - 4545 Watertown Rcad 19. Spring Park - Utility Personnel Sharing Agreement AGENDA FOR COUNCIL MEETING SST FOR MONDAY, OCTOBER 24, 1988, 7:00 P.M. CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT Continuted * 20. 1988-89 Police Contracts * 21. County Road 51 * 22. Ordinance Amendment Deleting Animal Permit Requirement * 23. Ordinance Amendment - Park Commission * 24. Reclassification of Part -Time Officer * 25. Rick Denneson Resignation * 26. Election Canvassing Meeting 11/09/88 * 27. Appointment of Election Judges - Resolution * 28. Administrator's Information Woodhill Avenue County 15 Progress Orono/Minnetonka Beach Interceptor Lake Minnetonka Regional Park Crystal Bay Road DARE Program CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT LICENSES (29*) BILLS (30*) ADJOURNMENT ARLO H. VAN DE VEGTE, PA. ATTOKN&Y AND COUNS[LOt, AT LAW 61 = - - r� 1090 W. WArZ � UL�MD� 30 LONG LAK[. OVA 55956 October 21, 1988 Ms. Barbara Arney 3919 Thomas Avenue South Minneapolis, MN 55410 11drK Sernhardson City Administrator City of Orono P.O. Box E6 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 RE: Long Lake/Orono Joint Meeting for October 26, 1988 Dear Barbara and Mark: This letter is to confirm the joint Long Lake/Orono council meeting to be set for 7:00 p.m., October 26, 1983 at the Oronr )cnucl. I assume that we will be meeting in the Auditorium or a large meeting room at the District Office. Also, I have been instructed by my council to advise you that they object to the proposed format of the meeting involving small groups and pairings and would prefer to meet in the large group format only. Thank you for your consideration and we will see on the 26th. Very truly yours, �6 "4'c"L , rlo N, Vande Vegte AVV/jlh 101488.1 TO: Mayor and City Council I , I, FROM: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator t ��" DATE: October 14, 1988 SUBJRCT: LMCD Representative Report Attachments: A. Gene Strommen General In-=roduction B. LMCD - Eurasian Water Milfoil Memo Dated 10/4/88 C. DNR Shoreland Regulations3 Summary While the City's LMCD representative, JoEllen Hurr, is on vacation, Gene Strommen the new LMCD Exceutive Director will be present to be introduced to the Councilmembers together with addressing the status of the following: - Eurasian Water Milfoil - Water Conservation - LMCD Comprehensive Plan progress - DNR Shoreland Regulations The staff has reviewed the proposed revision to DNR shoreland regluations and feels that Orono should not have signifi:ant problem complying or exceeding those standards. Mr. Strommen has tak?n considerable time in reviewing and summarizing the regulations together with meeting with representatives of City staffs from around the lake and being in attendance at DNR's October 10, 1988 public hearing. cc: Gene Strommen, LMCD Executive Director LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT TO: City Administrators/Managers OCT 51Cp� FROM: Gene Strommen DATE: October 4, 1988 SUBJ: Eurasian Water Milfoil Lake Access Signs The "new" weed with which our Lake is becoming identified has captured LIMCD's attention, along with several other organizations. As a result of the Freshwater Foundation's August 13 seminar on Aquatic Weeds and Eurasian Water Milfoil, LMCD has activated a task force to attack the problem. We are pleased to recognize the concern and cooperation of the DNR, Army Corps of Engineers, Hennepin Parks, MCWD, and Lake Restoration - a private treating company - in addition to the Freshwater Foundation for their willing participation. Tom Reese, Aouna, is chairing this effort for the L114CD. The LMCD has already approved $10,000 to initiate an information/ - education campaign to seek public response to checking the spread, and hopefully, to combat the weed's growth. The first step is now ready, uamely, the installation of a public alert sign which reads per the enclosed copy. It is 18" x 24", orange background, green lettering. We need your assistance• by installing signs at public accesses within your city. Since we are receiving help from Hennepin County Public Works and Hennepin Parks on the major accesses, please confirm by phone the access(es) you can post. We will make signs available to you immediately. Hopefully they can be incorporated on existing posts at each access. Thanks for your return call to help. 11L%-u/ ERS:jlm enc: copy of sign, Freshwater i v� '- _ • L /r r r � 1 ' this week co verify your willingness Foundatiun's sheet PLEASE PREVENT SPREAD OF EURASIAl WATER MILFOILE REMOVE ALL LAKE WEEDS FROM BOATS AND TRAILERS. �j n 2' N N F n SAVE ME Fes. floN O% Eurasian water M11foll What is the problem? Most aquatic plants are an important part of the ecology of our lakes and streams. They provide food and habitat for many organisms. They also help to stabilize the bottom and aerate the water. But when weeds are too abundant, they can upset the natural ecology and Interfere with our aesthetic and recreational en;oyment. This usually happens when the weeds are over - fertilized by nutrients provided naturally or by human activities In the watershed. Sometimes, however, weed problems result from the Introduction of an "outsider," a plant for which there are no established natural controls. Eurasian water milfoil is such a plant. First observed in North America in the early 1940s. Eurasian water milfoil has spread rapidly across the continent In Minnesota, It was officially identified in Lake Minnetonka In 1987 and Its spread to other Minnesota lakes has already begun. a1 1 J'1'I does it grow and spread? Eurasian water mllfoll Is a perennial herb, growing on the bottom of lakes and streams from a fibrous root system. During the spring and summer months, rapid growth from the root crowr• area produces reddish shoots that may reach the surface and flower In water from the shoreline out to a depth of about 10 to 15 feet. Dense populations may occur on a varlet"r of bottom types, Including silt, sand and even gravels and broken rock, making most Minnesota lakes susceptible to nuisance growth of this plant. Waves and human disturbances such as boats, boating equipment and water sk;!ng produce plant fragments which are spread rapidly by water currents, making the plant difficult to contain. New plants grow when the fragments form roots. Though It roots best in protected areas, the weed can also thrive in river channels. weed fragments can hitchhike on boats, trailers, weed harvesting equipment and other vehicles and be transported from one take to another. Thorough cleaning of all aquatic equipment Is the best way to help control the spread of Eurasian water milfoil. Eurasian water milfoil causes many problems: • Swimming, boating, water skiing and fishing .j; o all adversely affected by dense growths. • Exisr,ng co;onies of more desir4-,e plants are Ovaded arc replaced. • Plant ', dgments which wash up on shore make beach areas unappealing. • LUXuriant growth can affect flood control, irnga,*Ion, drainage, water treatment facilities and fish spawning areas. • Eurasian water milfoil is costly, particularly in areas reliant on recreation and tourism. • Mats cf vegetatfen formeo by the weed are ideal breeding areas for mosquitoes. HOW Ca n Eurasian water ` y' milfoii be controlled? J . . Eurasian water milfoil is difficult to Identify because it closely resembles native water milfoils. However, early detection Is Important because intensive control directed at small colonies during Initial stages of growth may reduce both problems and treatment costs. Eurasian water milfoil Is virtually impossible to eradicate once It Is established In a lake or stream, bVt It can be controlled. A number of management techniques are available. Which method Is most appropriate In a particular situation depends on factors such as the characteristics of the water body, the human and economic resources available and the total management plan for the lake and Its watershed. Aquatic weed management methods Include: ,. Public Information Harvesting Bottom barrier applications Granular herbicides Root removal Lake drawdown b%: Freshu•nler F,iund irion what can individuals do*? Lakeshore residents should attempt to clear weed fragments from their beaches before roots develop. Fragments must be removed from the water and disposed of away from the lake area. The weeds can be composted and used as mulch. 1 �:•� - Treatment for aquatic weeds in areas more than 2500 feet square requires a permit from the , Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. Businesses that operate mechanical weed -- harvesters or apply aquatic herbicides must be licensed by the state of Minnesota. Use only herbicides that have been approved for use In lakes and always follow package dirwOons exactly. y: Remove and properly dispose of all plants and plant fragments from boats, anchors, propellers and trailers after removing them from the water. rhough localized control may be achieved by puiling weeds or using bottom barrier materials, more serious problems require a conimunity approach, such as a lake association, watershed district, neighborhood group or local government where can more information be obtained? For further Information on take protection and management, contar. the Freshwater Foundatlon, 2500 Shady'.4 cod Road. Box 90 Navarre, MN S'.:92 (612 ,1 a71-W7) LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT MN SHORELAND MANAGEMENT RULES DRAFT Action Report of: City Managers/Administrators/Officials Review Forim 7:30 a.m., Friday, September 30, 1988, Wayzata City Hall TO: LMCD Board of Directors City Managers/Administrators/Officials FROM: Executive Director Gene Strommeh INTRODUCTION: Participants from the Cities of Excelsior, Minnetonka, Mound, Orono, Spring Park, Tonka Bay, Wayzata and Woodland contributed to an assessment of the MN SHORELAND MANAGEMENT RULES DRAFT. Prepared by the DNR, using a set of city standards adopted in 1976, and proposing to rescind the older county standards adopted in 1970, this current rules draft was introduced in 1985. An update draft released in August 1986 received furthe- public comment. A third draft was reviewed by a committee of 22 interest groups from July 1987, concluding with the recommendations in February 1988, which resulted in this present draft. DNR resource persons in attendance wort. Tom Lutgen, Hazard Mitigation Co- ordinator, and Ogbazghi Sium, Supervisor, Land Use Management. Rules provisions generating discussion were: Definitions. Attention was directed particularly to BLUFF IMPACT ZONE (new); SHORELAND, STRUCTURE, SURFACE WATER -ORIENTED COMMERCIAL (new); WATER ORIENTED ACCESSORY STRUCTURE OR FACILITY (new); and WETL?"D. Specific to wetlands, minor wetlands not identified in the normal wetlard classifica- tion were concluded to he a priority for cities to preserve. Scope. Local governments may adept ordinances that are more estrictive. Adoption schedule calls for cities to bring their ordinances info substan- tial compliance within two years of written notice by Lhe DNR Commissioner. Special circumstances reference, lines 11, 13, page 8, to LARGE CITIES prompted a recommendation to insert cities of the SECOND CLASS and addition of SUBURBAN to shoreland development. The LMCD "Shoreland Guidelines" of 1972 were referenced, having been re- distribl.ited tc all Lake area cities in September 1988. The LMCD Comprehen- sive Plan btudv also stresses regulated shoreland development. Criteria for Land Use Zoning District Designation, item Sub. 1-F, line 7, pa,,�: 14, recom- mended GArER DEPTHS be added to "in -water physical characteristics." Line 19, gage 14, add "AND ADEQUACY - following NEED. for public accesses to public waters. Special Protection District, line 1. page 15, is a responsibility for each ci.^ to so designate in terms of the intended purposes Mated hire. The � ^lore ! LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT MN Shoreland Management Rules Draft Review Forum, 9/30/88, Page 2 recommended zoning would pre-empt local zoning. Some flexibility with these provisions is possible. Zoning - 1, page l8, specified new standards, including setback, for single, duplex, triplex and ivad residential lots. Guest cottages are controlled. Controlled Access Lot Frontage Requirements. Increase in requirea lake frontage is dependent upon ratio of lake size to shore length (acres/mile). Lake Minnetonka is a General Development lake class with sewer, with 14,000 acres and 125 miles of shoreline, including islands; it falls in the 101.200 ratio size, the required increase in frontage for a controlled access lot being 20% (see pages 21 and 24). Structure Setback Standards, line 15, paL-e 25, drew questions concerning the SEPTIC SYSTEM as being the appropriate setback measure, rather than the building. Such a change poses considerations of a building's position on a lot depending on lot size, slope, as it affects septic system placement. Height, page 27, for residential dis'ricts, is proposed for reduction from 35' to 23', from ground level. Accessory Structures are similarly proposed to a 10' height limit. Shoreland Alterations, page 29, contain significant controls to prevent erosion into public waters, preserve shoreland esthetics. Standards for Commercial, Industrial, Public and Setsi-Public Uses, page _)5, .r.troduces standards where water -oriented needs are to be served. Stormwater Management, page 36, introduces standards .or all permit issuances. New stormwater outfalls re,,iire filtering or settling of suspended solids and skimming of surface debris before discharging into pro- tected waters. The balance of rules requiremenrs were scanned, no concerns expressed `y the group. Joint Exercise of Powers, page 54, was brought to the group's attertion _)y Gene Strommen as an opportunity for the 14 Lake Minnetonka borler communities to jointly develop and administer shoreland management contrcis as allowed in Minnesota statutes. The City of Wayzata did present a ccpv of its shoreland ordinances as an example ?0' their progress on the subje.'.. October 10 PUBLIC HEARING nu the rules draft is scheduled for 1:00 p.m. and 6:00 p.m. at Room 200, State Office Building, 100 Constitution Avenue, St, Paul. City .sdministrators plinr.ing to attend are asked to advise Gene Strommen, 473-7033, to arrange stating together. Strommen is plannias; to attend the 6:00 p.m. hearing. 10-3-88 i D LAKE MINNETONKA OONSERVAT;ON DISTRICT 7-11 I N T R O D U C I N G . . . 1- 8 8 Executive Director EUGENE R. STROPWM N The Lake Minnetonka Conservation District Board of Director; please to introduce Gene Strommen who joined t., District as its Execut.ve director July 1, according to Board Chairman Robert Rascop, Shorewood. Gene succeeds Frar,K Mixa who retired Jurp 30 after almost 19 years of d l:- cated service. A University of Minnesota graduate in the School of Forestry, Gene brings an unusual combination of business and non-profit management experiences to the LMCD. Following five years in the wood preservation field in St.. Louis Park, Gene changed careers by becoming manager of the St. Louis Park Chamber of Commerce. After s4-x years he was invited to serve as assistant manager of the Minneapolis Aquatennial in 1970. During that same year the fit. Paul W?nter Carnival selected him to manage the nation's oldest winter festival. A move to re-enter chamber of commerce management brought Gene to tte Suburban Area Chamber of Commerce h+adquartered in Roseville it 1984, where he served as executive vice president until .June 30, 1988. Significant among the skills Gene brings to the LMCD ar^_ Extensive adminis- trative, communications, volunteer business and community leadership organiza- tion and motivation, government relations and fund-raising experiences. Succc-sful budget management and fend raising brought a.id sustained finan- cial strength to all of the organizations under his direction. Internal membership and external public communicaticns have beem demon- strated. Quality newsletters for members and related corstituents kept th^se audiences informed. News releases were directed to area regional and in the Winter Carnivals case, international audiences. Volunteer ta'nt has been an integral part of Gene's bringing community, civic and government human resources together for a common cause. Coupled with adequate financing, Gene can lead an organization to deliver the priority service for which it is committed. "1 am enthusiastic atout joiring the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District at such a significant Juncture in its formative years. Frank Mixa, with the support of the LMCD board, fourteen cities and related county, regional and state agencies, has piA a substantial organizaticn and governing Lake Minnetonka Code in place," Gene noted in acce3ting his appointment.. "The execution of a study tc develop a Comprehensive Management Plan for Lake Minnetonka now under way with Arndorfer Associates, I�ic. is a major commit- ment. The result!+ will bring all the leading forces, community concerns and influences together to make Lake -tinnetonk.i a natural model f^r a recreational and community resource," Gene adder. Gene concluded by noting, 11 Look forward to bringing all of our area, regional and state constituencies together in arriving at the most effective management plan and outcome for Lace Minnetonka." LAKE MINNETONKA C(.)NSERVATION DISTRICT �\ Lr` ��— BOARD OF DIRECTORS I , OCT 4 lc;88 A C B N D A Regular MeE=ing, 7:30 p.m., Wednesday, October 26, 1388' Tonka Hay Village Hall 4901 Manitou RoAd, Tonka Bay 1. Call to Order 2. Roll Call 3. Reading of Minutes, approval a-i read or amended, "-28-88 4. Installation of Officers 5. Public Cosneents - items from persons in al.Cndance not on agenda f:. Coseounications: Letter of appreciation, Minnehaha Creek Watershed District for resolution in support of Long Lake Non -Point Source Pollution Abatement Project 7. Reports A. Special Board Assignment: MCWD Operating Pidn Review, Dave Cochran B. Treasurer (1) Quarterly Budget Rep.,,', quarter ending 9-30-88 (2) Financial Condition, month ending 9-30-88 (3) Auait of vouchers for pa;ment (l_. summary list) (4) Depository Resolution fo, checking d savings accounts C. Standing Committers (.) WATER STRUCTURES b ENVIRONMENT (Chair '(.11en Hurr) (a) Approval of Action Report of 10-8-88 ;b) Nelson variance ivplication request; committee recommendation to deny (c) Roc'.kvam deicing application request to include Site #:' as recommended for approval (d) Deicing arplications for iicense renewals per list, subject to conditions, in 12.09, Sub 4, a) - h) (e) Deicing annual application fee requirement to retain deicing status as recommended (f) *3istrict Mooring Area (DMA) temporary extensions recommending Code amendment (g) Lake frontage Coda amendment, considering Lake Use Cowmittee recommendation supporting consultant Dave Arndorfer'9 propos•il to withhold major Code amendments during Comprehensive Plan study (more) LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT Board Agenda 2 October 26, 1989 (2) LAKE USE (Chair Bob Pillsbury) (a) Approval of Action Report of 10-17-88 (b) Code amendments 1) 54.02, Sub 3: Sale of Strong Beer with Wine/Beer Licenses as recommended 2) 15.28, Sub 3: Delete language "unless accompanied by his parent or legal guardian" 3) 45.43, Sub 2: Change reference from 44.122 to 53.01, and delete language "authorized to sell intoxicating liquor there" (c) Liquor license fixed investigation fee refunds (d) Parking Review, Co. Rd. 51, recommending flashing yellow lights and reduced speed for public safety, per David Singer request (e) Deposit refunds of $100 each for six special events as recommended for approval D. SPECIAL COMMITTEES (1) Advisory Comittee (a) October progress, per outline (b) Subcommittees on Shoreland Management and Fisheries (c) Public Meetings January -February (2) Eurasian Water Milfoil Task Force (a) Sjgn installations (b) Informational brochure development (c) Mapping progress (3) Board Workshop (a) Legal service request for proposals recommendation (b) Ic:stitutional readiness study E. Executive Director: Priority meetings, exchanges 8. Unfiniehed Business A. Proposed Nov -Dec Meeting Schedule: 11-16-88 Advisory Committee 11-19-88 Dock Committee 11-28-88 Lake Use Committee No Advisory Committee meeting in December 12-7-88 Regular Board Meeting 9. New Business - as recommended 10. Adjournment to--1U-88 LAKE MINNETOIJKA (:Ot'dSERVATION DISTRICT Advisory Committee Minutes 2 October 5, 1988 4. SUBCOMMITTEE DEVELOPMENT. (Discussion of the advawi-e-mailed outline of 9-29-88) Shoreland Protection. The MN DNR Shoreland Management Rules Draft now undergoing state-wide public hearings is expected to be adopted relatively intact, Arndorfer projected. Some 1,940 lake communities of the 1,948 Minnesota lakes affected by the rules will find the new rules suitable for their use. The remaining eight lakes and their associated communities which have management boards, such as LMCD, have the flexibility to adopt their own equal or more restr+ctive shoreland management rules. Limits of acceptable change must be addressed in the Shoreland Management Rules Draft, such as building heights, setbacks, Arndorfer added. These assessments will be made by subcommittee members who will recommend desirable outcomes for the 14 Lake Minnetonka communities. It will be important that eac`r community be represented on this subcommittee. Natural Environnnent. These subcommittees will Fegin meeting in December through June as follows: FISHERIES. Randy D,_incan, biolagist for Barr Engineering, will assess fish population and pressures on them, to include spawning areas and their adequacy. Fish stockirg, especially walleye and muskte will be addressed. Eurasian Water Milfoil's effect on game fish will also be studied. (more) LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT Advisory Committee Minutes 3 October 5, 1988 WETLANDS. This study will determine the best programs for wetland protection. Some cities are rigorous while others are lax. The Army Corps of Engineers (C/E) influence of wetland preservation will he compared with state and local plans. A need exists to determine when the C/E should be involved in wetland use reviews. The Minne►;aha Creek Watershed District wetland inventory will be analyzed. WATER QUALITY. Nutrient budget and transparency as related to water clarity will be the primary focus of this subcommittee. Pesticides and chemical influence will be assessed. A base for the lake's direction as to quality - improving or regressing - will be established. Long term influences will be identified. It was noted here that Hennepin Parks is developing its own water q.iality program accordii.g to Tim Marr. This could be a valuable resource. Winter Monitoring. This subcommittee will address: * Litter accumulation * User conflicts greater for winter recreation * Ice fishing houses - responsible use * Access points and private property trespassing * User's distance from shore, dependent on snow * Snow plowing disruption of snow cover • Wetland use and abuse * Deicing management Subcommittee organization, administration and provision of resource material is Arndorfer Associates' responsibility. Dave expects to facili- tate each meeting. LMCD will circulate meeting nctices. Each agency and city representative is reminded at this time to select his/her staff and other resource (Board) specialists for one or another of the subcossittees. The Preliminary Meeting Schedule of 9-29-88, mailed to all Advisory Committee members and re -enclosed, is the guide for participant involvement. 5. PUBLIC MEETINGS. The time frame for preparation, advance promotion and organization necessitates the five scheduled meetings co be held mid -January through February. Arndorfer noted this timing coincides with year -one data collection and analysis being complete, allowing outside com- ment before this decision -making process begins. Promoting public attendance was cited as a chief concern for the successful outcome: Dean Ribufoni, an environment feature writer for the Star Tribune, was suggested for news assistance. Cable TV, news features, and likely a few paid advertisements will he necessary Notices in city water/sewer bills was also suggested, as well as city newsletters where available. A budget and schedule of marketing priorities is needed to support this effort. Locations as previously identified -Ire city halls or public auditoriums in Excelsior, Mound, Wayzata, Ilootnington or Edina, and St. Louis Park. STOP Spread of Eurasian Water Milf oil r I )„ jwt tratigltort aquatic %%Ce ds! y wrt well hitrlt r, l�rrtt motor pror,ell„r �Locatiolla where aquatic weedy tire ott'•n fuulTd kid Boaters can help I,re%ent the sh►ead „t V.ulasian water mil(oil by tenx,,int' all aquatic ��rr�k t11,111 (railer. boat, ,,jor/propellor and arlel►of-s belme lawlch- ing and after lei water. Special care should be taken t t ltc sn ►d tile ,i Tlerior offrom the wet wells of trt cartop boats and canoes. qT aA71An NAIFTI MILMIL F1t"M" T H t" EU RASIAN WATERM11,F011, TASK FORCE Steve Colvin MDNR 500 Lafayette Rd., Box 25 St. Paul, MN 551155-4025 Marty Jessen Freshwater Foundation 2500 Shadywood Road, Box 90 Navarre, MN 55392 Kevin Kretsch Lake Restoration 620 Hamel Rd. Hamel, MN 55340 Jim Mahady Minnehaha Creek Watershed District Muriel Morrisette Freshwater Foundation 2500 Shadywood Road Navarre, MN 55392 Herb Nelson U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 1421 U.S. Post Office St. Paul, MN 55101-1479 296-0782 471-8407 478-9421 473-4224 471-8407 220-0403 Tom Reese 540-2583 Lake Minnetonka Conservation Dtstrtct 5641 Bartlett Blvd. Mound, MN 55364 Hal Runke 830-0555 Barr Engineering Company 7803 Glenroy Road Bloomington, MN 55435 Jack Skrypek 296-0783 Minnesota Dept. of Natural Resource 500 Lafayette Road, Box 25 St. Paul, MN 55155-4025 Gene Strummen 473-7U33 Lake Minnetonka Conservation District 402 E . lake Wayzata, MN 55391 Dave Weaver 559-6705 Suburban Hennepin Regional Park Dist. P.U. Box 41320 m .10 • i 71 4. BREAD C • 'IAL~I Fi JV IM ALL LAI% MA loRAM BeA I m ■ _ f A :rrr� I= . / OCT ME MO TO: Board of Managers Mlinnehaha Creek Wat?rshed District FROM: Eugene A. Hickok anJ Associates DATE: October 20, 1988 RE: Lake Level, Flow and Precipitation Summary for September 1938. Lake levels in Lake Minnetonka rave continued to decline through September as illustrated by the attached graph and lake elevations. There has not been any discharge from Lake Minnetonka to Minnehaha Creek since November 17, 1986. Creek flow at the Browndale Ave. dam in Edina during September is shown below. The 30 year average precipitation for September at the National Weather Service station in Maple Plan is 2.83 inches. The actual precipitation recorded in Wayzata for September was 3.04 inches. A summary of precipitation follows. Maple Plain Minneapolis -St. Paul Intern'l Airport Wayzata PRECIPITATION SUMMARY SEPTEMBER 1988 Actual 2.79 3.04 MONTHLY FLOW SUMMARY Grays Bay (cfs ) 30 Year Average 2.83 2.50 Browndale Ave. Dam (cfs ) September 7 0 2.5 September 14 0 2.5 September 21 0 5.0 September 28 0 5.5 5- Is 3 0 - SIX !,10NTH PRECIPITATION RECORDED ol/ 7-77 X/' ell, i APR. 88 MA,( 88 JUPI. 88 JUL. 88 AUC. 88 SEPT. 88 MONTH © MAPLE PLAIN AVE = WAYZAT/ ACTUAL FRECIPIIATION SUMMARY MPLS. AIRPORT MPI.S. AIRPORT MAPLE PLAIN WAYZATA AVERAGE ACTUAL AVERAGE ACTUAL OCT. 87 1.83 0.60 2.06 0.84 NOV. 87 1.29 1.07 1.46 2.17 DEC. 87 0.87 1.25 0.86 0.79 JAN. Be 0.82 1.37 0.84 0.96 FEB. 88 0.95 0.10 0.78 0.19 MAR. 88 1.17 1.33 1.51 1.51 APR. 88 2.05 1.56 2.35 0.95 MAY 88 3.20 1.70 3.93 1.46 JUN. 88 4.07 0.22 :.tl: 0..') JUL. 88 3.31 1.17 4.65 1.34 AUG. 88 3.64 4.29 ".u9 3.75 SE"1, 89 :.SJ 2.79 1.83 3.04 LAKE `✓IINNETONKA Writer Levels 198 7 - t 988 930.GC• 929.50 929.00 O Z 928.50 v 0 928.00 Z C H > 927.50 W J W 927.00 926.50 926.00 06-Apr-87 21 -Jul-87 26- Aug -8709-Nov-87 04-Apr-88 03-Jun -88 21 -Jul-59 06-Sep-88 GATE .......ZSZ..S,SiE..,..i,i..................ii.tllttlpwtflit.at.fttt.t,.z.L,....,,a.i..::x,it___ZC:..zz:. _........... ....... ...... _:__::.xz:......::..a:=a:ati Ad/ Dater Eleaattona - take nta0etonaa ,...a ui.......... ::a==:,:.:..,t:.i:....::a.............t,... ....:::i:::,u::::,:xi:::.=: Date Eleiattoo Fla Date ElrratIon Flo• Date IIt, ation Flol CA It Ela.atION Flow Data II*.atIam Flo• 06-441-17 927.11 0.00 1/-Jr1-17 927.43 0.00 lA Jrl I1 921.37 0.00 21 Jwl I7 927.71 0.00 22-Jw1.11 927.71 0.00 24-J01-17 921.62 0.00 27-Jr1.17 921.75 0.00 21-Jr1-17 121.73 0.00 30-Jul-17 921.79 0.00 31-Jol-17 921.11 0.00 03-Awq-17 911.11 0.00 06-Awg-17 121.71 0.00 10,-bq-17 921.71 0.00 11 Arq-11 921.77 0.00 11-Aiq-17 921.13 0.Do II Aeq I1 921.13 0.00 1+-Arq N 921.79 0.00 14-Awq-17 9I/.7: O.Do 26-Arq-17 9-1.15 O.CO 31 Alq-1/ 911.A3 0.00 01-Us-17 920 AI 0.00 04-Sep-17 921.521 0.00 14-See-17 921./1 0.00 Ill-SOP-17 ►21.33 0.DO 21-Sep-17 t2l.97 0.00 23-Sep-17 +21.aa 0.00 19-Sw-17 911.12 0.00 05-Cct-17 921.3: u.00 12-Oct-17 M.13 0.00 I6-Oct-17 tn.16 0.00 20-Oct-17 tn.Is 0.00 26-0ct-17 921.1: 0.00 02-Met-17 tn.OA 0.00 09-11a41 921.04 0.00 lb-11t-17 921.04 0.00 24-10.-17 +21.00 0.00 01 Dec-17 tn.10 0.00 , 7-kc-17 921.01 0.00 14 +ec -17 Tn. o1 1.00 03-J64-11 927.16 9.00 19-Jaw-11 I11.M 0.01 03-Fe►-11 927.4 1.00 11-Faa-11 121.94 0.00 �L-Jun-11 927,10 0.w 01-Auq-11 9J6.to 0. W 234e6-1/ 927.91, 0.04 Ua-:un-/1 927.10 0.DU In-A„q -qq 926.a 0.00 07-Mr-11 t:7.96 0.uo );-Jun-" 127.66 0.00 :•A"-n M.19 0.v0 15-Ilar-n ".00 0.00 .:-Jun-all 127.32 0.00 Ja-9uq-0/ 924.14 0.Ulu :a-Aar-11 911. 04, 0.00 !J-Jun-ve 9:7.3: 0.00 Il-Awq-N 926.71 0.A 30-Dar-10 92t.01 0.00 :V-Jun-n 927.44 0.DO I2-Arq-1110 9JA.N O.Dr 0!-10!-to 921.14 0.00 Y-Jun-n 927.40 0.00 24-Auq-11 9I6.41 0.UO 06 Ar•-Il 9/1.16 0.00 :7-Jun-11 927.21 0.00 .A-Auq-n 916.A2 0.00 11-4er-:9 920,14 0.00 3v-Juw-H 927.11 0.Ou 10-8uq-11 926.30 0.00 13-Apr-01 In. 16 0.OU 05-Jul-n 927,06 0.00 06-Se1-111 924.06 0.vo 11-40r-80 129.10 0.00 07-JYI-a 927.06 0.00 12-sa0-11 126.31 0.aJ 25-Apr-n 921.06 0.00 11-Jul-11 926.93 0.04 13-Se1'11 916.34 0.A 21-4pr-19 9P 01 0.00 11-Ja1-11 927.04 0.00 19-Sep-11 926.:4 0.A O3-Dat-411 921.00 0.00 U Jrl n 926.90 u.00 20-SAP11 976.42 0.00 01-Dat-811 9:1.00 0.00 1 Jul-11 +2A.10 0.00 'a-»1-11 9:6.:A 0.v0 09-nat-11 Tn.1A 0.OU 21-Jul-11 926.94 0.00 3o-Sep-116 f:e.2 0.00 13-Raw-11 gn.04 0.00 25-Jul-a 926.N 0100 0-Oct-98 926.26 0.uu I7-1At-11 t21.00 0.00 :.-J11-11 926.90 0.A 10-0ct-11 126.24 0.00 It-NAe-n 927.96 0.vu 01-Arq-11 126,72 ..vu 17-011-11 97A.16 0.vu 29-Mt-11 M.►0 0 - A 03 Aug-N 926,71 O.OJ I0-0ct-01 921.14 0.00 31-Aat-011 127.14 0.00 04-4uq-01 976.91 0 v0 C � i To: Mayor Grabek 6 Orono Council Members City Administrator Bernhardson From: Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator Date: October 21, 1988 Subject: #990 Word Ferrell, 3405 Watertown Road - Variance - Request to Table Mr. Ferrell called this morning and told me that he had just received word from his doctor on some tests, indicating that he will have to be hospitalized and will be laid up for the next 3 weeks. He requested that his application be tabled until he is back on his feet. We would anticipate that that would be some time in late November, perhaps even December or January. Please keep your packet with memo and exhibits for i990 that was delivered on October 20, 1988 since this is a bulky item and we would like to avoid copying it again. Proposed Motion - Moved by , seconded by to table application #990 Ward Ferrell, 3411 Watertown Road until applicant notifies the City that he can be present for a specific Council meeting date. Ayes , nays r I • �J i i 1 To: Mayor Grabek & Orono Council Members City Administrator Bernhardson , From: Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator Date: October 19, 1988 Subject: 1990 Ward Ferrell, 3405 Watertown Road - Variance Application - Request to construct a single residence on vacant proper' adjacent to his existing residence. List of Szhibits Exhibit A - Staff Sketch Showing Planning Commission Recommendation & Staff Recommendation Exhibit B - Planning Commission Action Notice Dated 10/3/88 Exhibit C - Planning Commission Minutes of 10/3/88 Exhibit D - Memo & Exhibits of 9/26/88 Planning Comission Recoeendation - This item was referred to the Planning Commission for review upon applicant's request for a revision to his earlier application. The Planning Commission at their October 3rd meeting, recommended on a vote of 4-2 to approve a single additional buildable lot for this 2.90 acre property, and further recommended that this be accomplished by legally combining the 1.04 acre parcel and the 0.85 acre parcel, creating a parcel of 1.89 acres in area, leaving the existing house on a 1.01 acre parcel. The Planning Commission felt that from a precedent standpoint, this would be perceived as approval of a lot area variance of .11 acres or 58 rather than granting lot area variances with a subdivision application that would create a new building site. Note that the Planning Commission recommendation of 4 in favor and 2 against for approval of a new building site with 1.89 acres incorporated into it, was the second motion voted on. The initial vote was a motion to approve with the acreage being divided equally between the 2 sites. That motion failed on a vote of 2-3. Noting from the minutes that Cohen's vote of nay on this motion was based on the fact that tie was not in favor of an additional houses on the property, it would appear that Planning Commission was not in total agreement regarding the issue o how the remaining property should be apportioned. Zoning File #990 October 19, 1988 Page 2 of 3 DiscusaiOD - Given the history of this parcel, and given the fact that applicant has demonstrated th ability to place a house and primary and alternate septic systems on the property, but given the precedent of granting any variance for a substandard, unsewered, common- ownership lot situation, staff feels there are significant factors and reasons supporting both sides of the issue. As noted in previous memos, there will be some additional situations within the City that could request the same consideration if this common -ownership variance is granted. Those additional situations are not overwhelming in number, amounting to approximately 22 unsewered, common -ownership situations with a realistic potential for requesting variances to lot area in order to gain an additional building site. However, as staff has noted previously, 22 additional houses on substandard lots in the unsewered zone does not further the City's intent to avoid sewering the rural areas of the City. Furthermore, it is staff's opinion that reduction of the existing developed building site from 9 conforming 2.9 acre size down to a 1.01 acre lot size, is precedent setting in and of itself. Although Planning Commission is comfortable with the idea that they are granting only a 5% variance, staff feels this action will be perceived as setting a more adverse precedent and setting a standard that makes a statement that a 1.01 acre lot is acceptable in the 2 acre zone. For this reason, if a new building site is approved, staff would recommend that the 2.9 acres be split evenly between the new building site and the existing building site, giving each 1.45 acre. This also will potentially provide a second alternate drainfield site for the existing house, making that property less prone to becoming a candidate for municipal sewer in the future. This would require a lot line rearrangement. -Mr Zoning File #990 October 19, 1988 Page 3 of 3 Staff Recossendation - In the var4.ous memos and the exhibits presented to Planning Commission and Council by staff on this revised proposal and the previous "2 additional building sites" proposal dating back to 1985, staff has attempted to fairly present the history and factual basis for the City's common -ownership philosophy and ordinances. Based on that information, it is staff's opinion that approval of this proposal to allow a second residence on a commonly -owned parcel of 2.9 acres in a 2 acre zone, will set a precedent that, given the relatively non -unique circumstances of this application, could result in as many as 22 similar properties being requested for similar consideration. Twenty-two substandard lots being developed in a rural, unsewered area of approximately 1,100 developed, unsewered properties may or may not be significant in maintaining the goals of the City's Comprehensive Plan, depending on the individual characteristics of each of those properties and the intensity of development of those properties in the future. Certainly, allowing infill development o' existing substandard common -ownership unsewered lots will not enhance Orono's attempt to keep sewers c-ut of the rural area. It is questionable whether such development will have a significant negative effect. However, approval of this application will likely result in additional similar requests. Councii should consider what criteria the City will use in reviewing those requests as they occur. If Council agrees with Planning Commission that it is appropriate given the circumstances of this application that second house should be constructed on the property, it is staff's recommendation that the property be equally divided into 1.45 acre parcels for the reasons noted above. Staff feels that the degree of precedent set, i.e. granting each site a 27.5% variance, is less precedent -setting than granting a 5.5% variance for a vacant lot and granting a 49.5% variance for the lot with the house on it. A resolution reflecting Counci l's action on this variance will be drafted and presented for adoption at your next meeting. f14A&N#PJC- C ^VA#Jgl*M 2Etor�w�� n�N CoNgL# G VACANT Lars, AWW 1WI S /. Sj OfC C. PA+QCEL AS A 8u I � D /N S1,rE . 1 hereby eertil) that tills wren. pta +. nr r• Mp. prepared by me or under my dvccl +u ,uim rj ►het 1 am a du'y Nc-istcred � Surwrac �derr the h/er/. of LbeL5t'�•t/s_of [�1 >�l-r Now till) Al CoH�nsl[er Fes"" �L- *, 1.0 1", • r ...... Ar as cw.•. A It 4 d •.. it ..• i r / fftdh a ZONING FILE NO. 990 CITY OF ORONO NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 473-7357 Date of Notice: 10/10/88 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- TO: Ward Ferrell COPIES TO: 3405 Watertown Road Long Lake, MN 55356 '"YPE OF APPLICATION.: Variance - -------------- DATE OF MEETING: 10/3/88 VOTE: 4 For 2 Against Planning Commission recomends the following: Approval subject to conditions noted below NOTES AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS: Planning Commission recommended approval of one additional residence on the property, to be located on a lot to be created by legal combination of the two westerly parcels, for a total of 1.89 acres in area for the new building site. A motion to recommend approval Subject to making two total lots of equal size (1.45 acres for new house, 1.45 acres for existing house) failed on a vote of 2 ayes and 3 nays with one abstention (due to lake arrival of Planning Commissioner Brown). Applicant's next scheduled meeting is confirmed as: City Council Monday, October 24, 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. A oz i B �oT LINE �A'r[Q/NvGEI►�IFNT R,Ecow�w�rNo eo t y s'TAF� /F ONE NEW RN#L-b/N G Sat ww t4 1 twmbl wrtif e>st dlia sur+e7. PVn' or n:, !• was pripsrW by ass or under mr dirod su "•x �isi� rd that 1 m a duty Ke c :x '�,. _os ssader the Iaws of tbs tears r Drta I I��S�—lei. NO.if�•- Suu . ..., _. C~Posltw FAA- vaal.�+c.a SL lie* st so K .f 1.01. A< K u•w•as /. W/� A c 09 CWWAW .f at At .r G".7a•BIG. aa MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 3, 1988 #990 WARD FERRELL 3411 WATERTOWN ROAD REF== BACK TO PLANNING COMMISSION FOR FURTHER REVIEW The applicant was present for this matter. Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator Gaffron stated that this matter had been before the Planning Commission back in 1986. Mr. Ferrell owns three separate parcels of property which are 1.04 acres, .85 acres and 1.01 acres with an existing house. His original request was to have a variance to the 2-acre standard so a house could be built on each of the two vacant lots. After their review of this matter in 19¢6, the Planning Commission indicated that they welild not recommend approval of two houses on the other two parcels. The matter went on to the City Council but was tabled several times and never finalized. The applicant was now requesting to build on one of the two vacant one -acre lots. Chairman Kelley asked why there were no plans, cnly a letter indicating the applicant's intent. Mr. Ferrell stated that he would like to build a house on one of the two lots and leave the other one vacant. Kelley stated that he would stand by his previous decision to allow two houses on the entire three acre parcel, with the middle lot being split and used between the other two lots. Mr. Ferrell stated that it would ba very costly to rearrange the lot lines. Cohen stated that he was not in favor of the applicant building even one additional house. Moos concurred with Cohen in that she would like to see the 2-acre minimum upheld. Hanson asked applicant if there was any adjacent land he could acquire. The applicant replied that there was no acquirable land in any direction. Hanson said that he would consider joining the two lots for a total of 1.89 acres. However, there would need to be septic system contingencies placed upon the approval. Planning Commission member Hanson asked whether certain legal issues would come into play based upon the house being built back in 1958. Gaffron stated that there was no need for a legal opinion in that respect, the City Ordinances were very clear in dealing with Mr. Ferrell's situation. Johnson stated that he would be in favor of Kelley's suggestion to split the middle lot between the other two. it was moved by Chairman Kelley, seconded by Planning Commission member Johnson, to recommend that the 2.90 acreage be divided equally and two building lots be established with the existing house and one other lot. The variance would he for the lot area in the 2-acre zone. All yard setbacks and front yard setbacks would have to be met.. Motion, Ayes-2, Moos, Hanson and Cohen, Nay. Planning Commission member Hanson asked whether combining the MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 3, 1988 ZONING PILE #990-PERRELL CONTINUED 1.04 and the .85 lots would meet the City's septic requirements. Gaffron stated that in a rural area a 2-acre minimum would be required. However, from a septic point of view, each of the lots could meet the requirements for primary and alternate septic sites, but there would only be room to build a modest residence and none of the amenities (pools, tennis courts, etc.). It was moved by planning Commission member Hanson, seconded by Moos, to recommend combining the,,1.04 and .85 acreage for a total of 1.89, and grant a variance to build on that lot. Kelley asked why Hanson favored that proposal rather than splitting a lot between the two lots. Hanson replied that he wanted to keep any new building sites as close to the 2-acre minimum as possible. Cohen reiterated his desire to uphold the 2-acre minimum standard. He did not want to open pandora's box. Hanson stated that were it not for the fact that applicant had no acquirable land, he would not be in favor of such a proposal either. Kelley added that there is also history to take into consideration. Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator Gaffron explained that the City has allowed variances for mu:.h less than 2 acre parcels in the past, but only in single- separate ownership situations. This case is unique in that the property in question is substandard and is owned by an adjacent property owner. City Ordinances prohibited a property owner under such conditions to sell off the property and obtain a building permit. Motion, Ayes=3, Johnsun and Cohen Nay, Brown abstained. Zoning Administrator questioned Brown's abstention. Planning Commission member Brown stated his reason to be that he did not get the full benefit of the discussion due to a late ar - ' '-a1. Gaffron apprised Brown of the gist of the application ar.,_ recall vote was taken. Motion, Ayes-4, Johnson and Cohen, Nay, Motion passed. #1310 HOWARD BISINGER 3245 WAYZATA BOULEVARD RB MAL CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT SBCOIID RBV IBM The applicant was present for this matter, as was Mr. John Gannon of Park Construction. Zoning Administrator Mabusth stated that this matter involved the renewal of a conditional use permit for 100,000 cubic yards of fill to be obtained from the "394" project and placed on Mr. Eisinger's property. Mabusth stated that the City Engineer had addressed the issue of time involved with grading and seeding. The City Engineer had determined which months would be best for seeding. It will be staff's responsibility to call when the seeding and grading should take place. Mr. Gannon had also written a letter in response to the concerns involved with the amount of trucks and time it would take to haul 100,000 cubic yards of fill. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 12, 1988 ATTENDANCE 7:00 P.M. The Council met on the above date with the following members present: Mayor Grabek, Councilmembers Goetten, Peterson, Callahan and Nettles. The following represented the City staff: City Administrator Bernhardson, Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator Gaffron, Public Works Director Gerhardson, and City Recorder Scheffler. City Attorney Barrett was also present. CONSENT AGENDA* It was moved by Councilmember Goetten, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to approve the Consent Agenda. Motion, Ayes=5, Nays=O, Motion passed. RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION - ROBERT ROST Mr. Rost resigned from his position as Park Commission Chairman in August of 1988. Mayor Grabek presenteO Mr. Rost with a plaque and expressed appreciation on behalf of the City of Orono for his years of service and accomplishments as the Park Commission Chairman. Mr. Rost accepted the plaque and told the Mayor and Councilmembers that it was his pleasure working with the City of Orono and he appreciated all the support he received from the City Council. IXPPROVAL OF MINUTES* It was moved by Councilmember Goetten, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to approve the Minutes of the August 22, 1988 Council Meeting. Motion, Ayes=5, Nays=O, Motion passed. PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no comments from the public. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS Planning Commission Representative Cohen was not present for this Council Meeting. ZO MI ISTRATOR'S = 9 9 0;The WARD PBRRELL \ 3405 A?ERTOMli ROAD VARICE ap nt was REPORT: not present for this matter. City Administrator Bernhardson explained that in February, 1986, the Planning Commission recommended denial of building two houses on applicant's three acres of land. They indicated that they may approve building one additional house. Mr. Ferre 1 l's property is located within the RR-lB zoning area which requires a minimum two acre lot size for a building site. When this matter was brought before the Council, it was again denied, but was tabled before the resolution was drafted. These same even•= took place in May of 1987 after applicant requested to req, this item. MINUTES OF REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING SEPTEMBER 12, 1988 ZONING FILE #990-FER.RELL CONTINUED Mr. Ferrell is now requeoting that this :natter be reopened once more and has a revised plan for consideration. Applicant is seeking a variance on one of the two vacant lots. Bernhardson stated that there are some alternatives for this matter. One would be to combine the two westerly lots, which would create a parcel of approximately two acres, leaving the easterly portion with a little over one acre. Another option would be to do a lot line rearrangement so that the total three -acre parcel would be split exactly in half. The concern of approving Mr. Ferrell's request to develop only one of the lots is that both lots are substandard and it would be difficult to approve building on one lot and deny the other similar lot. In light of applicant's revision to the original application, staff is recommending that this matter be referred back to the Planning Commission. It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Councilmember Nettles, to refer #990, Ward Ferrell, back to the Planning Commission for review. Councilmember Goetten stated that she would hope this was the last time :his matter was brought before the Council. She felt that the City Council had been very accommodating in trying to resolve this matter, but Mr. Ferrell had commented to the contrary. She suggested that should there be any additional costs involved with the review of this new proposal, Mr. Ferrell should be responsible. Motion, Ayes=5, Nays=0, Motion passed. #1303 ALLAN REZAE" 1989 FAGERNESS POINT ROAD VARIANCE RESOLUTION •the applicants were not present for this matter. Prior to any discussion on this matter, Mayor Grabek removed himself from the Council, due to his personal association with the parties involy id. City Administrator Bernhardson explained that the Council had previously given conceptual direction to the City pertaining to the approval of relocating a fence. At the August 22nd Council Meeting, it was discovered that the Applicants were in the process of selling this property. Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator Gaffron had tried several times to contact applicants but had been informed that Rezabek's phone number had been changed. The Resolution, once drafted, will require the signature of the current resident at 1999 Fagerness Point Road. It was staff's recommendation that this matter be tabled for two weeks to ascertain who currently owns the property. Councilmemher Goetten inquired as to whether the current homeowners would be advised to attend the Council Meeting on September 26th. City Administrator Bernhardson stated that if To: Mayor Grabek & Orono Council Members City Administrator Bernnsrdson From: Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator Date: Septer.oer 8, 1988 Subject: #990 Ward Ferrell, 3405 Watertown Road - Variance - Continued Review NOTE: Per the letter dated August 4, 1988, Mr. Ferrell has requested that the City re -open File #990, a lot area and width variance application. This was last reviewed by the City Council on May 26, 1987. List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Letter From Applicant Dated 8/4/88 Exhibit B - Staff Letter to Applicant Dated 8/9/88 Exhibit C - Plat Map Exhibit D - Survey With Staff Notations Exhibit E - Current Applicable Code Section Exhibit F - Planning Commission & Council Minutes Exhibit G - Various Pertinent Staff Memos & Exhibits Fr- PCZTLLITIC/J Ar !N7 OF Ia"CkCT1 Discussion - Mr. Ferrell originally requested to be able to build a house on each of the two approximately 1 acre lcts he owns adjacent to his home, which also is on a 1 acre lot. This property all is in the RR-lB Rural Residential Zoning District, which requires a minimum 2 acre lot size for a building site. On February 18, 1986, the Planning Commission voted 5-0 to recommend denial of 3 total residences on the applicant's 3 acres, but recommended approval of allowing 1 additional house on th-: 3 acres. That recommendation did not clarify whether a lot line rearrangement would be appropriate. Ferrell continued his 3-total-house request at the Council level and on April 1.4, 1986 Council directed staff to draft a resolution of denial by a vote of 4-1. Although th,t resolution 'was drafted, it was never formally adopted and was tabled at applican,�'s request. The item was opened again in May of 1987 at applicant's request, discussion ensued, and it was again tabled at applicant's r•tquest. APPLICATION NO. #990 CITY OF ORONO NOTICE OF COUNCIL ACTION P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 473-7357 Date of Notice: 9-21-88 --•------------------------------------------------------------------------ TO: Ward Ferrell COPIES: 3405 Watertown Road Long Lake, MN 55356 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- TYPE OF APPLICATION: Variance --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. DATE OF METING: 9-12-88 VOTE: 5 For 0 Against COUNCIL ACTION - NOTION: Council voted unanimously to refer this application to the Planning Commission for consideration of your revised proposal. This item is scheduled for the Planning Commission meeting on Monday, October 3, 1988. The meeting starts at 7:00 p.m., and it is expected this will be the first item reviewed that evening. Please contact Mike Gaffron or Jeanne Mabusth at 473-7357 if you or your representative cannot attend that meeting. If you desire certified copies of the official Council minutes, they are available from the City Recorder or City Clerk after review and approval by the City Council. To: Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson From: Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator Date: September 26, 1988 Subject: #990 Ward Ferrell, 3405 Watertown Road - Variance - Revised Proposal - Referral From Council Zoning District - RR-lB, Single Family, 2 Acre, Unsewered Application - The applicant has revised his proposal, and is requesting a variance to build a new residence on one of his three one -acre parcels, rather than his previous request to build a house on each of the two vacant one -acre parcels. List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Notice of Council Action Dated 9/21/88 Exhibit B - Memo & Exhibits of 9/8/88 Discussion - Please review carefully the memo and exhibits of September 8, 1988. That memo will give a background regarding the applicant's original request, a history of City codes in relation to this property, a history of action by the City to date on this request, and additional pertinent factors. Planning Commission is specifically requested to make a recommendation to Council regarding two issues: 1. Does the Planning Commission still hold to the Planning Commission recommendation of February 18, 1986 to recommend approval of one additional house on the total three acre property, for a density of one house Fer 1.5 acres? 2. If so, which of the following configurations for the property is appropriate: A) Require a lot line rearrangement and combinations so that there are two 1.5 acre tax parcels. B) Grant buildability to one of the one acre parcels, deny the other one acre parcel and require that the new building site be a combination of the two vacant lots. Zoning File #990 September 27, 1988 Page 2 of 2 C) Same as above except attach the denied lot to the existing residence property. D) Same as above except leave the denied lot uncombined with either the approved acre or^the existing house acre. Please refer to the survey/sketch attached as Exhibit N/E of 5/19/87, abol.it 11 pages back in your packet. This indicates t',at the parcel with the existing house is about 1.01 acre, the next vacant parcel to the west is about .85 acre, and the western most parcel is about 1.04 acre in area. The applicant has shown that technically there is room to provide for septic systems within the property, however, the sites would be quote limited in potential for development with more than just a simple single family residence. Staff is on record as suggesting that constructing houses on each of the two vacant lots will not ultimately further Orono's attempt to keep municipal sewers out of the rural area. Past Councils have given applicant at least some suggestion that two 1� acre parcels, i.e. allowing one additional building site on the entire three acre property, would be worthy of consideration. Staff Recces ndation - Again, staff would ask that you review the packet of information provided. If Planning Commission feels that a variance to allow one additional building site on the three acre property is justified, staff would recommend that a lot line rearrangement and combination take place so that the existing residence and the new building site will each contain 1.5 acres of land. Should Planning Commission recommend such an approval, additional appropriate conditions include: A. Payment of standard Park Fee at the time the building permit is issued. B. Access location for the new buildable lot shall be subject to City approval. C. The applicant shall file an application for a lot line rearrangement, and this variance approval shall not take effect until such time as the lot line rearrangement has been completed. Zoning File #990 September 8, 1988 Page 2 of 6 Now, Ferrell is revising his request: he wants approval to build on 1 of the lets in exchange for accepting a denial of buildability of the other lot. My letter to Ferrell dated August 9, 1988, responds to his request, hence the application is again before the City Council. 1. Brief Synopsis - Although I am including here much of the information that has been reviewed by past Councils, I will try to synopsize the facts and policies which affect this application, as briefly as possible: 1. Ferrell bought I hp houne at 3425 Watertown Road with 4 total acres of land in 1948. 2. Orono's original Zon.:ng Ordinance was adopted in 1950, prior to division of Ferrell'3 property intu ..,epdrate parcels. As of 1950, the property was coned for 1 acre min?r.um lot size. 3. Iu 1955, Orrnno'� rc:yinal Platting Code was adopted. 4. In 1958, Ferrel! requested to build a second house on the property per Counc-il minutes of 9/22/58. Ferrell was presumably told by Herb Ross, Mayor, that in order to build a second house it would require a subdivision, since the 1950 zoning ordinance allowed only 1 residence per lot. 5. In 1959, Ferrell presumably completed subdivision of the property into 4 lots of approximately 1 acre each. He built his current house on the easterly lot. He eventually sold the westerly lot with the house at 3425 Watertown Road. He kept the two vacant lcts west of the new house. 6. On October 12, 1959, the City Council adopted Ordinance 022 which requires minimium lot area of 1 acre, minimum lot width of 140', Mnich Ferrell's lots would meet or nearly meet. Ordinance #22 also allowed Council to approve building permits for substandard lots held in single, seFarate_ownershiF, inferred that substandard "common ownership" lots would not be granted buildinq termits, and established that. the Council could allow variances to this section at Counci l's discretion. Zoning File #990 September 8, 1988 Page 3 of 6 7. A new zoning code was adopted in 1967. Ferrell's property still was zoned for 1 acre in area, 140' width, no substantial changes from the 1959 ordinance, but the new ordinance did state that substandard existing lots of record as of 9/14/67 under single, separate ownership could be granted building permits if the Council finds that they would not adversely affect public health or safety. The ordinance did not specifically discuss common ownership lots, but by cmission inferred again that they would not be granted permits. 8. The 1974 zoning code, which became effective in January of 1975, rezoned a large rural section of the Cilly from 1 acre to 2 acre minimum lot size, 200' minimum width. This included the Ferrell properties. This code set specific standards for use of substandard single, separate ownership lots of record in the 2 acre zone, i.e.: a) Must be at least 1 acre, 100' width. b) Must meet all septic requirements or be sewered. c) Meets all other applicable standards. But again the 1974 code specifically did not discuss common ownership lots. 9. The Alden Anderson common ownership lot buildability application at 19UO Shoreline Drive was denied by the City in 1981, based on a lack of the required 2 acre lot area, setting a precedent for denial of situations such as Ferrell's. 10. The 1984 zoning code, which currently is in effect, requires Council approval to separate ( read "sell") adjacent, undeveloped, non- conforming, commonly owned lots if the resulting lots do not meet area or width standards. Clearly in the Ferrell case, Council approval is required in order to separate the conforming 2.9 acre group of parcels .nto substandard parcels. Zoning File #990 September 8, 1988 Page 4 of 6 Action to Date on this Application - To date, staff has provided Council with 8 memos (with associated exhibits) for this application. The item has been reviewed at 3 Planning Commission meetings and has been an 4.genda item at 9 Council meetings, dating back to April 1985. During discussions at the April 14, 1986 Council meeting, Mayor Butler noted that she would be open to allowing 1 additional home, but not 2. It is unclear from the minutes whether other Council Members shared that sentiment. Mr. Ferrell, at that time, did not wish to revise his application. However, due to the continued tAblings at the applicant's request, the Council never has formally adopted a resolution denying variances for each of the vacant 1 acre lots. It is staff's interpretation of Ferrell's current letter of request that he wishes to build on 1 of the vacant 1 acre lots without doing a lot line rearrangement. Pertinent Factors - 1. Ferrell has provided septic testing for each vacant lot which shows that, under strictly limited building proposals, a modest house with septic system and alternate site could conceivably be constructed on each lot. However, future additions or additional amenities that might he proposed for those lots would be siverely restr=cted, and the City would still have to be concerned with the greater density of septic systems and residences in the area. 2. If the Council is of a mind to allow 1 additional house on the 3 acre property, staff would recommend an approximately even split of 1.5 acres + with each property. This would require a lot line rearrangement and subsequent combination. Staff would not he in favor of Ferre I I's suggestion to approve 1 of the 1 acre lots and deny the other, because that leaves the door open for a future Council to create a more dense situation, and still would leave severe restrictions on the 1 acre lot to be built on. I Zoning File #990 September 8, 1988 Page 5 of 6 3. Council is cautioned to be aware of the distinction between Ferrell's property and properties such as the Smieja lot on Cygnet Place, which was recently approved for buildability. The Smieja lot had long been in single, separate ownership, was not owned by an adjacent property owner, and therefore acquired substantiai property rights because it had few alternative uses available to the property owner. In Ferrell's situation, Orono's codes have lung held that properties owned adjacent to and in common with a homestead lot cannot be built on if they or the homestead lot are substandard. The codes have continually inferred that substandard properties owned in common with a homestead residence have a reasonable use as yard area by the homestead property owner and do not acquire building rights by virt>>e of having been previously divided off. Approval of the Ferrell's request would be precedent -setting in that many other 1 acre commonly -owned lots in the unsewered residential zone could request similar variances. Specifically, staff has identified 22 situations in the City where we could expect similar variances to be requested. Although 22 new houses on substandard lots out of 1,100 existing developed unsewered lots is a relatively small number, building on those 22 properties would not further Orono's goals to maintain a rural character and avoid installation of municipal sewers. Ferrell's t proposal to have 2 house, on 3 acres also would be precedent sett.q , for the same reasons, but would probably have less substantial impact at a 1.5 acre/house density than at the originally proposed 1.0 acre/house density. Staff Recommendation - If Council feels that al ;,ig 1 additional house on the 3 acre property is appropriate, .ata -ould recommend a referral of this application to the Planning Cu,nmission for review and recommendation regarding whether the property should remain in 3 parcels or whether a lot line rearrangement and combination should occur to leave just 2 total parcels. If this item is referred to the Planning Commission, although staff previously indicated to the applicant that it could go directly to the Spptemberl9th meeting, due to unforeseen application loads, staff would prefer that referral be to the October 3rd Planning Commission meeting. so $ 00 zoning File #990 September 8, 1588 Page 6 of 6 If the Council feels that there is no justification to allow any additional houses on Ferrell's property, staff would recommend that a resolution for denial be adopted. A resolution of denial has previously been drafted, but would be amended to also deny the revised request. 1. :1 Mr. Ward Ferrell 3405 Watertown Road Long Lake, MN 55356 CITY of ORONO Post Office Box 66•Crystal Bay, Minnesota Yi323•Municipal Offices On the North Shore of Lake Mi,inetonka August 9, 1988 RE: Request to reopen file #990 Dear Mr. Ferrell: On Monday, August 8, I received your letter requesting that file #990, your unresolved variance application, be reopened. This would appear to be feasible since your application was last reviewed and tabled by the Council on June 8, 1987, pending your request to again appear before Council. The next City Council meeting is August 22, 1988. However, I will be on vacation from August 19th to September 5th, hence the next Council meeting for which this item can be scheduled is Monday, September 12, 1988. I gather from your letter that the intent of your request is to be granted approval to build a house on one of the vacant lots as currently configured, with the assumption that variances for the second vacant lot would be denied. Absent a specific plan from you that shows where you would place c new house, it is my initial reaction that the Council will wait to split your three acres evenly between the eAisting house and the new lot, leaving about 1.5 acres with each. If that is the Council's final determination, a lot line rearrangement would need to take place. In your letter you suggested that you have already paid the application fees and feel that no additional fees should be assessed. I presume that this is a reaction to lour recent conversation with Jeanne Mabusth during which shr' noted that additional fees might be charged. I would note for the record that Staff time for your applicar:.on to date has been approximately 20 to 25 he-:&rs, not including time spent at Planning Commission and Council meetings. The $300.00 in application fees you have pj.id so far, only covers about half of BUILDING& ZONING - 473.7337 • ADMINISTRATION i FINANCE - 473.7358 • Pl HIA WORKS - 473.7359 ASSESSING Mr. ward Ferrell August 9, 1988 Page Two the Staff time expenditure to date. I will remind you that the application form which you signed indicates you agreed to pay whatever additional or unusual expenses are incurred for review of the application, and would note that the normal variance application staff review time is -in the range of 3 to 5 hours. It is likely that staff will recommend to the Council that some additional fee (as yet undetermined) be assessed. There is a potential that the Council on September 12th, will refer your revised request back to the Planning Commission. If this occurs, this item ..ii3 be scheduled for the Planning Commission Meeting of September 19, presuming no additional information is required. Please contact me or Zoning Administrator, Jeanne Mabusth, at 473-7357 if you have additional questions. You will be receiving a meeting notification and a copy of the Council update memo on this application, prior to the September 12th meeting. Any additional information o: letter of request you wish to submit to Council should be in this office no later than Tuesday, September 6, 1988. Sincerely, Michael P. Gaffron Assistant Planningand Zoning Administrator MPG/ls cc: Jeanne Mabusth Mark Bernhardson 1 525 0 O Az X. a:Ia• �Ir6 o 4K �f�� • 1 rip t • t � N11 �— 1!1 - 0- •�1 WOO OWE r4 ^- �G� A w Aw (ISTERE ,.L teoo (s) j\ 300 A OF- Cf) -f I Jet YA ll• 10 I D LAND SURREY NO. 8c ct Ju r- i � a rp f Yi � rh�l4 1 � $11A2a•0 OFF•, fL I ( \ '� I Icsl:i R ri' I tl,nt d+ia rurte�. oMn. «Ie1.x =dd bs aye or under mr diraA .va t as • du:r Kc•isteled V b.. of tie §oats of Nis _ I � yn --- 10 Sr w.u•..•a £�/ f v/ ` � %S / fir /• f' •� Ohl- �---� — _ .� e /.07 A'C AC ... r s`�e us 3 10.0 3 I. Alteratic,ns may be made to a building containing lawful non -conforming residential units when they will improve the livability thereof, provided they will not increase the number of dwelling units or bulk of the building. Source: Ordinance No. 172 Effective Date: 1-1-75 J. Apply to "Uses" Only. The non -conforming use provisions of the Zoning Chapter apply only to the use to which land and buildings are put, and do not apply to situations where location or height of structures, lot size or other factors not involving the use of the premises prevent strict conformance with the requirements of the Zoning Chapter. Where, however, such a situAted-')existed legally under the prior applicable law, the Council~ will not unreasonably require strict compliance and will generally lock with favor on granting of a variance under Section 10.08. Subd. 6. Lot of Record. A lot of record is any lot for which a deed or registered land survey has been recorded in the office of the Register of Deeds or the Registrar of Titles for Hennepin County, Minnesota, prior to January 1, 1975, and after approval by the Council if required. 1+ Source: Municipal Code afi Effective Date: 9-14-67 .' A. Existing Lots. A lot of record existing upon January 1975 in an "R" District, which does not meet the requireme is -of the Zoning Chapter as to area or width may be utilized for a single family detached dwelling purpose provided that in the judgment of the Council such use does not adversely affect public health or safety and the following requirements are met: Source: City Code Effective Date: 4-1-84 1. In "R" Districts of One Acre or Less and With Public Sanitary Sewer. A lot of record existing upon the effective date of this Zoning Chapter in any "R" District of the City of up to and inclLding one acre, which lot is serviced by public sanitary sewer and which does not meet the requirements of this Zoning Chapter as to area or width only, may be utilized for 4ing'_e family detached dwelling r,-.!rposes without Council approval if the area measurements and width of that lot are within eighty percent (80%) of the requirements of this Zoning Chapter. However, the lot of record shall not be more intensely developed unless 1 ORONO CC 253 (4-1-84) combined with one or more abutting lots or portions thereof so as to create a lot sheeting the requirements of this Zoning Chapter. Source: Municipal Code Effective Date: 9-14-67 2. In "R" Districts of Greater Than One Acre and Served by Public Sanitary Sewer. A lot of : cord in any "R" District in the City in excess of one acre, which does not meet the requirements of this Zoning Chapter as to area or width only, may be utilized for single family detached dwelling purposes if the Council finds: (a) It is at least one acre in size, and the average width of the lot is at least 100 feet; (b) It is served by public sanitary sewer; (c) It otherwise meets the requirements of this Chapter or other applicable City Code provisions. 3. In "R" Districts Not Served by Public Sanitary Sewer.,, -A -lot of record in any "R" District in the City not served by public sanitary sewer must meet the area and width requirements of the Zoning Chapter and shall not be utilized for single family detached dwelling purposes without Council approval. Source: City Code Effective Date: 4-1-84 B. Combination of Separated Parcels Prohibited. fo lot or parcel of lan,4 which is divided by a public, private or platted road or road easement, which results in any segment thereof being less than the minimum acreage required for that zontag dis- trict, shall be allowed to be combined with any separated parcel of land across the road for purposes of qualifying under the minimum acreage, open apace, regiiired yard, setback or sanitary or septic system requirements, nor shall building or density credits be credited or transferred between such parcels under any provisions of this Chapter. Each separate parcel must individually conform to the provisions of this Chapter in connection with construction of improvements thereon. Source: Municipal Code Effective Date: 9-14-67 C. The separation by the transfer or sale�of non- conforming, undeveloped lots not served by public sanitary sewer, aligned in a contiguous arrangement, undivided by a public or private road or road easement and under same or common ownership is not permitted without Council approval. Council approval is not required if the separation of such lots results in individual building sites that satisfy the area and width requirements of the Zoning Chapter. Source: City Code Effective Date: 4-1-84 ORONO CC 254 (4-1-84) . Crystal Bay,,dinnesota. • E-dinutes of meeting held in the Village Hall on Sept.22,I958,at 7:30 P.M. Presont: H. P.. Ros3,!iayor; R. C. Bagley,K. Turnham E.0.',7ood,0. T.inanvell, Trustee G.A.Hane-n,Assessor; A.G.Stinson,Foreman;Creraid Ross.Constable;O.F..Johnson. Minutes of meetings held on Aug.25 and Sep.8,I958,were r^ad and approved. Attorney Louis B.Brechet,representing the Hub Barber Shop at Navarre was present regarding the parking situation on County Road I9 at the intersection of County Road 151asking for continuance of angle parking versus parallel Darking.Council decided to look into the situation further and bring up later for further consideration. The continuance of the present contract with the Suburban Hennepin County Relief Board was unanimously approved. The 1.1inneeota Watershed District Act was further discussed and ordered held ur for further review and discussion. The public park situation in our Village was reviewed and Turnham suggested that an offer be made to the owners of property desired if this could be accomplished legally, on a basis $5000.00 per annum untU cleared: ' T �.04., •• Clerk will consult legal adhorities and report result at next meetinp.r4,�, „' Maxwell moved that the present trailer restriction be waived in the case of Mrs.Sigafoos,ellowing her to use trailer in its present location. No sezond to motion was made and the motion died. On recuest of Ward Ferrell for the erection of another residence on his property on County Road 45,Bagley moved,seconded by Turnham, tnat his request be granted sub jecx , io�vever to the review and appz oval of our Planning Com. The budget for I959 was set at 8 IO2,000 for Village operation and The County Auditor will so be advised. A noti^.e of meeting of the Orono District Dev.CorporationIon Sep 25th,at The Orono High School was brought up and representatives of our Council will arrange to attend. Verified Acete.No.607 through No.669 were reviewed and approved with the exception of one involving the purchase of tools from the Searsikaoebuck Co. on which further details will be reauested including memo.involes. Meeting adjourned subject to call on October I3,I958. 0. E. Johnson, Clerk. Approved: 9i1. L^ 1 % i it _ xr MII'UTESOF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING IIL•'LD APRIL 15, 198 : P 3 T.M.1895 �CROSBY Approval is subject to the following conditions: 1- S--/q -S'? 1. PID 11-117-23 32 0004 and northern porticn of rearranged PID 11-117-23 32 0005 to be combined with Crosby homestead lot. 2. PID 11-117-23 32 0006 and southern portion of rearranged PID 11-117-23 32 0005 to be legally combined for tax purl: oses . 3. All future construction on undeveloped lot that involves the alteration of `lood plain fringe areas must be reviewed and approved by the DNR before a building permit can be issued by the City of Orono. 4. Tested septic site area on undeveloped lot must be staked and protected prior to construction. Motion, Ayes (6), Nays (0). #903 WARD FERRELL 3405 WATERTOWN ROAD REQUEST TO CONFIRM INTERPRETATION OF ZONING CODE PUBLIC HEARING 8:10-8:49 PM and and teary Ferrell were present. Chairman Callahan announced that now was the time and place for t,ie public hearing to be held concerning Ward Ferrell's application to confirm the staff's interpretation of the zoning code. There was no one present from the public for this application. Assistant Zoning Administrator Gaffron noted the certificate of mailing and the affidavit of publication. Ward Ferrell explained that in 1948 they bought the property on Watertown Road. Ferrell stated that in 1958 they decided to divide the property to build a new home. Ferrell stated that he was informed by staff at that time that he had to appear before the Council. Ferrell stated that everyone agreed on the Council, except one person. Ferrell stated that this property was divided at the previous Mayor's ( Herb Ross) request. Ferrell agreed and he met the zoning at that time and noted that he could have had 5 lots but chose f cur lots to make bigger lots. Ferrell explained that the surrounding lots are all the same size. Ferrell stated that the zoning has since changed. Assistant Zoning Administrator Gaffron reviewed with the Planning Commission that in 1967 this area was zoned 1 acre. Gaffron stated that from 1967-1975, Ferrell could have built on those lots without variances. Gaffron noted that in 1975 the area was rezoned to 2 acre. Gaffron explained that in a similar case cn Shoreline Drive, the Council denied the applicant the variances giving the City a clear policy in the common ownership issue within the rural areas of Orono. Gaffron revitwcd with the Planning Commission the tax hi ctrrr•r .-# .. i. , . -- MINUTES OF THE OR�)NO PLANNING COMMISSION MLL•'"'ING IIELU APIiII, 15, 1985 PAGE 4 1903 WARD FERRELL Rovegno noted that for 20 year:> it has been taxed as a separate `)uildable site and for the past 3 years it has not been taxed zs a buildable site. Wa.-d Ferrell stated that he ha:3 kept the property all these years thinking he could build on each parcel and he noted he would like to build his retirement home on one of the parcels. Ferrell noted he has owned tte property Since 1950 and is entitled to build. Planning Commission agxeed with staff's interpretation of the zoning code that the property needs a variance. Chairman Callahan suggested that the Planning Commission be polled as to their feeling on the application if it were an actual variance request. Kelley felt that Lots 7 and 8 should be combined into one lot, thereby only allowing two lots [the existing lot with the existing home and one other lot (7 & 8 combined)]. Mary Ferrell stated that the code is not consistent and is contradic-Cory in that the zoning has changed along with the code over the years. Sime felt that there is very little doubt that staff interpreted the zoning code correctly, but whether he agrees wit;i the basic premis-- is another point. Sim( melt that there aie a bundle of rights that go with the land and should not be taken away from people by changing the rules or zoning while they still own the land. Sime stated that the common ownership issue seems to alter the rules for people. Most of the Planning Commission felt they could only approved two lots (the existing lot with the existing home and one other lot] conditioned upon Lots 7 and 8 being combined. Chairman Callahan closed the public hearinq at 8:49 p.m. Rovegno movrd, Sime seconded, to confirm staff's interpretation of the zoning code that these lots do need variances. Motion, Ayes (6), Nays (0). Rovegno felt that d less intense use of the property would be more reasoiable by combining Lot 7 and 8 and that way the applicants -.4ould only need a lot area variance and not a lot width varian^e. Zoning Admini3trator Mabusth stated that this application was brought in under a request to confirm the interpretation of the zoning code in order to save the applicants money. Mabusth noted that a completed application would require payment for area variances for each proposed and existing building site in addition to septic testing for each undeveloped si:e and an alternate test site for existing v' ti MINUTES OF TILE ORONO I'LANNING COMMII;SION MELTING GELD AI'kII. 15, 1981 I'AG1- 5 house. Mabusth noted that staff concluded that in light of Council's recent amendment of the zoning code dealing with rural lots under common ownership and their decision on ' V�e Shoreline Drive property of Alden Anderson, that this approach was the most inexpensive way to get an answer for the applicant. #905 DENNIS THOMPSON 250 OLD CRYSTAL BAY ROAD CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PUBLIC HEARING ' 8:50 - 8:51 PM Deni,is Thompson was no: present. Chairman Callahan announced that now was the time and place for a public hearing concerning Dennis Thompson's conditional use permit application. Zoning Administrator Mabusth noted the certificate of mailing and the affidavit of publication. There was no one present in the audience for this application. Chairman Callahan closed the public hearing at 8:51 p.m. Zoning Administrator Mabusth stated that during construction on the Thompson home, staff noted a second kitchen and a se- ,tee apartme,it area being constructed and felt- that a co, ' use permit should be applied for. Mabusth state .mpson has agreed that the guest apartment will �e rented out. Kelley moved, Sime seconded, to recommend apprcval of a co,ditional use permit for the guest apartment within the residence located at 250 Old Crystal Bay Road finding all standards of Section 10.20, Subdivision 3(G) to be statisfied subject to the condition that the separate apartment unit may never be rented. Motion, Ayes (6), Nays (0). #907 JAMES BIGHAM 1545 LONG LAKE BLVD VARIANCE PUBLIC HEARING 8:52 - 9:12 PM James Bigham was present. Chairman Callahan announced that now was the time and place for the publics hearing concerning James B.iyham's variance request. There was no one present from the audience for this application. Assistant Zoning Administrat.— Gaff ron noted the certificate of mailing and the affidavit of publication. Assistant Zoning Administrator Gaffron explained that the applicant is requesting a variance to construct an addition, to his home which will increase the hardcover in both 0-7r and 75-250' setback zones. Gaffron stated that the additi oi, will increase the potential water usage since they plan to construct a bedroom. Gaff ron noted that Bigham replaced his septic system in November of 1984, but that there are no alternate drainfield sites oil the property and that if the new system fails at some point and it could not be repaired, a W� MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD MAY 28, 1985. PAGE 5 #1903 FERRELL that the application could have cost the applicant $1,000 just to get denied. Gaffron noted that staff felt that the applicant co•ild get some general direction from the City under the zoning appeals application process. Assistant Zoning Administrator Gaffron explained that the Alden Anderson application is very similar to this Ferrell application. Gaffron explained that the applicant owns four adjacent tax parcels totaling 2.40 acres. Gaffron noted that the applicant wishes to obtain a building permit for the 1.04 acre lot. Ward Ferrell stated that lie has owned the land since 1948 and built the existing home in 1958. Ferrell stated that he bought and has saved this land with the intent to build his retirement home. Ferrell stated that Herb Russ (former Vreno Mayor) had re -,rested him to . divide his property. Ferrell stated that as a favor to Ross and the City and to stop trouble in the future, he divided the property into four parcels. Ferrell stated that then the zoning changed in 1967 and at the time the hearing was held regarding this zoning change, he asked whether it would affect existing lots and he was told no by the City. Ferrell noted that he is will!-ig a parcel of land for his daughter to build on. Ferrell stated that in 1980 the Stubbs Bay Marina was divided and the City allowed very small lots. Ferrell felt that he should receive the same treatment that Stubbs Bay Marina had received. Acting Mayor Frahm explained that the City agreed to smaller lots in the Stubbs Bay Marina because the City felt that it would be a less intense use on the property with residential units rather than the intense use of the commercial marina. Frahm stated that there were very extenuating circumstances with the Stubbs Bav Marina and shouldn't be used to compare with this application since the circumstances were significantly different. Ward Ferrell asked if the City was going to honor what Herb Ross requested. Ferrell stated that Ross told him to contact George Hanson (former assessor for Orono) to see what the lot sizes should be when he was subdividing the property. Ferrell stated that Hanson told him 140' width for each lot. Acting Mayor asked staff what the typical lot size is in the neighborhood. Ward Ferrell : **ated that the average lot size i , cr, acre and only one parcel is two acres. Councilmember T. Adams asked how many units the al icant i� requesting out of a total of 2.9 acres. Assistant Zoning Administrator Gaffron answered tl.at the applicant is requesting a total of three building sites (one existing, one for the retirement home, one for his ,' ighter) . :MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD MAY 28, 1985. PAGE #903 FERRELL Zoning Administrator Mabusth i,oted that in 1967 the standards changed when the zoning code wa:, revised effecting the applicant. Acting Mayor Frahm explained that it is hard for the City to honor a verbal opinion that was made in .967. Frahm felt to be fair to the applicant that he would consider two building sites, but certainly not three building sites. Councilmember T. Adams stated that before le ,3 the Council should see arl relevant background inf�cmation. Councilmember L. Adams symphathized with this type of problem when the owner purchases property and keeps it with the intent in the future to build on the property only to have the zoning code standards change. Adams stated that he cannot see installing three septic tank systems on three small lots since the septic tanks wi'1 be the permanent system installed there. Adams n„cvd onceptually trat he would consider two building sites only recause of tnp problem that the applicant owned the property with the intent to build in the future only to have the zoning code standards change. Adams noted that if it weren't for that reason he would not even consider two building ..ites. Adams stated that when the septic systems are placed too close together on small lots such as these, there are potential problems with ground water contamination wl,un these systems fail. Acting Mayor Frahm expressed his concern that if the City approved three lots that the City would create a density pocket similar to tht. Crystal Bay neighborhood in which the City wuuld have to go back in the future to correct the problem by sewering the area. Wang Ferrell stated that his septic system is 28 years old and has nc jer had a problem with leakage. Ferrell pointed cut that he has paid taxes on the property as if they were buildable lots --ince 1948 and now he cannot use the property. Ferrell stated that up until two years ago they paid taxes on the two vacant lots as if there were separate buiidiny sit,2s. Ferrell noted that two years ago the taxes were lowered from $11,000 to $5,500. Ferrell explained that he has already told his daughter that she can have the lot and he is not going back on his word. Ferrell asked if the City w&s going to honor what Herb Ross told him years ago. Acting Mayor Frahm stated, in his opinion, no. Mrs. Ferrel l asked if the City was going to r, heir taxes that they have pa.L6 for buildable lots a. se years. City Administrator Bernhardson stated that should a varianct be applied for that in the review it should be considered what position the applicant would have been in if he had not subdivided the property. s • 1 7 L ��( Ls v 7" MINUT10_5 OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL M1-TING HELD MAY 28, 1985. PAGE A ��• fur 5-1?-97 Acting Mayor Frahm advised Asplund that after the patics are rc �ved, that the around should be 7odded. Councilmember L. Alams noted that he has a problem approving anything in the 0-75' setback area. Coe,nc: 'r mt" Ad:sins moved, Acting Mayor Frahm seconded, to Resc:,l!..ion #1768, A Resolution denying variances fe _ *enceany patio concrete request with do dline date for remc,val of patic,s'for June 15, 1985, for 3424 Eastlake Street and July 23, 1985, for 3444 Eastlake Street and the request for deck platfurm and screened porch to be referred to the Planning Commis•ion for their rev-ew. Motion, Ayes (2), Nay:= (1). Counci?memrer T. Adams voted nay. #897 CHUCK PETERSON 825 OLD LONG LAKE ROAD PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION Chuck Leterscn was present. Assistant Zoning Adminis- trator Gaffron stated that the surveyor reconfirmed the dry buildable area that Council requested at the last meeting. Gaffron conirmed that there is 2.0 acres of dry .�uildat,le per lot in the area identified strictly as - ,eascnal draina.:>.ay. Councilmember T. Ada, moved, Councilmember L. Adams seconded, tc ap* the preliminary subdivision application of Chuck erson. Motion, Ayes (3), Nays (0). i903 ARD FERRELL WATERTOWN ROAD ZONING APPEAL Mr. and Mrs. Waru Ferrell were present. Assistant Zoning Administrator Gaffron explained that the applicant was brc fight in under a :oning appeal in order to save the appE giant some money. Gaffron explained that if the applicant had applied for a v,..rianre t' -he application would be more costly and with thf- Coo- ast precedents the Council would probably have d= application. C'i'-v Ai torn,, Rad asked how much full variance a cation vci._ : tiave cost. Radio noteu that Lr allowing t apllicant ; c appeals p_ocedurt: the City is ,3ving the Rpr' 'cant money, ' ut by handling this matter the -'i'_y is not n,+ this app.' ication ,is a variance and not using the s dards. Padio noted that the decision reached t. ices not vresume that the same decision woul-I re rea, . . on < I 1 variance appli ^ ^n. Assistant. Z Wminist tor Gaffron stated teat the variance rpp, on would be $15C, plus the applicant's ,xpense for au _tonal surveying work, plus the extra ,..�..r.ae septic testing for each lot. Gaffron estimated /r./ MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD MAY 13, 1985 PAGE 11 (s�,(13�IiARD FERRELL &W 0 3405 WATERTOWN ROAD S- / - &� ZCNING APPEALS Wa-d Ferrell was not present. Building S Zoning Admi_istratorMabusthrioted that the applicant has requested that the application be tabled until May 28, 1985. Mayor Butler moved, Councilmember Frahm seconded, to t,,hle the Ferrell application until May 29, 1985. Motion, Ayes (5), Nays ;^). #905 DENNIS THOMPSON 250 OLD CRYSTAL BAY ROAD CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION #1757 Dennis #907 JAMES P?GHAM 1545 LONG LAKE BLVD VARIANCE Thompson was not present. Councilmember Frahm moved, Councilmember L. Adams seconded, to adopt Resolution #1757, A Resolution Approvina A Conditional Use Permit to allow a guest house apartment. Motion, Ayes (5), Nays (0). RESOLUTION #17-'l James 3igham was present. As•istant Zoning Administrator Gaff ron reviewed with the Council the applicants proposal to construct an addition to his home. Gaffron noted that the applicant replaced his septic system in November, 1984. Gaffron stated that no alternate drairfield site exists on the property and that if the new system fails a holding tank would have to be installed. Gaffron noted that with Dighams proposal a future 8 member family could move into the home and the current septic system might not be able to handle such an intense use. Gaffron noted that Bigham has not ,.iet s-)ne of the requirements in Resolution #1600 regarding drainage and retaining walls. James Bigham stated that the requirements could not be met because of the weather and the frozen ground. Bigham stated that he will fulfill the requirements as soon as possible. Councilmembt--r Frahm stated that there is a drainage problem on the property already. Frahm expressed concern for ad'' ,a on addit;jnal hardcover and noted that the septic s; cannot handle any future family larger than Bighams. James Bigham explained ch t the drainage problem does not come from his lot and that the drainage problem is caused by the lots across the street. Bigham noted that his lot serves s a drainage spot for others runoff . Bigham addressed the ieptic issue by noting that he could replace his septic system if needed in the same location as the septic system is currently located. Bigham noted if that does not work, then holding tanks would be installed. Bigham ,oted that he -Ice.sn't mind -11ding tanks and stated that he felt the whole igkx)rhood •erntually will be on holding tanks. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD MAY 28, 1985. PAGE 7 f9C3 FERRELL Councilmember L. Adams gave his opinion should the applicant apply for a variance, he would be willing to consider a total of twc lots. Councilmember L. Adams moved, Councilmember T. Adams seconded, to affirm the staff's interpretation of the zoning code. Motion, Ayes (3), Nays (0). #908 i #924 JON SCHERVEN 2649 CAS�4J POINT RD (#908) VARIANCE - RESOLUTION (#924) CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - RESOLUTION Jon Scherven was present with his father A.W. Scherven. Assistant Zoning Administrator Gaffron stated that the applicant proposes to build a two story addition over the existing concrete slab and deck on the lake side of his parents home. Gaffron noted that the applicant proposes hardcover tradeoffs, and that the proposed deck sloes extend into the 75' setL)ack zone. Gaffron stated that the conditional use permit is required because the applicant is requesting to use the basement as a guest apartment for his parents who are retiring. Gaf f ron noted that applicant does propose a kitchen in the basem^nt but has agreed that the second dwelling unit would never be rented out. Gaffron noted the Planning Commission did approve the application subject to the following regarding the guest apartment use: i.) apartment for use of family members only; 2 ) apartment use may not 1)e conveyed to a purchaser; 3 ) guest apartment may not be rented out and such to be confirmed by staff yearly; 4 ) use is subject to City review at end of four years. Acting Mayor Frahm asked if a separate entrance is proposed for the guest apartment use. Assis', ant Zoning Administrate r _d - ..con noted that the main entrance would be used, but ':iat once .inside the main entrance, a door leading to the basement and a door leading to the upstairs is proposed. Zoning Administrator Mabusth explained that the Council did recently approve the Beck conditional use permit which is similar to this application. Councilmember L. Adams felt that the lot is really too small to support another dwelling unit. Jon Scherven explained that his parents have tried to sell the home and ha-e not beer. able to. Scherven :.Mated that he has offered t-) buy the home, remodel it, and then they would be able to live in the basement. Scherven confirmed that he will agree ' o any stipulations the Council w_ shes to place on the quest apartment use. MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD NOVE14BER 18, 1985. PAGE 4 EX s c Q #988 MERTES continued Sawmwwg'1 Tom Corson, 3241 Casco Circle, was present and stated that the lot in question was not consistent with the other lots in the area. He also stated that the existing garage on the lot should be removed whether the variance is granted or not. Mr. Corson felt that the original variance should not have been granted being this lot is only 54' in width. Jim Mci lei stated that they felt they would not have a problem neeting the setbacks and hardcover requirements. Cnetten su-ated that the entire Casco Point area is a high intense residential area. She noted that the lot size was consistent with the area although it would be one of the smallest lets. Tom Corson stated that they would be making a crowded situation even more crowded. He questioned the initial intent of the ordinance requiring a 100' lot width. Chairman Callahan stated that the lot was intended to provide a residence and the hardship is that there is no other adjacent property available. There were no more comments from the public and the public hearing wa 3 clos-e,l. It was moved by Rovegno, seconded by Goetten, to recommend renewal of the lot width and lot area variances noting that the Issues (1-7) and Findings (1-19) , prepared by staff, were found to be sufficient. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 1. Kelley voted nay stating it would be overbuilt for lot size. #989 HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPT. OF TRANSPORTATION RENDRICKSON ACCESS CONDITIONAL USE ?F"IT PUBLIC HEARING 11:40 -11:50 Hennepin County proposes dredging app-oxinately a 20'xi26' wide corridor, removing 4.5' of lake botton along the edge :)f the Hendrickson boat ramp, and constructing a 126' long seawall along the sides of the inplace boat ramp. There were no persons present regar_dinq this matter at this time. Planning Commission table this ,natter until the December 16th meeting. #990 WARD FERRELL 3*11-3415 WATERTOWN ROAD '1ARIANCE POELIC HEARING 9:29 - 9:37 Applicant requests lot are Vlot width variances to construct homes or, ta^ substandard vacant commonly -owned lots adjacent to the exisiting residence at 3405 Waterto•-on Road. To: Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson From: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator Date: September 1, 1988 Subject: #1310 Howard F. Eisinger, 3245 Wayzata Boulevard - Conditional Use Permit - Second Review Please review the attached Planning Commission Notice of Action that outlined the questions presented by the Planning Commission to the applicant at your August Planning Commision meeting. Staff will ask that Mr. Eisinger have an authorized representative For the contracting firm that will be responsible for doing the filling under the MNDOT contract for 394 improvements. Some of the questions raised by the Planning Commission have been outlined for Mr. Eisinger in that notice. Planning Commission may wish to alter or add others. The City Engineer has made a recommendation regarding the concern for the duration of time disturbed earth should be allowed to remain on site before it must be seeded. Review his letter of August 31, 1988. Cook recommends periodic seeding of the unfinished side slopes, suggesting that the side slopes be graded and seeded by approximately the 15th day of the month of May, June, August, September, October, and November when deemed necessary by the inspecting staff. rote that he would suggest that the top of the fill area remain in an undisturbed state until the finish elevation is achieved. Maintaining the side slopes in a seeded state will prevent further erosion of the site during the long installation. Staff Reco�ndation - To recommend approval subject to adding the following condition to the conditions already set forth in the original approval resolution enclosed in your August packets, Exhibit J: 1. The City will require periodic seeding and grading of side slopes duri:ig the time the property is receiving fill. Applicant/owner will be asked to grade and seed the side slopes at ap;.roximatc ly the 15th day of the months of May, June, August, September., October, and November if deemed necessary by the inspecting staff. Upon satisfaction of the answers to the questions posed ty the Planning Commission to the applicant's contractor, the Planning Commission may wish to add other conditions found accrotriate under the authorization of _a conditional sse pe.mit by the City of Orono. Zoning File #1.310 august 8, 1988 Page 2 of 2 Renewal of Application #1103 - The original conditional use permit approved the filling of the former dump site on the Eisinger property, totalling 12 acres in area, to a maximum of 100,000 cubic yards of clean fill from the I-394 improvement project (review Exhibits E, G, H, and I). Council accepted the Planning Commission and staff recommendati.an to limit fill to a maximum of 100,000 cubic yards resulting in no more than a 5' overall increase in height from the existing eleva'C4ons at the dump site. As proposed, all filling would take place approximately 35' from the designated wetland area that surrounds the dump site on both the east and west sides. Resolution #2192 reviews the limits of the land alterations approved with the application and also sets forth the guidelines by which the fill project will be maintained by the applicant, under the supervision of the City ..taff's inspections. Staff has reviewed those original conditions. It is not clear how long the City will allow exposed earth to remain on the pruperty prior to the final grading and seeding. Consider the application that involved the filling of a 11' high berm on County Road 6 in the western part of the City. The filling began over a year ago and the berm has remained in a disturbed condition for over a year. Staff is concerned that once this filling project begins, `here may be lapses in time where exposed sections of earth remain at the site for long pericds of time. There will of course be adequate erosion control provided throughout the project. The resolution should provide clear guidelines for the staff responsible for supervising this project, when areas remain with fill unattended for over 30-60 day periods of time, staff should either be directed to bring the application before the Council for further direction or to immediately require applicant to complete the final grading of the area and seed immediately. It may be that these concerns are not valid, as once the filling begins on a project this size, there may be no delays in th- hauling of the materials. The applicant and the representative from Par Construction. Mr. Gannon, should provide more background on this phase of the ariYlication. I. any of the new members on the Planning Commission seek addition 1 information ur imFut on the part of staff, please contact my office pri.Jr to the meeting. Staff Reco®endation - To approve th- renewal conditional use permit application of Howard Eisinger for the property located at 3245 Wayzata Boulevard, subject to the findings and conditions set forth in the approval 7zesolution #2192 and sed on the additional information from the applicant's contractor, that the following guideline be added to the new approval resolution, as follcws: That at no time shall any section of fill be allowed to remain in an unattended state at greater than 5:1 slopes and not seeded for over days. To: Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Co:ianission Members City Administrator Bernhardson From: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator Date: August 8, 1988 Subject: #1310 Howard F. Eisinger, 3245 Wayzata Boulevard - Renewal Conditional Use Permit - Public Hearing Zoning District - RR-lB Pertinent Sections of the Code - Section 10.03, Subdivision 19, 20 - Conditional use permit for fill and grading in excess of 100 cubic yards. Section 10.09 - Conditional use permit procedure. Review of Application - Renewal of conditional use permit - Application N1103 approved by the Council on June 8, 1987. Application involves the filling of approximately 100,000 cubic yards of clean fill within a 12.5 acre property - former dump site. Applicant proposes no changes from the original application approved by the Council. Fill to be placed such that the average height of fill to be maintained at 51. All lard alterations shall take place 35' from the adjacent wetland areas. List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Application Exhibit B - Plat Map Exhibit C - Property Owners List Exhibit D - Staff Memos to Council Reviewing Application #1103 Exhibit E - Cook's Sketch of a Typical Cross Section Exhibit F - Braun Engineering Letter Dated 5/28/87 Exhibit G - Proposed Fill Site - Plan Exhibit H - Cross Section East/West Exhibit I - Cross Section North/South Exhibit J - Resolution #2192 Approving Original Conditional Use Fermit Review of Current Application - The applicant appeared before the Council at their July llth meeting requesting an extension of the original conditional use permit. Staff advised the Council that an extension could be granted for a period of 30 to 60 days but asked the applicant to define the status of the project. Mr. Eisinger confirmed that nothing had begun as yet, and the in no way could he conceive that the project could be completed within ) days, or for that fact, by the end of November. Staff advised the C^uncil that applicant's best option would be to file a renewal application of the original conditional use Fermit, providing no changes from the original application, as it was clear, Mr. Eisinger would require another year to complete total fill proje,-:t of 100,000 cubic yards. The applicant presents application #1310, a renewal conditional use Fermit, without any changes from the original application submitted over a year ago. 5. Park c na• ..ruction shall cease all hauling to the site upon evidence o,. .hearing and/or other signs of instability created by fill:r over tk,e former dump site. Applicant shall not proceed with hauling unt• . the City Engineer ISas had adequate time to review the evidence and suboit a written report to the Council for their review and action. If Cc unci 1 determines that it is in the public interest to cf,ase all Ea.iling to the site, this conditional use permit shall be terminatee i.moe: di ate ly and the applicant shall complete the final grating and secd:nc: of the entire disturbed area. 6. Applicant is r: ;.)onsi:ele for up -dating all previous permits issued by the Department cF Natural Resources, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, Hennepin COU'Ler Department of Environment and Engineering, and M.C.W.D. 7. Authorities granted by this resolution run with the property not with the owner, but are permissive only and the filling of the site must have commenced within one year of the date of Council approval or the special conditions of this resolution will expire on that date (October 24, 1989). 8. 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. 9. 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 24th day of October 1988. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk James R. Grabek, Mayor Property Owner(s) Page 4 of 5 To: Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson From: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator Date: August 8, 1988 Subject: #1310 Howard F. Eisinger, 3245 Wayzata Boulevard - Renewal Conditional Use Permit - Public Hearing Zoning District - RR-lB Pertinent Sections of the Code - Section 10.03, Subdivision 19, 20 - Conditional use permit for fill and grading in excess of 100 cubic yards. Section 10.09 - Conditional use permit procedure. Review of Application - Renewal of conditional use permit - Application #1103 approved by the Council on June 8, 1987. Application involves the filling of approximately 100,000 cubic yards of clean 1 '1 within a 12.5 acre property - former dump site. Applicant proposes no changes from the original application approved by the Council. Fill to be placed such that the average height of fill to be maintained at 5'. All land alterations shall Lake place 35' from the adjacent wetland areas. List of Rahibits Exhibit A - Application Exhibit B - Plat Map Exhibit C - Property Owners List Exhibit D - Staff Memos to Council Reviewing Application 01103 Exhibit E - Cook's Skete-h of a Typical Cross Section Exhibit F - Braun Engineering Letter Dated 5/28/87 Exhibit G - Proposed Fill Site - Plan Exhibit H - Cross Section East/West Exhibit I - Cross Section North/South Fxhibit J - Resolution #2192 Approving Original Conditional Use Permit Review of Current Application - The applicant appeared before the Council at their July llth meeting requesting an extension of the original conditional use permit. Staff advised the Council that an extension could be granted for a period of 30 to 60 days but asked the applicant to define the status of the project. Mr. Eisinger confirmed teat nothing had begun as yet, and that in no way could he conceive that the project could be completed within 60 days, or for that fact, by the end of November. Staff advised the Council that applicant's best option would be to file a renewal application of the original conditional use permit, providing no changes from the original application, as it was clear, Mr. Fisinger would require another year to complete total fill project of 100,000 cubic yards. The applicant presents application #1310, a renewal cor.,I_' -*-)nal —;e permit, without any changes from the original application subm: ' ove. ,a year aqo. 5. Park Construction shall cease all hauling to the sit- upon evidence of shearing and/or other signs of instability created by filling over the former dump site; Applicant shall not proceed with hauling until the City Engineer has had adequate time to review the evidence and submit a written report to the Council for their review and action. If Council determines that it is in the public interest to cease all hauling to the site, this conditional use permit shall be terminated immediately and the applicant shall complete the final grading and seeding of the entire disturbed area. 6. Applicant is responsible for up -dating all previous permits issued by the Department of Natural Resources, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, Hennepin County Department of Environment and Engineering, and M.C.W.D. 7. Authorities granted by this resolution run with the property not with the owner, but are permissive only and the filling of the site must have commenced within one year of the date of Council approval or the special conditions of this resolution will expire on that date (October 24, 1989). 8. 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. 9. 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 24th day of October 1988. ATTEST: Dorothy M. H%Il n, City Clerk James R. Grahek, Ma,.,,,, - Property Owners Page , c f 5 A RESOLUTION GRANTING A RENEWAL CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PER MUNICIPkL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.u3, SUBDIVISION 19 i 20 FILE #1310 WHEREAS, Howard F. Eisinger (hereinafter "the applicant") is the owner of the property located at 3245 Wayzata Boulevard within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") a legally described as follows: PID: 32-118-23 14 0002 Section 32, Township 118, Range 23, commencing at a point in the East line of Government Lot 1 distance 393.24 feet South along said line from the South line of State Highway No. 12 thence at right angles West from said East line 418 feet thence at right angles North 393.02 feet to South line of highway thence West along said highway line to West line of said Lot 1 thence South along said West line to Northerly line of Great Northern Railroad right-of-way thence Southeasterly along said right-of-way line to East line of Lot 1 thence North to beginning (hereinafter "property"); and WHEREAS, the applicant hag applied to the City of Orono for a renewal conditional use permit to permit the filling of 100,000 cubic yards of clean fill over a former dump site of approximately 12 acres it area per Municipr i Zon-.ng Code Section 10.03, Subdivision 19 and 20. The fill materials shall be placed such that the average height is maintained at 5'. Filling shall take place 35' in from the adiacent wetlands at the 972 elevation. Minnesota: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVE' by the City Council of Orono, FINDINGS 1. This appl=cation, was reviewed as Zoning File 11310. 2. The property is located in the RR-1B Single Family Rural Residential Zoning District. 3. On June 8, 1987, the Orono Council approved application #1103 granting a permit to the applicant to allow the filling project per the conditions set forth in Resolution #2197 4. The applicant proposes no changes from the original application with the renewal application (i1310) currently under consiueiation by the Ccur-' I . Page 1 of 5 Zoning File *1310 October 19, 1988 Page 2 of 2 In addition, the Planning Commission dealt with traffic/safety controls to be established during the time of haulinq. The Planning Commission recommended approval of the renewal conditional use permit application of Howard Eisinger adopting the recommendation of the City Engineer and in addition, asked the Council to consider the following: 1. To exclude all filling activities between the rush hours of 6:30 a.m. to 8:30 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.-n. 2. To dsk the Orono Police Department t,, be represented at the pre - construction conference with the City Engineer and CiI-y staff. A representative of the Police Department would have more insight pertaining to questions of traffic/safety. The enclosed resolution has been drafted per the Planning Commission's recommendation. 5. On August 15, 1988 and October 3, 1988, the Orono Planning Commission reviewed the application as proposed and recommended unanimous approval of the application besed on the following findings: A) The current proposal will nave no negative impact on the sui_ouding wet's.-As or intersec+ing drainageway. B) Once again, the adjacent property owners have been advised of the applicant's proposal and none have voiced objection or submitted written opposition ' he City. C) The application as modiff, fly the Planning Commission will not be detrimental to the pr,.::,ic health, safety or welfare or mate ially injurious to prr.)perties or improvements in the vacinity. D) Braun Engineering, in a letter dated May 28, 1987, has opined as follows regarding the placement of approximately 100,000 cubic yards of fill over a former dump site: ". .it is our opinion that the addition of 5' of fill over the area presents a very slight risk o`_ embankment failure." F. The City Council has considered this renewal app'ication including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, r-r )rts by staff ar.,i comments of the applicant and the effect of the proposed use on the health, safety and welfare of the community. 7. The City Council finds that grak.ting a rer. oa 1 conditional use permit to all w the i'lling of 100,000 cubic yards of c.:ean fill within the area as defii.ed by the Orono staff, will not be detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare of the public, would not adverse1v affect light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other da-ger to neighboring 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 .nd objectives of the Zoning Code ant' C. -tprehensive Plan of the City. CONCLUSIONS, ORrHR AN. LONDITIONS 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, Subdiv; ons 15 i 20 to permit the placing of 100,000 cubic yards of fill within at, area approved by the Orono —aff, subject to the following conditions: Page 2 of 5 1. Prior to the hauling of fill to the site, the applicant or applicant's agent must submit `he following! A) Six cross sections of existing topography. B) Final grading and erosion plan designating the fol�-owing: i. Side slopes 5:1 ratio; 11. 1% slope to be maintained within inner fill area; iii. Silt fence installed 30-35' from wetland at 972 elevatic�: - no land alterations allowed within 26' of wetland; C) Executed developer's agreement and appropriate security to ensure final grading and seeding if fill project is not completed. 2. Fill r',all not exceed allowed amount of 100,000 cubic yards. Average he_ght of fill to be ma ntait.2d at 5'. Side Mopes to be graded and seeded period�-illy during the course of the project. The Orono staff is to auvi. pplicant or applicant's agent when seeding is to be conducted. 3. Park Construction shall be responsible for advising the City cf the monthly schedule of hauliny activities so that staff can arrange an i apecti-)n schedule for the month. Prior to hauling ary fill to the ter, Park Construction must arr.. ce f-+r a pre -construction meeting with the Orono staff to review all final submittal? and tentative hauling schedule. The .*'y will asx that a representai-ive of its Police Department be present at th pre-r_ons:.ruction meeting to advise of any special tr- cic/safety concerns -,wring the hauling process. 4. Hauling activit ( ',all not be conducted durirg the follo-1_119 t imp —.riods : 6:30 a.m. tc 8:30 a.m. 400 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. Pave of To: Mayor Grabek & Orono Council Members City Administrator Bernhardson From: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator Date: October 19, 1988 Subject: 01310 Howard F. Eisinger, 3245 Wayzata Boulevard - Renewal Conditional Use Permit - Resolution List of Exhibits Staff Memo of 8/8/88 Staff Memo of 9/l/88 Exhibit A - Application Exhibit B - Plat Map Exhibit C - Property Owners List Exhibit D - Staff Memos to Council Reviewing Application #1103 Exhibit E - Cook's Sketch of a Typical Cross Section Exhibit F - Braun Engineering Letter Dated 5/28/87 Exhibit G - Proposed Fill Site - Plan Exhibit H - Cross Section East/West Exhibit I - Cross Section North/South Exhibit J - Resolution #2192 Approving Original Conditional Use Permit Exhibit K - Planning Commission Notice of Action 8/23/88 Exhibit L - Cook Letter Dated 8/31/88 Exhibit M - Park Construction Letter Dated 9/29/88 Review of Application - The renewal application of Howard Eisinger was reviewed at two Planning Commission meetings. Once again, the m.aior concern of the Planning Commission was the duration of the filAng, traffic/safety concerns during the hauling process and how to dial with the disturbed earth during the filling process. It should be noted that Mr. Eisinger has not changed the application from the original permit application. We are still dealing with the f i 1 1 inq of approximately 100,000 cubic yards of clean fill received from the upgrading of the 394 project. Please review Exhibits K, L and M, that provide more detail on the major issues raised during the current review. In Park Construction's letter of September 29, 1988, Gannon responds to the Planning Commisison's concern regarding duration of time required to complete the project, as applicant has given no definite time -iod of the duration of the filling project. He advises if the fill is available, it could be completed within five weeks, and if it is scarce, it could span a period of 6 months to a year. Review Exhibit L, Cook recommends that unfinished side slopes be graded and Seeded periodically during the course of the project, notinq that the top of the fill areas should be r-_aded and seeded when the finished elevation is reached. It would 1-e tb inspection staff's responsibility to order the seeding per the recommended planting schedule provided by Cook. This form of site maintenance will also prevent erosion durinq the time of the filling operations. STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this day of , 198 before me a Notary Public within and for said county, personally appeared _ known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the s.me as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC MY COMMISSION EXPIRES STATE OF MINNESOTA ) )ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this day of , 198_, before me a Notary Public within and for said County, personally appeared known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC MY COMMISSION EXPIRES Paye 5 of MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD AUGUST 15, 1988 ATTENDANCE 7:00 P.M. The Orono Planning Commission met on the above date with the following members present: Chairman Kelley, Johnson, Bellows, Moos; Cohen arrived at 7:05 p.m and Brown arrived at 7:20 p.m. The following represented the City staff: Building & Zoning Administrator Mabusth, Assistant Planning & Zoning Administrator Gaf frog.___ mad_ J^ytx Recorder Schef f ler. Council Representative en attended and--CguncilmemherXallahan was also present. 11309 GERALD NELSON 1629 13OHN'S POINT ROAD 1 AFTER -THE -FACT CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PUBLIC HEARING - 7:00 P.M. TO 7:20 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were The applicants were present for this matter. Building and Zoning Administrator Mabusth explained that applicants were seeking an after -the -fact application for approval of hardcover and excavation within the 75' setback area and the flood plain. This matter had been reviewed back in 1985 by the Planning Commission and City Council. Krutziq Builders was issued a building permit and advised that hardcover within the 75-250' setback area exceeded the 4,725 s.f. allowed in that area. Krutzig filed a variance application which was denier?. H-)wever, because of various engineering designs submitted with that application, the builder did receive approval to build a 900 s.f. deck in the lakeshore yard, which was not considered hardcover. The Resolution stated that :ertain drainage changes had to Le made which involved the installation of swales along both sides of the property. The swa le on the south ,ot line had to be one foot lower in elevation than the east property owners' driveway elevation. Mabusth stated that the City had never approved the drainage on the property. There have been no problems with the Swale on the north side of the property, but there has been trouble with drainage on the south side of the property. Upon inspection of the property, Mabust'i noted that the south swale does not conform to the specificatio.is set out by the City Engineer. Applicants have installed an excavated pond in the lakeshore yard, with a plastic underlines. There are boulders outlining the pond which have filter fabric underneath them. There is also f i 1 1 that has been placed within the flood plain of Lake Minnetonka. There was some discussion on behalf of applicants and the Commission members regarding who was responsibile for the existing drainag- problem. It was determined that Lyman Limber Scones t roo Otto G Bonevran PE Robert 1C Joseph Arkklmt►E. PE Rosene Bradhxd A PE PE k/ar Rd E 1lwTW. ner, ►E. Anderlik & James C Orion. rE Gk!m R Cook. ►E Associates Thomas E. NOWL /E. R*m G. Sd%PWC . PE. tAarvsn L Sonraa. /E Engineers dL Architects October 1i, 1988 City of Orono Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Attn: Ms. Jeanne Mabusth Re: File No. 139-1309 Nelson Property Dear Jeanne, Kesh A Gordon. PE Thomas W Peterson, PE Danrer 1 Edgerton, PE. hCh" W F01M, ►E kWtar C Lyndr. PE Mart A. Sere PE Donato C &s9&rM /E lames R Maand. ►E. PMmrp 1 Ca were, /E Jerry A Bowdon. ►E Kenneth Or Anderson, ►E tort D Wain!. ►E. Mark A Hanson, PE =,A A Bat E Ch&Ws A E,KkWn Red C Fre4d. PE Mart R ftrtPt\ r pawHyry PwrhaeP T Rautmann. PE Robert C y Robert R ►kRe4. ►E Thomas E DOM O. LOU=. rE t+ Sid *h /E. 0al We have inspected the Nelson property at 1629 Bohns Point Road. The work com- pleted by the property owner will improve the water quality and reduce the quantity of water being discharged directly to the lake. The property owner created a ponding area with the overflow being six inches below the neighbors driveway. This should be adequate to provide proper drainage. The ponding area is lined with an impervious fabric to an elevation 9 inches below the overflow. The pond is in effect a hard cover area because of the fabric. The property owner has attempted to mitigate the hard cover situation by stopping the fabric below the overflow elevation. This will al- low storm water from the small rainfall events to percolate into the ground rather than flow directly to the lake. The larger rainfall events will over- flow onto the yard area before enter ng the lake. The property owner has used a permeable fabric for underlining much of the area where landscape work was completed, The placement of fabric is not consistent with adopted city policy. The fabric placed under the planting areas should be removed. The fabric placed in the rock spillway area should be retained to prevent erosion of the underlying soil. If you have any questions, please contact this office. Yours very truly, BONESTR00, ROSENE, ANDERLIK L ASSOCIATES, INC. ale m K. Cook fife: li 24 233E West Highway 36 0 St. Paul. Minnesota S5113 0 612 636-4600 MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD AUGUST 15, 1988 ZONING FILE #1309 CONTINUED should be the responsible party. The applicants were not aware of the drainage problem and were told that everything had been handled. Kelley asked applicants if they were familiar with Orono's ordinances pertaining to land within 75 feet of the lakeshore. Applicant stated that they discovered the ordinances when the project was nearly complete. The applicants' landscaper was present and stated he had worked within the City of Orono before, but did not realize that -it was necessary to obtain a grading permit to install a pond. The landscaper stated that he did not change the grade in the f lood plain. Mabusth indicated that there were changes in the grade when fill was placed on the south side of the pond. Kelley recommended tabling the application so the applicants could work with the City Engineer to correct the problem. Applicant stated that there is something wrong with government when people can purchase a piece of property with no indication that it is located within a flood plain. They had no idea there would be restrictions pertaining to 75' within the lakeshore. Bellows stated that she felt the applicants' agents involved with the purchase of the property were not thorough. Applicant stated that they were aware there was a swale and a runoff problem, but they did not know that they required City approval to correct the problem in the manner they chose. Applicant stated that they lost two 20' pine trees due to root rot. Last summer they had significant dead grass and mosquito larva. They felt that the best way to deal with the unsightliness and runoff was to install the pond. This solution is working. He stated that he wished he had known that Lyman Lumber was supposed to correct the problem, it would have saved them significant money. There are currently two other pine trees that are threatened. They were informed by various landscapers that something had to be done immediately to channel water away from them or they would lose them also. Applicant stated that he had brought some of the filter fabric that underlies the boulders with him. He offered to demonstrate for the Commission members how it allowed water to run through. He could not understand how the use of such fabric would not be acceptable to the City. He stated that ..iis fabric was a new product. There were no comments on behalf of the Commission and applicant stated that he would not take the time to demonstrate. Applicants' neighbor to the south, Douqlas Lohmar, state.l that he wanted to correc-_ the misundarstandinq on behalf of the Planning Commission. A certificate of occupancy was giver to the a person rentzng 1629 Bohn's Point Road, prior to Nelsons purchasing the home. Mr. Lohmar complained about the drainage and the certificate of occupancy was voided. The City Engineer came out and agreed that water was not draining off of the Lohmar's driveway. A 1' trench and a large area of the front yarJ were duo to alleviate the problem. All of the drainage MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD AUGUST 15, 1988 ZONING FILE #1309 CONTINUED water collected in those areas, however, it still did not solve the problem. In his opinion, the fill that was brought in along the edge of the water to the stone wall was the reason for the problem. Mr. Lohmar is a civil engineer and he took transit readings of the level of fill and determined that there is 9" of fill at one point in front- of the rock wall. when the house was built, all of the excavation was piled up in front where the house now sits and the whole front --area was built up with 4' of dirt. Later it was discovered that the dirt had to be removed, but in doing so, 0-9" of dirt was left behind. Mr. Lohmar is only concerned with drainage. He felt that what the Nelsons have done is the best possible solution to the problem and has improved the site 100%. Mabusth noted a certificate of occupancy could never have been issued to the property because of several building code violations and the drainage problem along thy- south lot line. A certificate of occupancy was issued only after Lyman Lumber, actual owner of the property at the time of issuance, executed an attested disclaimer assuming all responsibility for the corrective drainage work. Kelley reiterated his desire to table the matter until more research could be done to solve the problem. He would like a report from the City Engineer stating the best possible solution to the drainage problem. Mabusth asked for specific direction regarding the five points set forth in the August 11, 1988 memo. Kelley addressed each of these five issues. Bellows stated that there was a need for a demonstrated hardship pertaining to the pond. One major issue to be addressed by the City Engineer is how much impact restoration of the yard to its original state will have on the entire area. Applicant presented pictures showing the elevation of the berm on the adjacent property which is 3 or 4 times higher than his and asked why that was acceptable. Bellows explained that the difference is due to the Nelsons' berm lying within the flood plain. The issue 4 s alteration of land within the flood plain. The issue of the vegetation was discussed. Mr. Nelson stated that he has no access to remove the other 20' pines should they also die. Bellows suggested that should the Nelsons plant vegetation in the flood area, they choose vegetation that can withstand excessive water.. 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 table 01309. Motion, Ayes-S, Nays-0, Motion passed. EAP ZONING FILE NO. 1309 CITY OF ORONO NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 473-7357 Date of Notice: 8/23/88 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- TO: Mr. & Mrs. Gerald Nelson COPIES TO: 1629 Bohn's Point Road Wayzata, MN 55391 TYPE OF APPLICATION: Variance/Conditional Use Permit ----------------------------------------------------------- DATE OF MEETING: 8/15/88 VOTE: 6 For 0 Against Planning Commission recommends the following: 'fabled for reasons noted below. NOTES AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS: The Planning Commission directed staff to arrange a meeting between you and the City Engineer at the site in order to discuss an appropriate plan to relieve the drainage problems along the south property line, and the effects of the collection of the drainage within the lakeshore yard. Please contact my office as soon as you Le'.,rn from your trip as I will be out of the office from September 2nd through September 16th, returning on September 19th. It will appear that we will not be prepared to make the September 19th, 1988 Planning Commission meeting, but staff has scheduled an optional meeting on October 3rd, 1988. Please contact me sometime during the week of August 29th so that we can begin discussing the amendment of the drainage plans for your property. Once again, for your information, the Planning Commission wished to re-emphasize the following: 1. Crushed rock with filtered fabric is considered hardcover by the City. 2. The Planning Commission would prefer the grassed swale with the pond as opiosed to the crushed rock with filter fabric or plastic. 3. In any event, the City Engineer will be asked to confirm which form of improvement will provide less of an impact on the lake. 1t1 7�-no►.t � z•- - s, L11 1►.1._]�'�Tb`� 'S 1'�'• �' J�i�il�i •iaY. +r 40" , Topographic Survel.° for Gerald R: Nelson in Tract A. R.L.S. No. 565 Hennepin County, Minnesota A o , � t r z Co c C1 o � I „G lza I'A Bonestroo _-M Rosene Anderlik & Associates Engineers & Architects rlu."ust 5, 11,l88 Ci _,r of Orono Bova 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Ati_n: Jeanne Mabusth Re: 139-1309 Gerald Nelsm Dear Jeanne: Ono C. Borvuroo. PE Kedn A Go�jon. PE Robe" W RoWf%e. PE RKhafd W Foster. ►E loWon C AndeniK. PC Donaw C Burgaral. PE &aaford A Lemberg. ►E hrry A Bowdon PE btnxd E turner PE %tart A Hanson. PE lames C Olson. PE Tea K Feld. PE Glenn R Coor. PE MKnael f RRWmann ►F Thomas E Noyes. PF Robert R Plettene. PE Robert G ichunKhl. PE DWd O Loskofa, PE Marvin L Sorvaw PE lhomat W Pel0son PE Chants A E,KYton MKhall C LyrKh, PE Leo M P~lSky /#met R Mauna. PE Harlan PA Olson KMnelh P Anpenon PE Susan M Etorlm Ke PF Md'K A Se,V R i + $anldrd P( sf We have reviewed the ponding area and r,ck constructed at 1629 Bohns Point Road. The majority of the work was completed in the 100 year Floodplain area. The pond was excavated and a plastic liner placed in the bottom. The pond banks were constructed with large boulders. The construction of a rock path- way was constructed as shown. Plantings with woodchips and filter fabric were placed around the pond. The construction appears to have blocked drainage from the east. We will need additional elevations from the property owner on the site. The swale gourh of the house should be reconstructed as it doesn't drain properly. The pond would not seem to provide a s'gnificant improvement to the quality or quantity o: water di;charged to the lake. If you have any questions, please contact this office. Yours vary truly, BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK 3 ASSOCIATES, INC. ='-- �4,1L Glenn K. Cook GILC:kj EncI. 980if tin sot "10W W 26 0 ft. ftUL MreWs"a M 13 06124MAM E 8 9 y 1629 SOHN * S POIR? ROAD I, the undersigned, a representative of Lyman lumber, am in receipt of a Certificate of Occupancy from the City of Orono for the property at 1629 Bohn's Point Road with the understanding that the drainage along the east lot line of the property has not 1. been approved by the City Engineer and may need reworking at the expense of Lyman Lumber. Date 1 wAR0Cov1-R CA[C[/[AriC ✓t _r? A, ♦•rt' le f �,� rITAt .44CA • 770n Jt fr A t7IAt AAlA • /, 11 s t J1 !I p ^Wojfo w•,#v6r*&m r IY WIHI AM M. KRUTZIG PROPERTY TkACT A. REGISTERED LANG SURVEY ND. 565 HENNEPIN COUNTY. 141dNESOIA 1 Dete Scale: 1. I-, - I el� . •0 v Chw G aw—,w. P F 00&— W Reawr, P L 2335 V %....A oV.*b...7 36 I.dlo.d A Lt.&". P E Sj, P-.4 M - - 15113 R#w.N E Try P P f. Nww, C Ottow P E /%.... 61.: - 636-*600 ' July 18 1985 City of Orono Box 66 Crystal Ba}, MN 55323 Attn: Jeanne Mabusth Re. Our File No. 139 Krutzig Grading AM Bohns Point ida? Dear Jeanne, C—R !.wd PF A -A 4 6-dew. P F rA.w.... E ti. rer. I f Rwwe.d W F.,i,.. P F .Awl, 6 S.Awwuh,P E M.— L. Swww. P . vowew L' IwH^e+. P E /nn A Iorrk .. P E Mo.k A Nwn- ,w P E T,d A fww. P E MwAw! T Re ,~— P E RoA,rr R P(elfww P E CM.w Lor,nn PE l.io N Po..en,. /Iw•bw M J:— the following is a summary of the corrective grading work needed on the Krutzig property at 1653 Bohns Point. 1. Retaining walls to be constructed a minimum of 6' from property line to face of wall. 2. Drainage swales along property lines to be 0.5' lower than adjacent neighbor's properLy at lot line and 3' in from lot lin-. 3. Drainage Swale along driveway to be minimum of 1.0' lower than edge of pavement surface and 5' from edge of driveway. 4. Retaining wall base to be minimum of 1' below existing elevation at property line. 5. Fill on lake side to be removed within 75' setback area. A .- y 6. Fill in back yard area to be removed to original grade. Grade to be ,A410 ' capered from present grade at garage to match otiginal grade 50' east ,f garage. If yoi have any questions, please contact this office. Your, very truly, 50WESTRoO, ROS M , ANDERLiK 6 ASSOCIATES, INC. -W, Z.., / 6--z Glenn R. Cook GRc: eer gee 1 . 122Os ■ �k lAA'r /rrraA 9 r*4AWA r ores Certificate .r Survey for W1111art, M. Krutris rf Trart A. Registered Land Survey No. 565 Hennepin C•3unty, Minnesota t lam`---- ta I hereby certify that this is a true and correct r•epre�rntation of a survey of the boundaries Of Trect A. Regletered Lana Survey No. 565. Hennepin County, Minnesota. and of the location or a proposes building. It does not purport to thou other Improvements or encroachments. pate : 5-27-63, house shown 10-12-6 scale: 10 . 50' VW.• Spot elevotlo" • I -on s►srker GORDON CUFF N INC. Mark S. Gronberg we(,. No. 1?755 Gordon M. corrin Rog. No. 6064 Engineers & Surveyors Long Lake, Minnesota City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITr�A�NCIL NO. 126 rr, 1?�o A RESOLUTION DENYING A VARIANCE. TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.22, SUBDIVISION 2 FILE NO. 881 WHEREAS, Krutzig Custom Homes, Inc., a Minnesota corporation, (hereinafter "the Applicant") is owner of the property located at 1629 Bohn's Point Rcad within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as follows: Tract A, Registered Land Survey No. 565, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "Property"); and WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City for a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivision 2, to permit the construction of decks, sidewalk, and driveway which would increase the hardcover from 3,950 square feet or 21% to 5,950 square feet or 31.5% in the 75' to 250' setback zone where only 25% or 4,725 square feet of hardcover is allowed; and WHEREAS, the City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commissicn, reports by City staff, comments by the owner and effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of Orono, Minnesota, hereby denies the application of Krutzig Custom Homes, Inc. for a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 for the property legally described above, based on one or more of the followinq findings: 1. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on November 19, 1984 and recommended denial of the application based on the following findings: a) Appl. cant was made fully awart! by City staff of -he hardcover limitations on the property at the time of application for a building permit. b) The lot is substandard in area and width in the 1R- 1B Zoning District in which it is heated; however, the property is substantially large en —igh that it could be developed within the hardcover limitations. c) The additional hardcover requested is not necessary to preserve a substantial property --ght of the owner, and the conditions le-iding to the r. d for a variance were creatt,d by the applicant. p.3,;v- 1 ) f 4 City of "I—ILU RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 1725 )d) The property currently accepts the natural flow of runoff from the surrounding properties and additional hardcover will decrease its capacity for accepting this flow. 2. The Council finds that the proposed deck design, which includes 5-1/2 inch decking with 1/2-inch spacing, underlain by a level sand absorbtion layer of 12" thickness, with no barrier layer between the sand and the underlying ground surface, has been demonstrated by applicant to be sufficiently permeable in this instance so as to not be considered hardcover. The Council finds no undue hardships to the property that justify granting a variance to the hardcover limitation of 4,725 square feet in the 75-250' setback zone. FURTHERMORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of Orono hereby approves the construction of deck, sidewalk, and driveway improvements to the property subject to the following conditions: 1. A permit for the proposed deck of 900 square feet in aro-, must be obtained prior to construction. The deck must 7,eet the following minimum design requirements: a) Width of decking boards may range from no less than 4" to no more than 8" in width. b) Ratio of board width to spacing width may be no greater than 12:1 (8.338 open space). c) A 1/2-inch high wood strip must be installed along the upper perimeter of the deck to prevent direct runoff. d) A minimum of a 12-inch depth of sand must be placed under the entire area of the deck and extending downward through any fill layers to the original soil surface. e) The deck platform shall be no higher than 12" above finished grade, or if it is higher, a suitable barrier must be placed between the deck and the ground surface to prevent any access which would allow future place- ment of impermeable materials (Plastic, concrete slab, etc.) under the deck. page 2 of 4 City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. �1726 2. The applicant is placed on notice that the deck and the areas above and below it may never be covered with impervious materials, enclosed, or in any way altered so as to become hardcover, without the granting of a hardcover variance by this or a future City Council. 3. The sidewalk and drivewi are limited in hardcover to a total of 775 square feet, a„j any porous pavement or other innovative surfacing methods proposed to be used in order to exceed this amount are subject to review by the City. 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 th_s resolution and on behalf ui himself, his heirs, successors and assic,-', hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Adopted by the City Council on this llth day of February, 1985. ATTEST: Corotiy M T a in, City Clerk Property Owner Mary C. Butler, Mayor N / ql LAKE MINNETWAVA\ Elev = gZ9.Z1 IIgl � t�,e✓ I Grading Plan +ev William .,. Krutzig of* f rac t A, Reg i sU red Land Survey No. 565 Hennepin County, Minnesota WALL t,c n� gµ.tl .91� - _ �t13i•il- _ 402. 2 L6 �5� ti r PRr►o s(p NE TM �H�N i w = ^ �' / Aot � 1 4*31 0 �•;OA- qJ1 41 41 141r/[�E �1a� t-�a-c s ad/�1 g1i•tt ` ` �ll'1e�' �^ - gtt.�t /l2.eJ 91,.�1 � •- ilt.'11 Date : 7-8-85 COFFIN & GRONBERG, INC. Scale: 1" = 50' Engineers,Surveyors & Land Planners o : Iron marker Long Lake, Minnesota Datum: Mean Sea Level tFSt5LBuvLs n p FjLL2 pee July 25,1988 Orono City Court i l Orono, Minnesota Dear Council Members: My wife and I request a Conditional Use Permit to retain a pond recently completed at our home to provide better control of rainwater runnoff and prevent the further loss of two remaining 20'white pines. Last year we had two similar white pines die because their roots drowned from standing water. We are new to this community, having purchased our present. home on June 1,1987. Prior to constructing the pond there existed a depression for pooling runoff water that was 1'2- feet in depth with an area 101* 20'. The standing water had killed off the grass, drowned two 20' white pines, created a mosquito breeding pond and gave off offensive odors from algae growth. In an attempt to improve our environment and prevent further loss of the two remaining white pines, we sought the advice of three different landscaping firms. All three suggested a pond be constructed and aerated because of the standing water. The excavated soil from the pond would be placed on the other side of the pond to form a small two foot high mound to plant replacement evergreen trees and shrubs, thereby keeping their roots dry. We proceeded with this solution and assumed the landscaper would take out any permits if needed. As it turned out, the landscaper was as unaware of the need for a permit as we were. Sincerely yours, Cl Gerald and Barbara Nelson 1629 Bohns Point Rd. Orono, `V 0 �1 ra+,.. 3. t ow ++. i ' . *' I 013 RUII DATE 07/06/88 HE'1NEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM REPORT 40. P1435401 PROPERTY OWERS LIST PAGE 12 BATCH 004 38 08-117-23 44 0014 38 08-117-23 44 0015 38 09-117-23 33 0008 PROP ADDR 01535 BOHNS POINT RD 01595 SONNS POINT RD 01580 BOHNS POINT RD OWNER NAME WILLIAM J A MARY A ULRICH C J A S L WINSLOW RICHARD M KGJACEVICH ET AL TAXPAYER WILLIAM J A MARY A ULRICH CLARK J A SHARON J WINSLOW RICILARO M FOVACEVICN NAME/ADDR 1535 BOHNS POINT RD IS95 SOHNS POINT RD C/O 14OPWFST COPP WAYZATA MN 55391 WAYZATA MN 55391 1200 PEAVEY SLOG MPLS M11 55402 38 16-117-23 22 0001 38 16-117-23 22 0002 38 16-117.23 22 0005 PROP ADOR 01600 BOHNS POINT RD 01640 bOHNS POINT RD 01725 BOHNS POINT RD OWNER NAME JOSEPH C THOMASON A WIFE D A 0 DUNLAP T A J FELOMAINI TAXPAYER THOMAS A COINIIE SWEEN DAVID J A DIANE J DUULAP TERRY A JULIE FELOMAIN/ NAME/ADDR. 1600 BOHNS POINT ROAD 1640 BOHNS POI14T RD 1725 BOHNS POINT ROAD WAYZATA MN 55391 WAYZATA MU 55391 WAYZATA MIN 55391 w, Q b. 38 17-117-23 11 0001 38 17-117-23 11 0002 38 17-117-23 11 0003 PROP ADOR 01665 BOHNS POINT RD 01655 BOIIIIS POINT RD 01625 BOHNS POINT RD OW11ER NAME T DENNY SANFORD ET AL J DAYTON A E DAYTON THE BANK WAYZATA TRUSTEE TAXPAYER T DENNY SANFORD J M DAYTON A E J DAYTON THE BANK WAYZATA TRUSTEE �t NAME/ADDR 430 OAK. GROVE ST SUITE 200 1655 BOHIIS POINT RD C J WINSLOW RETIREMENT TRUST MPLS MN 55403 WAYZATA M11 55391 900 E WAYZATA BLVD WAYZATA MN 55391 38 17-117-23 ll 0004 38 17-117-23 11 0005 38 17-117-23 ll 0006 y„ PROP ADDR 01629 BOHNS POINT RD 01635 BOHNS POINT RD OWNER NAME 0 A S ANDERSON ET AL G R NELSON A B A NELSON DOUGLAS W LOHMAR A WIFE � TAXPAYER TOM E SWEEN GERALD R A BARBARA A NELSON DOUGLAS W LOHMA! HAME/ADDR 1600 BOHNS POINT RD 1629 BOHN'S POINT ROAD 1635 BOIINS PT RD WAYZATA NI 55391 WAYZATA MH 55391 WAYZATA MN 55391 38 17-117-'3 11 0007 38 17-117-23 11 0006 18 17-117-23 11 0009 PROP ADDR 01645 BOh,1S POINT RD ?► OWNER NAME O A M FOX J M DAYTON A E J DAYTON J M DAYTON A E J DAYTON �.� TAXPAYER DAVID K A MARGEIIE FOX JUDSON M DAYTON JUDSON M DAYTON NAME/,'0OR 1645 BOHNS POINT RD 16SS SOHN'S POINT ROAD 1655 BONN'S POINT ROAD WAYZATA MN 55391 LRYSTAL BAY MH 55323 CRYSTAL BAY MN 55323 38 17-117-23 11 0010 38 17-117-21 11 0011 38 17-117-23 11 0012 PROP ADOR OWNER NAME J M DAYTON A E J DAYTON J M DAYTON A E J DAYTON J M DAYTON A E J DAYTON TAXPAYER JUDSON M DAYTON JUDSON M DAYTON JUDSON M DAYTON NAME/ADDR 1655 SOHN'S POINT ROAD 1655 BOIIN'S POINT POAD 1655 BOHN'S POINT ROAD CRYSTAL BAi 114 55323 CRYSTAL BAY 11H 55323 CRYSTAL BAY MN 55323 p......- RUN DATE 07/06/88 y BATCH 004 36 17-117-23 11 0013 PROP ADOR OWNER NAME J M DAYTON L E J DAYTON TAXPAYER JUDSON M DAYTON NAME/ADOR 1655 BOHN'S POINT ROAD CRYSTAL BAY MN S5323 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SISTEM PROPERTY OWNERS LIST TOTAL BATCH 004 00019 REPORT NO. PI435401 PAGE 13 i t Y . I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE "f REPR[SE14TATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF T14E HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PROPS Y TION TO !T OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF. -"4CITY OF ORONO �- GENP.R�L AN L OSE�A PL ON -------------------------------- ------------------------------ PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address Ito 2-c� ?DO kos palliT f2 b Property Identification Number (P.I.D. ) 11 -// 7-;3 11 - Soo,s Please check one - Property abstract or lC torrens? (for Condit-.onal Use applications only) , Please actach legal description to application if not included on required survey. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- APPLICANT //�� Phone (home) y % l - D 3 (� Name MR4MAS (9,eAA1, 0 %V C(�aV Phone (work) s-e 1 r7 Address 2-f.� RoA.ems Poi,vT RD. City OROivO Zips --------------------------------------------------------------------------- OWNER (if different than applicant) Phone (home) Name S q vv\ C Phone Address _ City Zip Date Property Acquired :5-u iv e- 11 / 1 8 7 (month/year)- _ I (ia (do not) also own the adjace t parcels of land. ------------------------------------------------------------- - FEES - CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS Renewal Fee - 1/2 Current Fee After -the -Fact Fee - Double Current Application Fee '�_ tisu �YL♦�`• T,, $100.00 a) Residential accessory Use $150.00 b) Institutional (church, school, etc.) $150.00 c) Duplex Credit/'Bldg $250.00 d) Commercial/Industrial Use $200.00 f) Land Alteration _ Grading and filling - designated wetland c floodplain Grading and filling - 101 cu. yd. or more Grading, seawall, retaining walls within y of iakeshore PRD/PID - see fee schedule OTHER APPLICATIONS $150.00 Commercial Site Plan Review (+ consuitant fees) $250.00 Vacation $150.00 Easement Vacation $ 50.00 Easement Vacation With Subdivision $250.00 Rezoning $100.00 Appeals _ _ tither - see fee scheL:ule PRESENT USE OF PROPERTY --pp Present Zoning District L h Present Use of Property n L Residential 0 (specify) --------------------------------------------------------------------------- DBSCPTPTTnm nP RRnUV-qT eq REQUIRED SUBMITTALS "1. Completed Application Form. ,2. Certified Property Owners List of owners within 350' (you can obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Gcvernment 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 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. H. 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 APPLICANV 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. 1. 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 v ification of this request. 1 Owner's signature Date --------•--------- --•----•-►----------------------------- Z----♦ ------ Applicant must hav 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 authorised agent attend in your place and advise the Building i Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. To: Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson From: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator Date: October 12, 19e8 Subject: #1309 Gerald Nelson, 1629 Bohn's Point Road - After -the -Fact Conditional Use Permit/Variance - Second Review Additional List of Exhibits Exhibit O - Planning Commission Notice of Action 8/23/8 Exhibit P - Staff Sketch Exhibit Q - Cook's Report As requested, staff and the City Engineer met with the applicant at the site to discuss the drainage problems within the lakeshore yard of the property. Staff reviewed the elevations confirmed by Coffin & Gronberg on 7/5/88 (Exhibit P). There is approximately a 6" drop in elevation from the driveway of the property owner to the south and the applicant's south yard that receives the drainage from the east and the south. As staff confirmed at the meeting, on several inspections of this property, drainage was observed collecting in the area where the pond has been constructed. Once again, the original design was to allow water to fan out over the grassed yard through the swal- running along the south lot line and then eventually drain to the lake. It is interesting to note that the applicants confirmed that when the water overflows from the pond, it does fan out over the grassed yard. Note the elevation of the west side of the pond is 931 and the elevations that surround the pond is 931.2. Staff observed no further signs of erosion within the lakeshore yard. Drainage would appear to function without any negative impact on the surrounding properties. The north side yard continues to function as originally approved. Please review Exhibit O, the City Engineer's report. in consideration of the Planning Commission's directive that was to insure all recommended improvements would provide the least impact on the lake, staff recommends the following: 1. To allow the plastic liner underlying the entire excavation of the pond to remain as it prevents the undermining of the sites of the bank providing the necessary stability and the liner is installed ar the upper elevation al lowi.nq overflow to pass over non -hardcover surface. Zoning File #1309 October 12, 1988 Page 2 of 2 2. To allow the gushed rock with underlying f=_bric remain in place to prevent further er-isior. as the drainage path is channeled within this area. 3. Plantings within the lakeshore yard may remain as long as the underlying g•otechnic or filter fabric is removed. Wood pulp/chips or crushed rock may remain as long as they are installed on top of existing or natural grade. 4. The f i 11 that was placed on the south sic'e of the pond iias been matched with the excavation of the pond so there is a equalization and as a result has no negative impact upon the flood plain area. It is hoped that staff can bring this application to the Council meeting of October 24th so that the applicant can complete all necessary alterations by November 15th of this year. Zoning File #1309 August 11, 1908 Page 3 of 4 Review of Current After -the -Fact Application - The applicant's landscape contractor has attempted to solve the drainage prrJ lems along the south lot line without the benefit of permit review. Re, ^w Exhibits M & N, Staff can see no change in the criginal swale a lon j south lot line that Krutzig had installed. This still remains as a grassed area. As you proceed lakeward, the applicant's contractor has installed a stored pathway leading to a pond that has an underliner of plastic. The pond itself has been constructed with a plastic liner placed within the entire cavity of the pond. Large boulders outline the pond and a raised landscape area has been installed along the south side of the pond with filter fabric under.ining the entire landscape area. In addition, there have been new rock landscape Areas with filter installed fabric adjacent to the boulder wall along the lakeside of the house. Landscaping with filter fabric or plastic was classified its hardcover `)y the City in a recent review by both Council and Planning Commission. In fact, both groups unanimously voted to classify filter fabric as hardcover. As a result, the landscaping adjacent to the boulder wall would bring the property over the allowed 25% hardcover with the 75-250' setback area and in addition, provide hardcover within the 0-75' setback area where none is allowAd. Review Exhibits K & L, Cook's letter and sketch regarding the current proposal. Once again, he calls attention to the need to re -construct the swale along the south side of the house. It should also be noted that the majority of work performed within the lakeshcre yard has been installed within the flood plain of Lake Minnetonka. All work appears to be below the 931.5 elevation. Note the entire deck area and boulders in the lakeshore yard Dave been placed along the line of the 931.5. The 75' setback line seems to be 5-8' west of the 'aou_der wall along the lakeshore of the house. Cook also notes that the pond construction seems tn provide no significant improvement to the quality or quantity of water discharged *o the lake. Staff Recowee ndat ion - Prior to asking the current owner to submit additional information regarding the current proposal, staff feels that it is the City's role to first advise the applicant what improvement would be more consistent with the City's policy regarding work within the lakeshore l,rotected area and flood plain. At this point, staff can recall application that dealt w;th the construction of a pond within the 75' ._:.back area or within the flood plain of Lake Minnetonka. The previous drainage plan called for a swale that would continum and fan out withn thw lakeshore yard based on the final elevation of the Swale along the south sidr_ of the property. Once again, the swalt along the north side seems to be functioning the way it was intended. As the elevations in the lakeshort yard appear to be more graduated and tend to slowly drain to the lake. Zoning File ##1309 August 11, 1988 Page 4 of 4 The Planning Commission should address the following items so that our new resident has some basic understanding as to what the City deems approvable in solving this type of drainage problem: 1. Would you approve the crushed rock landscaping without the filter fabric? 2. Would you approve the pond if it was outlined merely with the boulders, with no filter fabric with only a grassed swale carrying the run-off from the east along the south lot line. 3. Applicant should be advised if the only acceptable method for dealing with the drainage on the property is the original plan that called for a grassed swale that would fpn out to more gentle graduated slopes in the grassed lakeshore yard. 3. The fill that has been placed within the flood plain is a far more important issue. Staff would have to recommend against placement of fill within the flood plain as the City has been consistent in denying fill within the t lood plain. If the fill or pond is to remain, it should be reviewed by the Minnehaha Water Creek District. 4. Any other options or methods of drainage improvement that the Planning Commission would like to address or advise applicant. In any case, clearly the Planning Commission must table the current proposal and based on the directives to the applicant, the applicant and applicant's contra,2tor must work with City staff to revise the current drainage proposal and recommend a schedule to make the necessary changes within a reasonable time frame. 'Jo To: Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson From: Jeanne A. Mablisth, Building & 'Zoning Administrator Date: August 11, 1988 Subject: #1309 Gerald Nelson, 1629 Bohn's Point Road - After -the -Fact Conditional Use Permit/Variances - Public Hearing Zoning District - LR-lB Total Area = .8+ acres Pertinent Ordinances - A. Section 10.03, Subdivision 19 - Conditional use permit for the excavation of a pond. B. Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 - The pond is located within 75' of the lake where no filling or excavation is allowed. C. Section 10.55, Subdivision 8 - All work within the flood plain and lakeshore protected area is prohibited. It should be noted that the proposed work would have required review by the Watershed District and the DNR because of the filling within the flood plain. List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Application Exhibit B - Property Owners List Exhibit C - Plat Map Exhibit D - Applicant's Addendum Exhibit E - Resolution #k1726 Exhibit F - Drainage Plan i^proved With Building Permit & Variance Application Exhibit G - Engineer's Review of Drainage Plan Exhibit H - Plan Locating Flood Plain Elevati- i Lakeshore Yard Exhibit I - Survey Locating 75' Setback Linf Exhibit J - Statement From Owner of Propert•: ime Certificate of Occupancy was Issued Regarding NFcu to Improve Drainage South Lot Line Exhibit K - Cook's Report Dated 8/5/88 Exhibit L - Cook's Sk-tch Exhibit M - Current Topographic Survey Exhibit N - Profile/Section of East Line Drainage Area & Pond Zoning File ##1309 August 11, 1988 Page 2 of 4 Brief Review of the History of the Property - As the property contained over 80% in area and satisfied the required lct width of 140', a building permit was issued for the substandard lot without the need of a variance review. In 1985, a building permit was issued to Krutzig Builders, Inc. At the time the building permit was issued to Mr. Krutzig, he was advised that there were excessive amounts of hardcover that exceeded the allowed"4,725 s.f. or 25% of hardcover within the 75-250' setback area. Krutzig filed a variance application (#881) and the building permit was issued based on a hardcover amount of 21% within the 75-250' setback area. Review Exhibit E, Resolution #1726 that denied certain improvements that would have required variances to the hardcover allowance. Note in that application, because of various engineering design and hydraulic information submitted with Applicaticn #R881, Mr. Krutzig was approved a 900 s.f. deck area. The deck was not considered hardcover. All other improvements on the property had to be maintained at the 4,725 s.f., 25%, allowance. During the period of construction staff worked closely with the adjacent neighbor to the south, who contended that drainage was consistently running off onto his property where originally the drainage had always been contained within the bowl area withir the subject parcel. Review Exhibit F 6 G, Krutzig's drainage plans showed drainage swales along both sides of the property. Cook commented that at the south lot line, the Swale would have to be 1' lower in elevation than the east property owners' driveway elevation. The north -side swale appeared to function successfully, as the City never received any complaints from the property owner to the north. The south side continued to be a problern throughout construction and staff continued to work with Mr. Krutzig. A swale was installed but it became apparent that there was retention of run-off in the lakeshore yard. Note that in the drainage plan (Exhibit F), a swale was to be constructed in to the lake yard and drainage was to fan out. The City Engineer never approved the final elevations of Krutzig's drainage attempts along the south lot line. The City refused to issue a Certificate of Occupancy until the drainage along the south side and other building code violations were completed. Krutzig Builders lost the house after it received the Reggie Award in 1986. Review Exhibit J, the Certificate of Occupancy was issued to the current property owner only upon Lyman Lumbers' assuml.tion of -11 costs to correct the drainage problems, that up to that point had not jeen resolved or approved by the City Engineer. Prior to acquiring the property, Mrs. Nelson did contact my office and I advised her of the unresolved drainage problem along the south lot line and that it must be approved by the City Engineer before a Certificate of Occupancy could be issued to the residence. The City Engineer can confirm that no one from the City staff has ever contacted him to come out and make a final inspection of the final drainage along the south property line. To: Mayor Grabek & Orono Council Members City Administrator Bernhardson From: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator Date: October 20, 1988 Subject: #1309 Gerald Nelson, 1629 Bohn's Point Road - After -the -Fact Conditional Use Permit/Variances - Resolution List of Exhibits Staff Memo Dated 8/1:1/88 Staff Memo Dated 10/12/88 Exhibit A - Application Exhibit B - Property Owners List Exhibit C - Plat Map Exhibit D - Applicant's Addendum Exhibit E - Resolution #1726 Exhibit F - Drainage Plan Approved With Building Permit & Variance Application Exhibit G - Engineer's Review of Drainage Plan Exhibit H - Plan Locating Flood Plain Elevation in Lakeshore Yard Exhibit I - Survey Locating 75' Setback Line Exhibit J - Statement From Owner of Property at Time Certificate of Occupancy was Issued Regarding Need to Improve Drainaaa South Lot Line Exhibit K - Cook's Report Dated 8/5/88 Exhibit L - Cook's Sketch Exhibit M - Current Topographic Survey Exhibit N - Profile/Section of East Line Drainage Area & Pond Exhibit O - Planning Commission Notice of Action 8/23/88 Exhibit P - Staff Sketch Exhibit Q - Cook's Report Th- Planning Commission reviewed after -the -fact application #1309 at their just 15, 1988 and October 17, 1988 meetings. The application invol•.�.:. the excavation of a retention pond of approximately 165 s.f. within the lakeshore protected area and flood plain and the installation of certain landscape improvements underlaid with geotechnic fabric also within the lakeshore protected area and considered hardcover. Please review the enclosed staff memos that provide more details regarding the review. Per the Planning Commission's directives at their August meeting, staff was to work with the applicant to determine the best course of action that would provide the least impact on the lake. Planning Commission moved to approve staff recommendation cited in the staff memo dated October 12, 1988. The enclosed resolution has been drafted per the Planning Commission recommendation of approval. A RESOLUTION GRANTING AFTER -THE -FACT VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.22, SUBDIVISION 2 AND SECTION 10.55, SUBDIVISION 8 AND AN AFTER -THE -PACT CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PER MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.03, SUBDIVISION 19 FILE #1309 WHEREAS, Gerald Nelson, (hereinafter "the applicant") is the owner of the property located at 1629 Bohn's Point Road within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as follows: Tract A, Registered Land Survey #565, Hennepin Coun=y, Minnesota (hereinafter "property"); and WHEREAS, the applicant has made application to the City of Orono to allow a pond of approximately 165 s.f. constructed without the necessary permit review, located within the lakeshore protected area, and within the floor plain of Lake Minnetonka where no such alteration is allowed per Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 and Section 10.55, Subdivision 8, and in addition, seeks a conditional use permit per Section 10.03, Subdivision 19 required for the installation of a pond. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #1309. 2. The property is located in the LR-1B Single Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District requiring a minimum of 1 acre in area per residential unit. 3. The property is approximately .8 acres in area. 4. The Orono Planning Commission revieweu* this application on August 15, 1988 and October 17, 1988, and recommended approval of the after - the -fact variances and conditional use permit as set forth above, based on the following findings: Page 1 of 4 A) The improvement as amended by the Planning Commission will provide the least impact on the adjacent lake and within the flood plain of Lake Minnetonka. B) The excavation of the pond has been eq•ialized by the placement of the excavated fill within the flood plain area and has been found to have no negative impact on the f lood plain of Lake Minnetonka nor on the adjacent properties. C) The property receives the majority of run-off from the adjacent properties located within the immediate watershed. D) The installation of the pond and the drainage path constructed in the south side yard that carries run-off to the pond and eventLally to the grassed lakeshore yard meets the original intent of the grading and drainage plans approved at the time of development of this property. 5. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this pro- perty 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 poEe a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring properties; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate a 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. 6. The City Council finds that granting a conditional use permit to allow a 165 s.f. retention pond as amended by the City will not be detrimental to th- health, safety of general welfare of the public, would not adversel, affect light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other Ganger to neighbor.ng 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 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 variances to Municipal Zoning Code Sections 10.22, Subdivision 2, and Sectior 10.55, Subdivision 8 and grants a conditional use permit per Section 10.03, Subdivision 19 to allow the retention pond to remain within 75' of the lakeshore and within the flood plain of Lake Minnetonka where no such excavations are allowed, subject to the following conditions: Page 2 of 4 1. The plastic liner underlying the entire pond excavation and the crushed rock/wood chips with underlying fabric are to remain as installed. ,. 2. New plantings within lakeshore yard may remain as long as underlying geotechnic or filter fabric is removed. Wood pulp/chips or crushed rock may remain as long as they are installed on top of existing or natura' graAe. 3. Authorities granted by this resolution run with the property not with the applicant, but arc• permissive only and must be exercised by applicant completing the directives set forth above within the lakeshore yard by November 15, 1988 or the special conditions of this resolution will expire on that date. 4. 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. 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 24th day of October, 1988. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk James R. Grabek, Mayor Property Owner(s) Page 3 of 4 A RESOLUTION DENYING VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.28, SUBDIVISION 5 (B) FILE NO. 990 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 zoning regulations for the protection of the public health, safety and general welfare; and WHEREAS, Ward Ferrell (hereinafter "the applicant") is the owner of property located at 3405 Watertown Road within the City of Orono and legally described as follows: PARCEL 1 That part of the Southeast 1/4 of Section 32, Township 118N, Range 23W, described as follows: Commencing at a point on the South line of said Southeast quarter, 50 rods West of the Southeast corner thereof; thence West along said South line 263 feet; thence North at right angles to said South line to the public road; thence Southeasterly along said road to a point directly North of the point of beginning; thence South to the point of beginning. (Also known as P.I.D. #32-118-23 44 0009); and That part of the Southeast 1/4 of Section 32, Township 118N, Range 23W, described as follows: Commencing at a point on the South line of said Southeast quarter, 50 rods West of the Southeast corner thereof; thence North 6 rods to the center of the public road; thence Southeasterly along said road to the South line of said Section 32; thence West to the point of beginning; excluding the public road. (Also known as P.I.D. #32- 118-23 44 0010); and PARCEL 2 That part of the Southeast quarter of Section 32, Township 118N, Range 23W, described as follows: Beginning at a point on the South line of said Southeast quarter, 1088 feet West of the Southeast corner thereof; thence West along said South line 140 feet; thence North at right angles to said South line to the public read; thence Southeasterly along said road to its intersection with a line drawn North through the point of beginning at right angles to the South line of said Southeast quarter; thence South to the point of beginning. (Also known as P.I.D. #32-118-23 44 0008); and Page 1 of 9 PARCEL 3 That part of the Southeast quarter of Section 32, Township 118N, Range 23W, described as follows: Beginning at a point on the South line of said Southeast quarter, 1228 feet West of the Southeast corner thereof; thence West along said South line 140 feet; thence North at right angles to said South line to the public road; thence Southeasterly along said road to its intersection with a line drawn North through the point of beginning at right angles to the South line of said Southeast quarter; thence South to the point of beginning. (Also known as P.I.D. #32-118-23 44 0007); and WHEREAS, for discussion purposes the property has been defined as 3 separate parcels as described above and per Exhibit A attached; and WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City for variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.28, Subdivision 5 (B) to permit the construction of a principal residence structure on a lot containing approximately 1.04 acres or 52% of the required 2.0 acres in area and 140 feet or 70% of the required 200 feet of of width (Parcel 3); and to further permit the construction of a principal residence structure on a lot containing approximately 0.85 acres or 42.5% of the required 2.0 acres in area and 140 feet or 70% of the required 200 feet of lot width (Parcel 2); and requesting Council approval per Zoning Code Section 10.03, Subdivision 6 (C) to separate non -conforming, undeveloped, substandard, contiguous, unsewered lots of record under common ownership, which separation would result in individual building sites not satisfying the lot area and lot width standards of the Zoning Chapter of the Orono Muncipal Code; and WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed the application; the recommendations of staff and the Planning Commission; comments of the neighboring property owners; and materials and comments made by the applicant and applicant's attorney. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Orono hereby denies the requested lot area and lot width variances and denies the request to separate the commonly owned lots for the property described above based upon one more of the following findings of fact concerning this property: FINDINGS 1. As of January 1, 1975, the property has been zoned RR-lB, Rural Residential Zoning District, requiring a minimum lot size of 2.0 acres in area and 200 feet minimum width. Based on the required performance standards for the RR-lB zoning district, the proposed use of the property for 2 new residential building sites in addition the one existing building site would require the following variances: Page 2 of 9 Parcel 1 (with existing house) a) Lot Area Required = 2.0 acres Existing = 1.01 acres or 50.5% Variance = 0.99 acres or 49.5% Parcel 2 (vacant) a) Lot Area Required 2,0 acres Existing = 0.85 acres or 42.5% Variance = 1.15 acres or 57.5% b) Lot Width Required = 200 feet Existing = 140 feet or 70% Variance = 60 feet or 30% Parcel 3 (vacant) a) Lot Area Required = 2.0 acres Existing = 1.04 acres or 52% Variance = 0.96 acres or 48% b) Lot Width Required = 200 feet Existing = 140 feet or 70% Variance = 60 feet or 30% 2. The property consists of 4 separate tax parcels which are contiguous and which are owned in common by the applicant. The property in total contains approximately 2.90 acres and has a width in excess of 500 feet, in both respects meeting the area and width requirements for the single existing residence on the property. 3. Prior to January 1, 1975, the property was zoned R-lC, effective since September 14, 1967, a residential zone requiring a minimum of 1 acre in area and 140 feet minimum width. 4. Prior to September 14, 1967, the property was included within the "Stubbs Bay Zoning District", effective since July 10, 1950, a residential zone requiring a minimum building lot size of 1 acre in area. 5. The applicant purchased the property in August 1948. 6. Prior to 1958, the property was undivided and contained approximately 4.19 acres and contained only the residence located at 3425 Watertown Road. Paqe 3 of 9 7. On September 22, 1958, the City Council approved the request of Mr. Ferrell to construct a second residence on the undivided property. The request was granted subject to approval of the Planning Commission. Subseal2ently, Mr. Ferrell was issued a building permit to construct a new residence on October 13, 1958, which residence is now known as 3405 Watertown Road. 8. Sometime during 1958-1959, Mr. Ferrell subdivided the property so that 3425 Watertown Road was contained within a separate. 1.29 acre parcel, the new house at 3405 Watertown Road was located on a 1.01 acre parcel (Parcel 1 per attached Exhibit A), and 2 additional parcels (Parcels 2 and 3 per Exhibit 10 were created between 3405 and 3425 Watertown Road. 9. Mr. Ferrell has r^ rained -)w:;er si, ip of Parcels 1, 2 and 3 sinca their creation as a result of the 1950-59 subdiv:si,n. 10. On March 18, 1985, Mr. Ferrell reque,ted C.i.ty staff to accept a variance application for approval to construct a r.ew home on Parcel 3. At staff's recommendation, Ferrell suh-ritted the application as a zoning appeal in -jLder to b-Y :granted a timely review and re.ommendation ny the Plannitio (ommissican without submitting the --omplete survey and soil testin., information required. 11. Pursuant to the zoning appeal application, the Planning Commission held a Public Hearing on this matter, Application No. 903, on April 15, 1y85. The Planning Commission confirmed that many variances were necessary in order to build on either of Parcels 2 or 3 and the Planning Commission gave the applicant the general direction that Planning Commission would likely only recommend approval of one new house, and only if Parcels 2 and 3 were combined. 12. The zoning appeal was reviewed by the City Council on May 28, 1985, and the Council affirmed staff's interpretation of the zoning code that many variances would be necessary in order to build on both vacant lots, and at that meeting certain individual Council members stated they would likely consider one additional building site but not two. 13. On October 9, 1985, Mr. Ferrell submitted a formal application for variances to build new homes on Parcels 2 and 3. The Planning Commission held a public hearing on the matter on November 18, 1985, and tabled the application pending submittal of additional required survey and soil testing information for the existing house on Parcel 1. 14. On February 18, 1986, the Planning Commission again reviewed the completed application. The Planning Commission unanimously recommended denial of 2 new building sites but recommended approval of. 1 new building site using the combined Parcels 2 and 3. Page 4 of 9 15. The City Council reviewed the application on March 10, 1986, tabling it until April 14, 1986 for final action. On April 14, 1986, the City Council directed staff to draft a resolution of denial based on the following findings: a) The extent of the variances requested is excessive for the RR-lB zoning district. b) Given the history of septic system problems in the City of Orono and surrounding Lake Minnetonka, a density of 3 septic systems on 2.9 acres in a district where 6-res is required for 3 septic systems, is excessive. c) Because the property is currently used as conforming residential building site, the applicant would not be deprived of a reasonable use of the property. d) ApplicanL has not demonstrated sufficient hardships to justify granting of the requested variances. At the April 14, 1986 Council meeting the applicant ciu;,.d his attorney could not be present at the meeting. TheappJlcant was asked if he wished to have the matter tabled until hip attorney was present. Applicant waived his right to have his attorney present. 16. The applicant maintains that he divided the property in 1958-59 at the request of then Mayor Herb Ross. Because the zoning code adopted in 1950 allowed only one residence per building lot, Mayor Ross would have been legally bound to require that a division be completed in order to allow the new house which was permitted in 19`8. 17. The applicant maintains that the property was divided in a manner such that new homes could be built on each of Parcels 2 and 3 according to City codes at the time of division. In fact, Parcel 2 does not and never did contain the 1 acre in area required under previous zoning of the property. 18. The applicant has provided soil testing, proposed septic system designs, and proposed site plans for each of Parcels 2 and 3 which indicate that technically, septic systems can be provided to serve a residence on each of Parcels 2 and 3, meeting the required sanitary setbacks. However, technical feasibility is not the only criteria considered by the City in reviewl,lg variance applications, and in this case and other similar cases, the City has also considered, as a matter of policy, the potential adverse effect of higher density housing on the quality of Lake Minnetonka and the potential adverse effect on the general health, safety, and welfare. Page 5 of 9 19. The applicant maintains that when the zoning was proposed to be changed from R-lC (1 acre) to RR-lB ( 2 acre) in 1974, he attended the public hearings and was told that his lots would still be buildable under the new zoning. This occurrence has not been do^umented by the applicant nor can it be verified by the City. Whether or not it occurred, the Zoning Code adopted by the City Council would be binding. Mr. Ferrell was notified in writing by the City in 1981, upon inquiry, that under the current code, no building permits for a new house would be issued, and that no basis existed for the granting of variances. 20. The 1967 Zoning Code,which designated the property as R-lC, 1 acre, 140 foot width, stated as follows regarding existing lots of record: 31.200. Existing Lots. A lot of record existi,._ pon September 14, 1967 (the effective date of the Zoning Code) under sing:.e separate ownership in a "R" Residential District, which does not meet the requirements of the Zoning Code as to area or width may be utilized for a single family detached dwelling purpose provided that in the judgment of the Council such use does not adversely affect public health or safety. Single separate owner- ship includes joint ownership by not more than two person:. The 1967 Code did not discus:, common ow,ership properties nor did it differentiate between sewered and unsewered lots of record. However, by using the term "Single Separate Ownership", it implied that other types of ownership would be treated differently but did not define in what way. Under this code, the applicant would have been allowed to build on Parcel 3 without .. variance because the lot met the standards of the R-IC zoning district. Parcel 2 would have required a lot area variance in order to be legally buildable. 21. The Zoning Code adopted January 1, 1975, which declared the property to be zoned RR-1B, 2 Acre Single Family Residential, stated as fo.1.1ows regarding existing lots of record: 31.201. Existing Lots. A lot of record existing upon January 1, 1975 (the effective date of the Zoning Code) under single separate ownership in an "R" District, which does not meet the requirements of the Zoning Code as to area or width may be utilized for a single family detached dwelling purpose provided that in the judgment of the Council such use does not adversely affect public health or safety and the fo'.Iowing requirements are met : 31.203. In •R• districts of Greeter Taan One Acre. A lct of record :n any "R" District in the City in excess of one acre, which does not meet the requirements of this Zoning Code as to area or width only, may be utilised for single family detached dwelling purposes if the Council finds: Page 6 of Q 1) it is at least one acre in size, and the average width of the lot is at least 100 feet; and 2) it is either served by public sanitary sewer or meets all the septic system requirements of the City or other governmental. body; and 3) it otherwise meets the requirements of this or other applicable ordinances. Under this Code, the Council, at their option, could have granted a lot area variance for a lot of single separate ownership, but the Code again did not specifically discuss any standards for the separation of commonly owned lots. 22. City policy regarding thF2 separation of unsewered, undeveloped substandard, contiguous lots in common ownership was clearly defined by an action of the City Council in 1981, in which the separation of a developed 1.4 acre lot from the adjacent vacant. 1.7 acre, 120.3 foot wide vacant lot in the LR-lA 2-acre, 200 foot width, unsewered zone was denied. (Application No. 635, Council action to deny on October 26, 1981, based on: a) lack of demonstrated hardship; b) no sanitary sewer a•.,i able; c) insufficient area; d) insufficient width. 23. Th,: 1984 Zoning Code amendments included the addition of Section 10.03, Subdivision 6 (C), which prohibited the "transfer or sale of non -conforming, undeveloped lots not served by public sanitary sewer, aligned in a contiguous arrangement, undivided by a public or private road or road easement ar: under imp or common ownership" unless specifically approved by the Cit ncil, or unless the iesulting lots satisfy the area and width r rements of the Zoning Code. No performance standards for approva. of such transfers appear in the code. 24. At least 13 Properties or groups cf properties in a situation similar to Ferrells with a -Iigh potential for request of similar variances have been identified within the City of Orono. 25. Since January 1, 1975, when the 2 acre RR-lB zoning district became effective, no permits nave been issued for new residences on commonly owned substandard lots in the RR-lB district. Of 153 new residence permits issued in the RR-1B district from l/l/75 to 5/l/86, 145 permits have been issued for conforming lots, 7 permits have been issued for substandard lots of record in single separate cwnershiT, due to the inability of applicants to combine or acquire additional and to create conforming lots, and 1 permit was issued to damol: and rebuild on a substandard single separate ownership lot where a house was already ixisting. The City of Orono has consistently denie-i permits for suhsta lard lets owned in common with adjacent develop-d lots in the RR-1B district. Pau 7 of 9 26. The City Council has always required that ;then two or more unsewered lots are owned in common, each lot must individually meet or exceed the requirements of the Zoning Code before any of the lots can be built upon and that two or more substandard lots owned in common must be combined so that the resulting combined lot meets the requirements of the Zoning Code before the lots can be built upon. 27. The granting of such a variance would require amending the many sections of the Comprehensive Plan th-c govern the rural development of the City. The City of Orono has been consistent in requiring a minimum of two acres for a buildable lot in tLe rural areas of the City where there is no sewer service. 28. In review of the factual findings noted above, the City fines that to establish a precedent that would allow severely substandard lots to be developed to be in complete conflict with the established environmental standards for rural development within the City and to be detrimental to the public, health, safety and welfare. The City also looks to the broader, environmental principals and goals setforth in its Community Management Plan and the intent of the specific zoning district when dealing with matters rf:lated to the public, health, safety and welfare. I:,sues involving the public health, safety and welfare are not only resolved in securing the obvious traffic and drainage concerns of surrounding property owners but the City als(, must provide its citizens with a designated and approved optimum level of density, open space and quality of life. 29. The granting of such a variance would require the rezoning of the property to an urban lot size in addition to requiring the extension of City services to the property to maintain a suitable level of fire protection. 30. The granting of such a variance would require the extension of City wate- and sewer to maintain the standards setforth in the Orono Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan for an urban sized lot. 31. In granting such a variance, Council would abandon a longstanding, consistent policy in consideration of the buildabiAity of substandard lots under common ownership and thereby establish an adverse precedent. 32. Denial of the subject variances would not constitute a taking of property or loss of substantial value because Parcels 2 and 3 have always had value and have been used as required area for the residence on Parcel 1. 33. The intent of the application is contrary to the letter and intent of the Orono Comprehensive Plan. Pag3 8 of 9 34. The variances would have an adverse effect upon the health, safety and welfare of the community for the reasr- jutlined herein. 35. The amount of light and air in the neic oo,' would be diminished by adding a structure on the-ubstandar- _t. 36. The values of surrounding properties will be adversely affected. 37. There are no special conditions applying to the land in question which are peculiar to the land or immediately adjoining property. 38. The granting of the application is not necessary for Lhe preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant. 39. The granting of the variances will serve mainly as a convenience to the applicant, and is not necessary to alleviate demonstrable hardship or difficulty. 40. In order to put everyone on notice that the above referenced substandard lots in common ownership must remain under common ownership to maintain the existing house as a conforming use, Council hereby directs the City staff to file such notice against the properties legally described herein. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota, at a regular meeting held May 27, 1986. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk Mary C. Butler, Mayor Page 9 of 9 :s _ Q N RIO- aft 4 IK (44 W a 1 W V C t OCT - 81,981 September 29, 1981 City of Orono Hoyt M,,C Orono, Minnesota 55391 In the summer of 1958, I went to see George Hansen t1) get a building permit. At that ti-In I was informed that I h ad to sea the Council for a?proval. At the next meeting I approached the Council for approval. I explained that I had about five (5) acres of land and I wanted to build at the cast end of this land. Herb Ross, then Mayor, knew the property and made a ■ration to approve the permit. A second mc.ion was about to be madd when Mr. 9ugley questioned the legality of two homes on the same property. He said two houses on a lot of c subdivi- sion was not legal. I explained that there wasn't any division of property and that the houses would be at Mat 400 feet apart. I already had a mortgage approval from Midwest Federal for an increase in the existing mortgage. The approval was tabled until legal advice could be obtained from the village lawyer. I waited about two months to hear the results that never came even when I asked what was going on. I called Herb Ross at work early one Saturday morning and informed him I couldn't wait longer because of winter coming and was going to start construction that day. About two weeks later Herb called and said to stop in and get a building permit. It was finally approved. At that time he expressed his wish that I would consider dividing the land to satisfy Council members and also a doubtful legal tangle. I said I would think it over. When I went to get the permit from George Hansen I inquir- ed about restrictions on lot size if I divided the land. He informed me of no restrictions of lot size, but expressed his !� desire to have it at least 14J feet wide at the building site. Having 693 feet of land on the south would have given me 5 or 6 j lots. I decided to divide the land and contacted Gordon Coffin j� for survey Finding 5 or 6 lots not appealing to me, I settled ++1 for 4 lots. 1 - 150 feet, 2 - 140 feet, and the third I left 1' 263 fe;t for myself. This was accepted by the Village and Herb 111111 thanked me for my cooperation with their request. FA City of Orono -2- Septeoher 21, 1981 When new zoning started and meetings were held for public response, the Question was raised abo-st existing lots (2 - 140 ft.). We were informed that it vou'.d -lot affect existing lots and had nothing to worry about. I decided to sell a lot and found a buyer. That party (I vas informed) vent to the City Flail to Set information on building restrictions and code and was informed that a permit would not be issued under any circumstances because of the lot size (1.25 acres). I was toll that it would be a waste of time even to r.pprosch the Planning Board for approval. This was told to --me over the phone by J*AAJ at the City Hall. It seems strange that after a request by one Council to divide land to satisfy the 'Pillage and Count:il members, to have statements made that existing lots would not be affected by new sonin,l codes, that now a buyer of a lot in told impossible to build on this lot in Oronn. I would like to sell this lot. The buyer wants to live in Orono but discouraged by the flat NO by the City for permit without any exception@. I would like this settlid so land can be sold. I have paid taxes on this land since 1949 and expenses to keep it clean. This amounts to quite a sum of money and time. Then to hear it can't be used is quite a blow. You people of the Planning Committee, Council members and those who work for the City work for the improvement of the City of Orono. We have land (lots) already pLotted but do not meet new codes. People vent to buy in Orono to live here. These lots should be approved for building. New people develop more jobs - improvement brings more revenue for the City. This in turn helve the City improve service to the community. Let's not hinder progress, let's get new citizens in Orono - to move forward let's imp-ove and develop what we have. Respectfully Ycurs, All, A . •� CITY of ORONO ors .tNs;•'• 11((pr IA.f M.N'rvM.J 11.,v �t�nnrr .I.�rMYntt'.patl ll((I/rr • /'' (its (h,• Nt-r►h Sh,,.,• u/ take 3 innr/unkrt October 26, 1981 Ward Ferrell 3405 Watertown Road Long Lake, :T! 55356 Dear Mr. Ferrell: 1 have received your recent letter to the City concerning the lots you own on Watertown Road. First, let me apologize for not having time to answer your questions sooner. As I understand the problem, you own three separate tax parcels, or lots, on Watertown Road. Your home is on the eastern parcel with the next two parcels being the open yard area west of your home. You now wish to sell one or both of the other parcels for another building site. We measure the parcel with your home as about .86 acre in area, the next parcel as .82 acre, and the western parcel as 1.04 acre, all exclusive of road right of way. This totals 2.72 acres. The zoning in your area since 1975 has required at least 2.0 acres of land for each house. This is because there is no City sewer available and each house must maintain its own septic system. Your three parcels together now comprise one conforming lot. If any of the parcels were to be sold off, none would meet the minimum lot area including the one with your home. Because these lots would be less than tha minimum area required, the City would not issue permits for any new house, whether you own the lots or if you sold one. There would be no basis for the City to grant a variance to the zoning area requirements. The only option would be a general area -wide rezoning. I must tell you that suca a prospect is very, very unlikely. I know this is not the answer you were looking for. Things do change as the years pass. If you wish to discuss it further, K11ANF4(.&aFO%6r4. US�ISt • �UVi1HIM�11UM1alWAKI •11tI5y • /IM1CMuM1l! •S!1l3� t b .. Ward Pagc you Adm; Sing Ala �cit cc: OWNER : 1V/1 iP 17 ADDRESS I') /Ar n i- E PHONE NO. G ,y 3 Sec. No. Parcel No. 7, ' .-- , i LAND DE=21 Size of Lot Land Sq. Ft. Elevation VILLAGE OF ORONO RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS PURPOSE OF BUILDING %/t let L-L 00L/t i" SUMDING LOC Dis. From Road Du. Sides D'u. Back Druinage BUILDER ADDRr.S3 �x -/9.,x 7 PHONE NO. PERMIT NO. % — Ad( "tion or Subdivision 11TION VENTILATION AND LIGHT Percentage of Flog Area Vent. Percentage of Light to Fl.xn Area CONSTRUCTION .. Frame C.� Brick. Solid Sao Brick Veneer Stone Cement Block rOoTQJGB Depth _ Least Depth Width f L Below Grado FOUNDATION Co=L-Action Size IiASEf.I�.1T _ Ground Drainage Floor Bing Posts size Spacing Berms Size Span No. Type oN . Foundation = 1 ' ' i Height Above Root Smcke Pipe — Distance From Joists nooRs Sub Floating h, joists size Spacing � � Bridging 9 9 S , Bea•.ng.v:q -! : i,,. _ + STUDDHIGS RAFTERS CE;ILUNG JOISTS SL.e %' x / Size . / �, Sue '_ Spacing Spacing Spacing Plates Span ' Longest Span Bracing ` L-OT3 Basement No. Size `: Stairway -j lat Floor -- No. Size Stairway INSULATION Ceiling b o, 6 i Walls r LINTELS Size Span / Locar:on WELL TYPE _ Construction Location r _ SEPTIC TANI;S Size Distance From Well Construction DRAINFIELD , Depth ,. _ Distance From Well � ; Width , Distance From Lot Lines/ Length ;- PLUMBING FIXTURES Sink3 % Shower Laundry J Toilet Bath Tub) Lavatory I hereby agree that in case permit is granted all work which shall be done and all materials which shall be used shall com- ply with the plans and specifications submitted and with all the ordinances of the Village of Orono applicable thereto. NOTES: r Signed- A�-1sc'a_ Receipt No.._ Y 5- -- � Bldg. b4✓-3_ j Plumb. &M Sewage E - Total Sj:-6 THE SEWAGE SYSTEM INSTALLED BY NAME - ADDRESS _ �I r a Exhibit J �l► In TAX VALOATION HISTORY Ward Ferrell, 3405 Watertown Road vacant vacant with house vacant 1.07 acres 0.85 acre 0.91 acre 0.10 acre YEAR PID 0007 PID 0008 PID 0009 PID 0010 MKT VALUE TAX MKT VALUE TAX MKT VALUE• TAX*• MKT VALUE TAX TOTAL TAX (Before Homestead Credit) 1985 5,000 198.60 5,000 198.60 25,000 2,064.62 200 7.94 2,469.76 1984 5,000 205.54 5,000 205.54 25,000 2,121.22 200 8.22 2,540.52 1983 5,000 193.50 5,000 193.50 25,000 2,097.92 200 7.74 2,492.66 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1982 10,400 384.30 6,600 243.88 14,100 1,628.12 220 8.12 2,264.42 1981 10,400 354.32 6,600 224.86 14,200 1,534.20 220 7.48 2,120.86� 1980 9,200 283.98 5,800 212.98 13,960 1,596.70 200 5.82 2,099.48 (12,500)**• -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1979 5,100 198.42 5,100 198.42 7,070 1,674.92 120 3.88 2,075.64 (5,900) 1978 4,600 183.90 4,600 183.90 6,240 1,688.56 110 3.96 2,060.32 (5,300) 1977 4,200 169.46 4,200 169.46 4,740 1,657.63 110 4.04 2,000.59 (4,235) ------------------------------- 1976 3,500 151.78 ------------ 3,500 ------------------------------------------------------------------- 151.78 `•" 1,460.46 90 3.92 1,767.94 1975 3,200 154.14 3,200 154.14 "'• 1,457.4: 90 4.36 1,770.07 1974 3,200 141.38 3,200 141.38 ••" 1,341.98 90 4.00 1,628.74 •Market value of land portion only '*Tax on land and structures ***Number in parentheses is Limited Value of land portion; Market Value number was calculated Using the formula: Limited value of land portion MKT VALUE ------------------------------------- x MKT VALUE land and structures Limited %value of land and structure ***•During these years the tax records do not indicate the values of land and structures separately the trend in residential subdivi- sioris has been toward a longer length of block and a reduction of the percentage of land devoted to streets. Under certain conj- tions, blocks up to 1000 feet r 1200 feet in length may be ac- ceptable. Lots 1. Residential lots, as to size and arcs, shall be governed by and subject to the policy of the Village Council which is hereby declared to be that all lots con- form in area to the existing lots in the general area of the pro- posed subdivision and in no event shall be less than fifteen thousand (15,000) square feet in area, and minimum width of one hundred (100) feet at the build - in, line, exclusive of anv ease- sient for driveway purposes (util- ities easement exceptec!). 2. Depth and width of proper- ties reserved or laid out fot com- mercial and industrial purposes shall be adequate to provide for the off-street service and parking facilities required by the type of use and development contemplat- ed. 3 Each lot shall adjoin upon a public street and shall have a minimum width of thirty (30) teet at stree! line. Lots to regis- tered land surveys may adjoin upon private streets. Said streets nonetheless shall comply with provisions pertaining to streets set forth in this ordinance. 4. Double frontage, and reverse frontage lots, should be avoided except where essential to provide separation of residential develop- ment from traffic arteries or to overcome specific lisadvantages o! topography and orientation. A planting screen reservatnan of at {cast ten (10) feet, and across which there shall be no right of access, shall be provided along tt.e line of lots abutting such a traffic artery or other disadvan- tageous uses. 5 Side lot lines shall be sub- stantially at right angles or rad al to Street lines Flood Areas Areas within the jurisdiction of th,-- Village Council subject tc flood conditions as established by the Engineer of the Village of Orono will not be considered for suudivuion purpoaes until ade- quAte drainage has been provid- ed. Planhnq on Publlc Property The planting of trees, type, spacing, etc., on public property shall be subject to the regulations of the Village Council. No plant- ing, gateways, entrances and sim- ilar improvements shall be made on public property except with permission and approval of the Village Council. Public Open Spaces It is the declared general policy of the Village Council that in all new subdivisions not less than five per cent of the gross area of all property subdivided shall be dedicated for public use, each five per cent being in addition to the property dedicated for streets, alleys or other public ways. The Village Council may waive this requirement if it feels that public property, other than roads, is not necessary in connection with this subdivision. The area thus dedicated should be either usable area or area which can be put into usable shape by the stbdivider. The subdivider shall leave land so dedicated in a condition satisfac- tory to the Village Council. The varying size of lots, the size of the subdivision, etc., will have a direct bearing on the de- sirability of and the necessity for such dedication as well as the sue of the piece to be dedicated. It will be within the discretion ct the Planning Commission to interpret these regulations in the light of the overall plan and pat- tern of park development In the interests of the Village as a whole, and, therefore, of benefit to the subdivision, the Village Council of Orono is de- sirous of conserving certain areas of natural beauty and establish- -ng in various areas the logical distribution of the following types of facilities: I Play lots, for preschool chil- dren. 2 Children's playgrounds, f or children from Ave to fifteen years of age to use for active play. 3. Athletic field, as a specialized center for organized games and sports. It. 4 Parks, large and small, for their value in passive recrea- tion and as a long range pro- tection from congestion of de- velopment. A cooperative interest in this larger program is sought by the Village Council and it is expected the subdivider will aid in assist- ing to make this achievement possible. Platting Procedure -he Council of the Village of Jrono requires that all proposed subdivisions shall have the prior approval of the Planning Com- mission before receiving final ap- proval by the Council. It is, therefore, necessary that certain steps be taken and data assem- bled that will enable the Plan- ning Commission to study the propcsed subdivision in the light of its relation to the Village plan for growth and development, and in the light of the general topog- raphy and the character of the development. To accomplish this purpose, the Planning Commission will wish to submit the preliminary plat to their Village Engineer and to their Consultant for their study in field and office and for their recommendations. This prelim- inary plat for the consideration of the Planning Contmusion shall be filed with the Village Engineer or Planning Commission not low than live days in advance of a regular meeting of the Planning Commission to allow sufficient time for review, study and a recommendation pertaining to this plat, at the next regular meeting. Whenever possible, it is desir- able that the preliminary plat be scrompanned by a written state- ment specifying the intentions of the owner respecting the pro- posed character of the develop- ment, deed restrictions, drainage, parks and playgrounds and the intended date of beginning devel- opment. He should express his willingness to proceed to Ale a plat of record of his subdivision or such part thereof as he may wish to put upon the market and to install all monuments shown un the plat. The Planning Commission. in its consideration of the prelim- inary plat, will take into consid eration the requirements of the Community and the beat use of the land being subdivided Par tncular atter,tion will be &,wen Lv the arrangement, location and widths of streets, the denersi drainage situation, lot sizes and arrangement, as well as any Mins- ter Plan requirements such as parks, school tiles, boulevards, highways, etc. Adequate street connections will be required to insure access and freedom of traf- fic circulation. The subdivider, after the ap- proval of the tentative plat by the Planning Commission and prior to the submission of a Mal plat, shall within six months after the date of approval, or such longer period as the Plan- ning Commission may grant, cause the property to be surveyed to accordance with the approved tentative plat and any and all changes therein as approved by the Planning Commission. The survey shall be made in accord- ance with the standard practices and principles for land surveying and all monuments shall be sub- ject to the inspection and ap- proval of the Village and the County Authorities before ap- proval of the final plat. Final plats must be submitt4o to the Village Engineer or Plan- .iing Commission not less than five days in advance of a regular meeting of the Planning Commis- sion for its approval prior to sub- mission to the Village Council. The Council requires that all streets shall be graded and grav- elled as a part of the develop- ment. Such work shall be done under the supervision of the Vil- lage Engineer and subject to spec- ifications prepared by the Village Engineer and placed on file with the Village Clerk. Interior streets The subdivider shall grade and gravel streets at his own expense. In case this work is "ot complet- ed for a logical Miss .i when the final pint is presented, a perform- ance bond with a Surety Com- pany approved by the Village Council ahall be furnished before final plat is accepted. Boundary Streets The subdivider may petition, prior to acceptance of the final Plat, that the grading and gravel- ling be done by the Village with full costs assessed against the benefitted property over a period not to exceed ten years. P"Umisiarl Plat Four prints of the preliminary plat of a proposed subdivision shall be submitted to the Orono Planning Commission drawn to a scale either one inch equals one hundred feet or one-half inch equals one hundred feet. The preliminary plat shall con- tain the following information: 1. The proposed name or legal description of the subdivision. 2. Its location with reference to k n o w n existing thorough- fares or section corners, etc. 3. The boundary, lines with di- mensions of the tract to be subdivided. 4. A topographical map of the area (showing contours of the land in general not greater than one foot intervals). Map should indicate location and w►dtn of existing adjacent streets and utilities with es- sential elevations and make note of bench mark used and its elevation. 5. Owner's name, Subdivider's name, and the Surveyor's name and certificate. (Sur- vey shall be made by Regis- tered land Surveyor.) 8. Scale, North point and date of plat. 7. Preliminary street profiles showing present grade, pro- posed grade ;every 100 feet), complete with percent of grade and showing satisfac- tory disposition of storm wa- ter. Two prints of profile — one to be returned to the subdivider when approved and acceptable. 8. All plats and profiles shall bear the standard State Board of Registration Certifi- cate, properly executed. 9. Proposed building lines an all lots intended for residen- tial use and in some cases re- quired on lots intended for business use, and at least the setback required by the Building Ordinance and any applicable Zoning Ordinance. 10. Owner's name of unplatted property, lots, blocks, and name of subdivision of plat- ted property within 150 feet of the boundary lines of pro- posed subdivision. 11, Copy of *he provisions of any protective covenants where- by the subdivider proposes to regulate land use in the sub- division. rural Plat Requiremeet The preliminary plat as out- lined above is a prerequisite to the submission of the Anal plat. Approval of the preliminary plat is tentative )nly. Approval of the Anal plat shall be obtained from the Village Council after first re- ceiving appro lal from the Plan- ning Commission upon submis- sion of same with the complete information outlined in the re- quirements specified herewith. The final plat shall coidorm to the preliminary plat as approved, and, if desired by the subdivider, it may constitute only that por- tion of the approved preliminary plat which he proposes to record and develop at the time, provid- ed, however, that such portion conforms to all requirements of these regulations. The following data shall be shown on or submitted with the final plat: 1. Boundary survey. 2. Dimensions — all necessary. 3. Angles —at all boundary and block corners. 4. Purpose for which sites, other than residential lots, are ded- icated or reserved. 5. Minimum building setback line when required by the Village Council. 8. Location and description c! monuments. 7. Other data: such other cer- tificates, affidavits, endorse- ments, or dedications as may be required by the Village Council for the enforcement of these regulations. 8. In lieu of the completion or installation of any or all of the above improvements, and before the final plan is ap- proved and recorded, the Vil- lage of Orono may accept a cash deposit or curety bond to secure to the Village the actual cost of such improve- ments as estimated by the Village Engineer 9 Streets and alleys (by angles and distances). 10. Above description should in- clude all centerline curve data. 11 Street names. 12. Block lines and block num ben. 13 Lot lines and lot numbers. 14 Easements and their widths 15 All necessary certiAcat- re quired by law 16. Name of subdivision, scale, date, north point and all oth ORDINANCE NO. 22 An Ordinance to Preserve the Public Health of the Citizens of Orono by Regulating the Mini- mum Size of Residential Ibuild- ing Lots WHEREAS, the Village of Or- ono has no community sewage system and depends upon septic tanks and soil absorption sys- tems for the disposal of waste; and WHEREAS, such disposal methods are apt to create a ser- ious problem affecting the health of the community where applied in residential areas serving more than one dwelling per acre; and WHEREAS, other communities have serious health problems by reason of the enlargement of res- idential areas with substandard lot sizes served by septic tanks and absorption systems; ar d WHEREAS, the Planning Com- mission of the Village of Orono has recommended to the Council that regulations should be estab- lished now to prevent the same sort of serious health problem from arising in the Village of Orono; NOW, THEREFORE, for the sake of the general welfare and health of the residents of the Village of Orono, it is ordained as follows: Section 1. After the effective date of this ordinance, no build- ing permit shall be issued for 7 the erection of a residence in any residential zone of the Village, except upon a building lot con- taining a minimum area of one acre, and having a minimum width of 140 feet at the building line. Section 2. It is recognized that ,here are several built up resi- dential areas in the Village which are substandard and overbuilt by the terms of this ordinance. In such areas, building permits may be issued for lots not meeting the minimum requirements estab- lished by this ordinance, if the Village Council feels that such building will conform to the gen- era characteristics of the neigh- S_rq-S� borhod and will not have an im- mediate and specific adverse effect upon the public health. Section 3. It L recognized that the enforcement of the minimum provisions required by this ordin- ance with respect to lots held fn ownershi at the A 5 single, separate V time of Fe passage o is ordin- , t% ance might be an arbitrary depri- from l vation of a valuable right said owners. Therefore, where a i� .k CU 0 lot which fails to meet the mind - mum standards of this ordinance is held in a single, separate own- r ership at the time of the pas- camp of this ordinance, the Coun- ssue a building permit,, 0 ,at there will be no • specific adverse ef- ue public health. , 4. This ordinance su- percedes and repeals any provi- sions in the platting ordinance or zoning ordinances of the Village which are inconsistent herewith, except that provisions of prior higher ordinances establishing standards than those prescribed by this ordinance are continued in effect. Section 5. It is recognized that the establishment of definite standards for all lots in the entire Village is impossible, as there may be, in every case, reasons to relax the standards, or to en- force stricter standards. The Council reserves its discretion to increase or decrease the stand- ards hereby set for good cause, whenever the particular facts of the situation convince the Coun- cil that the public welfare, and particularly the public health, re- quire such modification. Section 6. This ordinance shall be published in the Minnetonka Herald at Wayzata, Minnesota, and shall be effective immediate- ly upon such publication. Passed by the Village Council of the Vilage of Orono this 12th day of October, 1959, by a vote of 4 yeas and No nays. H. R. FOSS, Mayor Attest: O. E. JOHNSON, Cleric (10-15-59) er pertinent information gen- erally required on plat@. 17. The form of approval shall be as follows: a. This plat wa. approved and accepted by the Village Coun- cil of the V°liage of Orono, Minnesota, at a regular meet- ing thereof held this.......... day of..._.._.._.................A. D. lf....... ........... .............................Mayor ......................................... _Clark b. This plat was approved by the planning Commission of the Village of Grano at a reg- ular meeting thereof held this ........day of................A-D. 19..... ....................... I ........... Chairman c. Checked and approved this ........day of................A.D. loll... County Surveyor, Hennepin County, Minnesota. Should any section, paragraph, clause or condition of this ordi- nance be declared by the courts to be invalid, the same shall not affect the validity of the ordi- nance as a whole or any part thereof other than the part so declared to be invalid. This ordinance shall be pub- lished in the Minnetonka Herald published at Wayzata, Minnesota and shall be effective from and after such publiration. Passed by the Village Council of the Village of Orono this 12th day of September, 1955. H. R. Ron, Mayor. Attest: O. L. Johnson, clerk. ,.. '170SO 01 Fes^- G L o t-- Ordinance No. 7 r Ordinance Aefulatins PW- ustg in as Vulm" of Orono- }aubsPin Councl, Mineesese. The Village Council of the Vil- lage of Orono ordains: That the following regulations be, and the some are, hereby adopted and approved; and shall be known as and may be cited as "Village of Orono Subdivision Regulations." Faspessi In order to safeguard the best Interests of UW Village of Orono and to sesist a subdivid-.r in har- monizing him interests with those of the Village at large, this ordi- nance is adopted in the hope that adherence to it will bring results beneficial to all concerned. It is obvious that piecemeal planning of subdivisions will bring a disastrous disconnected patchwork of pattern and poor circulation 3( traffic unless its design and arrangement are cor- related to a Master Plan Study aiming at a unified scheme of community interests. It is, there- fore, necessary for the Orono Village Council to make certain regulations a n d requirements which contribute to the health, safety, convenience and general welfare of the community. In the long range analysis, the Plan- ning Commission believes these regulations will aid in raising property values for the subdivid- er and will effect many economies in the platting and development of a logical subdivision. "Subdivision" in this ordinance means the division of a parcel of land into two (2) or more lots or parcels for the purpose of trans- fer of ownership or building de- velopment; provided that a divi- sion of land for agrvultural ptu- paee- Into lots or parcels of live (!) acme or -tore and not involv- ing a new ,treet or allev shall not be deemed a subdivision The term lncludee re -subdivision and, when appropriate to the context, shall relate to the process of sub- dividing or the land subdivided ll,vuwn of any exut.ng Iot, par- cel or plot of land shall be can sidered within the purview of ttu- O'1 mane GgXJ31tJtL RZOUIXEMEI f •itseeas t In any areas where the Plu, ring Commission has adopted a part or whole of a Mister Plan, the proposed subdivision shall conform in general principle to such Master Plan and if the sub- division area coven a designated thoroughfare, such part of this main artery shall be part of his Plat and shall be dedicated by the subdivider. 2. In the desig" of ,the subdi- vision, pro-41tion shall be made for the proper ^onnections with existing streets in adjoining sub- divisions or for the proper exten- sion of proposed streets into the adjoining property where such adjoining property has not been subdivided. In considering the extension of such streets, every attempt should be made to m- "A- tain property values in adjoin ng subdivisions. (Adjoining develop- ments of unequal character should not be united by connect- ing streets unless it is deemed nceessary in the public interest for street maintenance, safety and fire protection to do so.) 3. Street right-of-way widths shall be designed in accordance with their character and use. Th• following widths are st,ggested as minimum right-of-way for var- ious types of streets: Right -of -Way a. Major arteries and parkways ....................... 100 feet b. Secondary and main thoroughfares ................ 80 feet c. Neighborhood resicitn- tial streets ..................... 60 feet d. Minor residential streets --- I.... ............. 50 feet 4. It is desirable that all streets shall intersect as nearly at right angles as seems practical, taking other factors into consideration. Minimum center line radii of local minor streets shall be not less than 100 feet, centerline radii of major and secondary thorough- fares should be not less than 300 feet. S. The location of all curved streets should be so arranged as to fit the natural topography as closely to rn Bible and to make possible desirable land subdivi- stuns and safe vehicular traffic 7. Terminal residential streets or ci,da-de-soc should be platted not longer than 500 feet urns topographical conditions mane a EXk longer terminal street necessary. Such cull -de -sac should be avoid- ed altogether where possible. 8. A turnaround at the end of all terminal streets shah be pro- vided of not less than 100 feet in diameter at the property line. 9. Street names may be Indi- cated out shall not duplicate nor resemble too closely names of ex' isting streets in Orono or in the metropolitan area. Lusting At"t names shall be used where the platted street is a logical exun- sion of that particular street. Alleys 1. In genera4 alleys shall not be permitted in a residential sub- division. Service drives shall be provided on major thoroughfares. Where alleys are nett iary and approved by the Council, they shall be not loss than twenty (20) feet in width. Alleys will be re- quired in the rear of ail lots to be ww-i for business purposes. a. Where two (2) alleys inter- sect, a cut-off of not lose than ten (10) feet along such property line from the normal intarsecticn of the property lines shall be pro- vided. 3. Dead-end alleys shall be Avoided where possible, but if unavoidable, shall be provided ,ith adequate turn -around facil- ities at the dead-end as deter - ^tined , the Council. Easements Where alleys are not provided at the rear of properties, there must be provided a public ease- ment as a part of the plat. The purpose of such easement is to provide possible location for ut:l- ity lutes such as sewer, water and gas and for ;ocation of electric and phone lines. Such easement shall be not less than five (3) feet on each ride of the lot line, milk- ing a total of ten (10) feet. No garages nor structures shall be built upon this easement. Ade- quate easement provisions shall be made for area drainage and storm crater carry off. Blocks (-omiderable latitude as tc• sue of b!, cks is deemed desirable by the Councr' in order that the subdivision may be plarirted in blocks to suit the topography, the general character of the site and ?he type c' development appro- prieto to x.ality With the increaser' f the ou►omubile, .;Z/ olle tot(_ .va::--i1 Hall to 3, -Aid :,,*"r. 4.1 --V6 -I , ;%f-i tht-n v-I.iccth if.! %PC wr, In , - - - t -uth v-pjuat'! pleca .,i.inn-:-1 �qcnpo�!•-1.4 Maxwell lot ;..cvy Al ' , 1 31111)t andSILUAS Ijv. Lake Min. .-,f "Only On't"'t'arrIly notunk..; thence I-colksorT btiild' n!0174 the weslvriy s.,de of ::aid isto...14ri!y OMNI ic, conjun ings, r - "'. I r �"llkkr"Ill to R Point 11110ft it in - 'I- con- w1i fa, of Stubbs 3idered le.1-sec!s theshoe! hr with farl'14' dweWngfil and Ctlon' dwelling 9 Part of such �1 Bay. Lake Minnet &Mily orka; thence dwelling may be erected on an� vesterly, northerly and easterly crie "bull n- -lot " Accessory Mary cc -!k�n 4 the west shore linov of aaid :1,73 l0wall to�;e'verived ts,in -_-tUL"3 Say to a Point wnere the ! - e!tti . . _ -)Wd-.r.g3 aA gUeRt Cot. stud shore IL-te intersects the! tar,- '302t 110lUaws, purrp W•!st side Of township road run- jr- 'w,*vil h'Out-s, chicken houses,.1 i r11111 North and South on cen- I)orrlx jllt� I arm btLld,ngs. .tor q.-cton line of Stoics; !'thing herein contained shall bt-4 CA TowLvhlp Ore 1lundrKl.*cnIIzfide.-fd to permit or author I SevOnteer (117), 1U.-ile Twenty- i :it: hI!Y persen whntsoever to extended; thc-3et• uLlixf- such acce-wry building,. 'north slant; the weq p."le -c P, f,or ' .1ik' Y of them. ,a U townithir road ec of related tolan' commercial erkilerPrije C.Or '.hP -0inCorbegiiin In%, Juctd upon i.- and wh.ch said Tons l 5.'.ail L-_ refairret! to u ,,A Tubb' 4 MW.zug herein Contained Say distirkt• shall be construed to prohibit 8, 1 BF AM FMTHZR KLSOLVIlMlowner of !and within the said !AND 0RVAZN ,nlgt the to, 6 zoning district front runtinui.ig a list: ^1 1 tht tarsi by I- r —4 uzins and restric him. any !;.aje. I'lino-istry nr prijimion %i..ich 11 :, with respe-t to ...;es of the s snts and buijJ'rj0_witjIjn the,.., exist.-rxe on said !and at t.he Jn I r1ict"Aall be and; tine Of 010 .adoption f o -s - 7 dift o hiA m o a; aereov adc...ted as JoUowg,, 1,.!,,,n and twItimance, and the en- -at. vner.t of this requlAnon and re card !,-nLnz � 'or%.t s he,*.' c.-4wi. or Ironj .,rnst, uctin.�'2111 . .,•cling or bl- kl,nqe It ;,11r, � uan -,v:tjj _lcp triA.14'. :tal 14151i;Q1. and no btLilding In- -tr other it: uctt;ry or i?nprovmnant i ll,ir. ry or nm:PNhirh "I. . is tr.hereal'er be erft-.al. ajtetrd1- a rt -? and in a:ion or' jra•tj . ..... I A the vo. 0 "t. -.4e nr be used i.... ;,. r .1.? adat. *.,; -j:'ier Char: pri, _it: thin rt!:c!-jtj-n • j&Ij o;dirian,t 46INk. truert ., thu rL§;L:I&- ;;On ind ri,stri,,rion; nor shall I. No -illijeards Or ,;;her ik,!-'a r.-"l in-1 herein contained he c.-in- ditiplay. or Vt pitihibit file )r ar .1 of ao;j, Mein th,211 be rrtsel,-d I i,,,n,, it' the stod zn"In niA._intd in otik.Lj rjmIng ju;_; I.,i, ..v:xj,!tu,al far!-. - e;*- 1WInS only, ;X 3 of the resider;,Ls .3f *hlt, tuic tht Cime-t of +%ell- -;.urefi tri.i traffic .IF, anti' sjl,r, ad"visi.-g ter sale' I t, ikil I 'rin 'h !:vtvj totting ij _t; like ;And ..P, )r other vrtk to be erWM ct.qs-,j.LIt--,1s LWIdinill hot" 85 heireinatter Io. -0-4. A -b4d(crig 1..It,- .3 1— . I 1#1111ta"W, Do hf.vi -'VPW WMIM IM ?rr - —All 4 -'tth tole it s. 4 is J144A. 7t8 $Un A40 lou'llA6 r -jn j3l,,,4 -tra: W j! WIN -1ho"' 4- AM 1194 SIR -#11 . t .31 .. Y:!Dkl;,IED Th., t xl:t ind n -d 61; P he. - nd I .ne I r:-e!!v q,. ir., d t "-,I!an t;," VA.,vii of tj.jq-jt- Ujw t 10) krl: !f!, 77 1". 1"'WrIlitu ej" ieverk.emyn :J At the 0I Ono III, 1). rowntshfj :atK of era —let, ,Sam v" of Isks') S.'et- on V..f-. TI. IL, , " t XV a vnva j:rr or '4 'vAy fFj III... :.Ctivn of 44ild -.--cn. r -sac 'if %tit' -:14road •j4ho Ui '-%-'t-'I t1JL�lA-'h%*v-stt-r1y Lne W IAC!', ubdivision i,Unj. r T, I'*" Hundred nfty_kjjx Ncrinepi:1 count... Midne- ta - entendt-A north enee running _Aov!herstcr1'v f 01319 the said sOuthweiterly ne Of said subd"lvision• and jtg n o orthwesterly ex-enfiGn tO the 'I WAacction of ULIA !iue with the t Id-mary low wjte: MjW;j of I ki, Xrtneto.:La; thence 1,&n. In Ing along *Ai", short' Line in a O..-theasterly direction, and then o: r z r an easterly dirrctifun• ind then in A, a z-Outherly d;.rec, -,in. nd then northerly dJTe-tian -follow- 1ing the line d,fncd b,, the arcil- "GrY low wate,'Tarts of Lire .1licnetarha. to qj, n Gint of be. Ind -.1koch -fewest kv as the Elr3ck. ?1)I4IC dAtrict. . L BE `' 1UR_-HE14 RESOLVED AND ORDALNED, That Cle fol. rules, reXu.L;icjjs kind ro. .--trictions with. respect to uses the land3 and bf:-'dings v.-;tpM �hc above zoe.ing d, -ttiCt 0311 be rid -irc, 4erehy ad-Lzed as fe". A. U!,* Dvitrkts Said ti : d4--rivit zv- vided j-._;trlC% to be lava as 3 d�ntlal jig- Ct* district." I. Al{ -h,,it pnrt%on of said jon- I.qfrivi, Other fl-ar 'hot h..re. tel, -esc:ibewl aic; rievignated. the "curorner-fal '11mr1r." is b 'I"Ifnated PsMblijbed a he as PC 2 .. Ti:« fri'l- -nq ,-:-ibcd "tion ' ;aid;kjtrWt , rebY '""I'lated Ln i tLablj a ",—mmercia, !iFirlet,* 3"F %J GVVPr11 Ilk tt,lli 1 aid Ilinj , .4), Ill- : an V,. 'ruwrial-m 'r- HurAirv-d ;-Ontegdm(1171, P.inr_ ,-,irenty. ;6,r-p i, Nfrn.-Pir, co,:xtv. 11rinesuts. descrisvd j,j '%ac P§-,t Of Goveim-ent Lc' as rahaws: rIm"Williff at a point ;r th- - -f -Mud Lawi wl-ich rujrL jrTerminit-4 at rollu.,,j CM t*ncmg. at a D,-)rt 04 h. !-10." 1, -. Z-Ak% Mmz,nl -A. "t. di.L&:;t let nar"..ow"Wr W an, dww f T 4a, FA%t 1111k .1 Ito" 2 J. I to'! frwn it's ,IWLSVQ&t Zoning File #990 May 29, 1987 Page 7 of 4 C) 1925 West Farm Road - This is 3 single building lot containing 2.1 acres of which about 0.27 acr, is contained within a drainage easement for a creek (the same creek that traverses 900 North Brown Road), leaving 1.83 acres dry buildable. The septic system is not as shown on the site plan submitted by - .Lrell, but is a mound system located southeast of the house, set substantially back from and at a much higher elevation than the craek., This case is not at all similar to Ferrell's. The fact is, the City has of issued a building permit or granted a lot area variance for any substandard, commonly owned lots in an unsewered zone since that 1974-75 rezoning. Mr. Perrell's request, if approved, would ;et a precedent that would suggest at leaLL 22 other substandard lots in uns-veered zones could be requesting similar consideration. .it is staff's opinion that allowing substandard, unsewer.ed lots to be built on wil I not be advantageous to the City in its quest to keep sewer out of the rural areas. II. Ferrell's ownership and 1958 sub.iivision in relation to codes throughout thi years. Please review the memos of march 3, 1986 and November 13. 1985 for a summary of how Ferrell's current situation came abou4 and how changes in codes have affected his properties. The lots Ferrell created in 1958-•59 appear to have met or ne .rly met the standards in effect at that time. On October 12, 1959, the Council adopted Ordinance #22 which ali.,wed Council to grant variances for substarq—,rird lot in single separate ownership, inferring that commonly owned lotZ .-)uld not be automatically granted variances, and inferred that in the case _f common -ownership lots, enforcement of that orainance with respect to lots held in common ownership would not arbitrarily deprive the property owner —of a valuable right. (See Exhibit Z-3 of last meeting's packet.) The 1967 Code said substantially the same thing, i.e. by stating that it would be appropriate to consider variances for substandard size separate ownership_lots where health, safety and welfare concerns w,-re sati- ed, it inferred that such variances were not appropriate for sub- standard common -ownership lcts. The 1974 Code rezoned the property to 2-acLe, 200' minimum width, and set. up standards for the granting of va-`acres for unsewerea sin ) e separate ownership lots, i e. 1 acre, 100' width, septic OK, meets all other zoning standards; again implying (but ri-)t saying) that common - ownership lots could not be granted variances. in 1981, the City Council effectively denied a similar application for com,non-ownership unsewered substandard lot buildability, establishing City policy clearly. Zoning File #990 May 29, 1987 Page 3 of 4 The 1984 Code finally came out any stated that unsewered substandard common -ownership lots could not be separated from adjacent lots if the result was a substandard lot in either case. Staff believes that Parcel 2 has been unbuildable without variances since October 12, 1959, and in fact may have never been buildable because it never met the 1 acre requirement of -the 1950 Zoning Code. Staff also believes that each Zoning Code adopted since that time has supported and enhanced that position. Staff believes that Parcel 3 has been unbuildable without variances since 1/l/75, but was buildable without variances prior to 1/l/75. Each Zoning Code from Ordinance 22 adopted 10/12/59 up through the Zoning Code effective 1/1/75 implied that commonly owned substandard unsev,ered lots were not to be considered for variances. The current Code effective 4/l/84 states in unquestionable terms that a substandard undeveloped unsewered common -ownership lot may not be sold off separately if such a sale results in substandard individual lots. III. Regarding the extent of Ferrell's "loss" if he doesn't get two new building sites. Staff believes that since an ordinance passed on 10/12/59 made Parcel 2 undoubtedly not buildable due to it being less than 1 acre, he had the buildability right to only one additional building lot k arcel 3) from 10/12/59 until 1/l/75, and from 1/l/75 to the ,resent has buildability rights only to the existing developed bui"ding site. Ferrell would have had the right to sell the two vacant parcels (but not as buildable lots) to other parties prior to 4/l/84, but he di--in't sell them, and as of 4/l/84 the Code says they are definitely not buildable without variances,and can't be sold off as separate lots without Council approval. And even if he had sold them ;,rior to 4/l/84 and applied for variances, according to Alan Olson's letter of 10/26/84, there would be no basis, hardship, or justification fur granting the variances to the area requirement. Any "loss" Ferrell sustains would logically be related to a taking of rights he has always had. Staff suggests that, unless lie proves that the City formally granted a lot area varia,ice for Parcel 2 when his subdivision occurred in 1958-59, Mr. Ferrell has never had the right to ' additional lots, from 10/12/59 to 12/31/74 had the right only t- additional lot, and from l/l/75 to the present has had the right tv -),.ly the existing developed building site. Zoning File #990 May 29, 1987 Page 4 of 4 Staff has been able to locate no record that a variance was ever granted to Ferrell in 1959, and has no record that the City ever even reviewed his subdivision. The City adopted a platting code in 1955, the wording of which indicates a plat was required for Ferrell's division, however, the Council minutes for 1958-59 and 1960 were reviewed ana no mention of a plat or subdivision by Ferrell was recorded. Staff believes that the City 1:kely never reviewed Ferrell's divisions or they might have recognized the substandard nature of Parcel 2, and if he had platted as the 1955 Code appea:-s to require, he would not have been allowed to consider the_ road right-o"-way as part of his lot areas. Staff Recoo ndation - Attached is a resolution for denial of the variances requested by Mr. Ferrell to construct 2 additional houses on his p.operty. The Council's procedural options are as follows: 1. Adopt the denial resolution as drafted. In this case, Mr. Ferrell would have to wait 6 months before he could reapply for the variances, if he so wished, -er Section 10.08, Subdivision 5. 2. Table the application indefinitely. This would be advisable only if the applicant requests a tabling based on add.itio,.al substantial. evidence he wishes to present. This tabling did occur in June 1986 and applicant presented no new relevant evidence when the item was reheard in May 1987. 3. Allow the applicant to revise his application to a 1-additional- building-site request, if he wishes, which some members of Council have indicated would be looked upon more favorably. In this case, Council could sither cease action on the denial resolution, or adopt a revised denial resolution which denies the 2-additional lot request but finds that the revised request is a change of conditions which was recommended for approval by the Orono Planning Commission at their February 18, 1986 meeting, henc -he 6-month reapplication moratorium woul-' be waived. Allowing such a revision of the application does not cu„unit the Council to approving the 1- additional lot request. Staff would recommend that i� applicant does wish to revise his request, the application be referred back to the Planning Commission for further review. Staff we '.d suggest the following language be incor^prated into the resolution as iinding #41 if you choose Option 1 above: 41. At the City Council meeting of June 8, 1987, the applicant was advised of the options to a) table if he has additional substantial evidence to submit; or b) to revise his application to request only 1- additional lot rn the 2.9 acre parcel instead of 2-additional lots; or c) choose neither and waive any right to further review of this application by tLe City Council. The applicant chose to waive further Council review of the application. ••� •• .•• •••. •- , — • �•. . �:, ••. U. 1'l" -It0't C/UJ bUlld:n,^,,., �•oir.i ore, spectr:cnlly cnglid^c: 11 IvtutiQlrg aign:e, displ t �- in' s;.ifiuhi7g ' be;dine; such public danuitt, or Sig" of riny kind c l {,!� j+• �se►lihq M bevergjslt. COntafr:nrlt,or mairtain•d in said Printing des- That rn� /�,;{iet sh E ercuhal at the tin .ot the Atli:¢- Itrict except signs bearing only the ibe ,-eu tion of " rewtl WDn gad ordi- 1 names of the residents of the low nanee, and the : nxetrnent of this Vict, and the dames of dwelling. iregulation and rer.jr1ct111% therein, except street and ro Seetiaa IV. 3eatioa In names gad traffic signs, and, ex I AND BE 1T FL'RT1iXR AliS- cept sign!. advertising for sale o3OLVED AND C"AINE13t, Tt:at AND BE IT 4URTHER RE- rent, the premises i on which they the following area and district in SOLVED LNID ONDALMD, That Imay be located. i said Orcno Township be. said the the lc:lo'a.nsi nrr4 0d dittrlct rn • 3, No building or other @true � sarre is hereby designated w a said Orono TnwrWC p be, And the tune shall be erected upon an 1 zu::::., district Qf the -70wnt of Isarn-- is It^rcby rtt;sigjtaseb as o ; land wit!J-i the above zoning di Orono, pursuant to the laws etl the zonirtt district aa,Is ;be Tvwn of ; tract except where the 1wil upo State of Wnnc�ta, to -wit: "ta Orono, pursuant . the L• ws of which the building or other s th,.• State cf Minna..ota, to -wit. tu:re s to be erected constitutes 1. Stubb's flay Distrid! Ii. Ormat•Distziat "building lot" as h^rcinaln'r d That part of Sections Thkt,- I fined. A "building lot" is here one (31) and Thirty-two (32). That part ,of Sections Two (±) dcdned to be land owned and r Township One -Hundred >:Jgh- and Three (3). Township One one ownership wh.ch equals teen (118), Range Twenty-threr Hu:ndmil Seventeen (117). Range exceeds an area of or.- and or - (23), Hennepin County, b[ihae- Two nty•threa (39), 1I e a n e p i n half acres. prov.ded, howev I -ota, and Sei-tiora.2lw (5). Sig Count;►, Minnesgts, Ltd of Sec• that where, at the time this re - 1 (8) and Eil;ht (Y), Tosat►astp One tiun Thirty-ft-e (34. Township lution and ordinance shall t i Hundred Seventeen (11T), Rzige Ore Hundred 41ighteen (118), effect, the land has been plat Twenty-three (23), Iferinepin ( P.ant a Twenty-ibree (23), Hen. into let ; and a plat filed of re County, Minnesota, described as I nepin County. Xinnesota. c^• urd with the Register of Deeds i follo-vs: CuttyptenxipI al a jtwu scribed as follo*m Hennepin County, and the Re whrtr the What I1: of the town - All of Section ?wo (3), Town- trar of Titles of Hennepin Cou. ship road ruO jing North and ship One lfundrvd. Seventeen ty, and where the area of an su South on center section line of (117), Range T"ie my -three (23),. platted lots is less than one Section Flve t¢), Township One I except the tll.iftpLi" niece o:lone-half aces in area, each s Hundred Seventeen (117), Range land lying nurtbe asterly of the t lot shall constitute one "buiI •i went) -three -(23), Hmmettin right o! wny of the main line of lot"; and provided further, th County. Minnesota, intersects the Great I(WUmm Baiir•oad, «'here, at the time this resolud the �uutherly side of the right and t xerlt the Waog1411tt piece and ord'.aance shall take elf I of way of the Minnesota West - of land lying nprthunterty of 'he area of aqy unplattgd separa ern It:,,I:oail (aho known as Vie1 the right of waF of tM Mince- I Piece of property under one o* I Luce ;+ne); thence in a no: th- sola Western R,ailroga, (also o� ship is le; s tiara one and tin west r I direction along the kn+,trr•: 1t tjw r !half acres is area, each such 1 gut!ter:y line of said r.ght of l a r.ttu piece of property shall co way u- :.ud Minnesota western �.Il of 3ection Three (3). Town- rtitutu one "building lot" I �lruil•i to a point where said I+hip One Hundred t3evente, a or.0 family dwelling with a:cc 1 line in:, erects the West lane of 1,117), Range Twenty -twee i:?), sory btulding7 customarily ' the East one-half (Eli) of S.cc- lying Past of County !toad Nu in conjuncti= w ith fatutly des' tion Thirty-one (31), Township ber One Hundred Forty -Aix inp and ccoskrred a part of I One Hundred Eighteen (W). (146), and southeasterly of the lfanuly dwelling may �x 1 Rands Twenty-three (22); thence tight of way of the Milu»suta "PT-1 'Lay one. "building tut." ; 5i ,,th clong the North-SouthWestern Ra►lmad, (a; ,) knn:•.-n sorY buildi•nj�s shall be de.d I center lute of said Secdon "Al ir- as thaLuce lint); include --"h b.ul&ngs as gu ty-one (31) and Section Six (A, and 1cottagea, garage;, boat ho ITluf part of Section Thirty-five 1pumv or F••.II hcvjes, chic teen (117 One Fe Twed Sebre- (35), .o•vruhi One Hundred I housed, barns or uthe. farm bud ..' teen 1117), P.:utre Twenty-three, p (23). to the center point of swd Eighteen (lid;, Range 7,6 entys'ms- I Section Six (6), Township One i three (23). contained in a trian- ! 4. Nothtry ;ierein shall be c - � Hundred Seventeen (117), Range gle of lond formed by the south-,y strued to prohibit an owner Twenty-three (23); thence East easterly Lne of the right of way.land from cuntini ing on the along the North linty of the of the Minnesota Western Rail- !owned by bum. any trade or Southeast [hue -quarter (SE%) of' rood, ',also known as the Luce 1 dustry or profession wL..ch L n i Section Six (6), Trnrnship One, line). and the southwesterly line ex►atence on the land at the it e , Ilundtad Seventeen (117), Range of the right of wav of the main of the adoption of this yes North - line of the Great Northern Rof t .i+!- tion and ordinance and the Twenty-three the North - road and the South line of •egulation and rd actment of this r west c. irace of thee Nort. east One -quarter of Lire Southeast Section :l.,cty-qve (33). �bualdjft strictiosn, nr from constructing y I One -quarter (NEYi. SZ%) of 13E IT FURTHER RFSOL�'ED or buildings for use n ; *ction Six (6), Townsinp one AND ORDAINED, That the tot - connection with s+rch trade jh�, I Hundred Seventeen t 11"), Katge grainy.o- profession which + Twenty-three 'lowin; ruler, reRulaticna and re- y- Nees (=7); thence 9oeilit; �rtrictiona with respect to ices of ex.stenee on the land at the along the West L•nr+ of the. the (andA and btu)dtncs within of the adoption :t this resolNortheast One-qt-^rter )f the! t1+_• afu.•t mentioned zoning des- and nrdtnance, end the enactcnuthec st Une-o ,tier tn,-t shall boo and are hereby of this regulation and rrst;x� SE14) of Sowt.on -iLx (6), Town - nor sbali anything herein ati tilted as follow., to -wit: tained 'be construed to pro ship One a Twenty 9c+ert CM F(11 ), Raitge Tweatg-three i 1. Said rontng district is hear- the use of an lard in the W-by deraarird to ►te a private rer.i• tuning distr`i t�'ai to a point where said ring +tMa*- agricultur9,-Cts Cie sticire lie of wilt �eiitiai district, and no tmtWir-g(area , u.as; nl r rhailtor ot" orucitunt rat im ^vv+•, mi P wD+ run. Lallo '&VVW-monks; t* tni..l s2van eerttainod berat .nail httei,►te: ►s trlc-wt.. :trier to prubttxt the rxla�!l1 wear; ;t,•rri txp,:nd for ue x►ttUAP, gt ouha�UM od-.said °..err +de of EXH. E s-10 -�4-7 To: Orono Council Members From: Michael P. Gaffron, Assistant Zoning Administrator Date: May 21, 1986 Subject: #990 Ward Ferrell. 3405 Watertown Road - Var.iances - Denial Resolution Attached is a resolution for denial of the variances requested by Mr. Ferrell to construct 2 additiona-1 houses on his property. The Council's procedural options are as follows: 1. Adopt the denial resolution as drafted. In this case, Mr. Ferrell would have to wait 6 months before he could reapply for the variances, if he so wisned, per Section 10.08, Subdivision 5. 2. Table the application indefinitely. This would be advisable only if the applicant requests a tabling based on additional substantial evidence he wishes to present. 3. Allow the applicant to revise his application to a 1- additional-building-site request, if he wishes, which some members of Council have indicated would be looked upon more favorably. In this case, Council could either cease action on the denial resolution, or adopt a revised denial resolution which denies the 2-additional lot request but finds that the revised request is a change of conditions which was recommended for approval by the Orono Planning Commission at their February 18, 1986 meeting, hence, the 6-month reapplication moratorium would be waived. Allowing such a revision of the application does not commit the Council to approving the 1- additional lot request. Staff would recommend that if applicant does wish to revise his request, the application be referred back to the Planning Commission for turf -r review. Staff would suggest the following language be incorporated into the resolution as item #41 if you choose Option 1 above: -Au tit 9 41. At the City Counci 1 meeting of1986, the applicant was advised of the options to a) table if he has additional substantial Evidence to submit; or b) to revise his application to request only 1-additional lot on the 2.9 acre parcel instead of 2--additional lots; or c) choose neither and waive any right to further review of this application by the City Council. The applicant chose to waive further Council review of the application. yNN r'^ :� O ,A•f- 11-PPL 1 eANJ ¢ rvr,2&j " Ccti-� c p n�ov- 6� Pr'�z can, yti�rK � y -G To: Mayor Grabek Orono Council Members City Administrator Bernhardson From: Michael P. Gaffron, Assistant Zoning Administrator Date: May 29, 1997 Subject: #990 Ward Ferrell 3405 Watertown Road - Variances - Denial Resolution List of Exhibits 1. Please refer to your information packet from the .last muting. Additional Exhibits: Exhibit A - Information/Surveys Submitted by Applicant at 5/26/87 Meeting 1) Swan Lake Plat - Mills New Subdivision 2) 900 North Brown Road 3) 1925 West Farm Road Exhibit B - Denial Resolution as Drafted With Exhibit "A" (Sketch of Properties in Question) Discussion - I. Cases/situations that applicant feels are similar. The applicant, at your May 26 meeting, suggested that there are many cases similar to his that the City has approved. In fact, because the prime differentiating factor is common ownership; none of the cases he brought up are similar: A) Swan Fake Addition - specifically William Mills' Jr. plat - this is a recent plat (1985-86) which divided Lot 7 into two lets each of which contains two dry buildable acres exclusive of the lake/pond area. This plat has absolutely no similarity tc what Ferrell is requeFting. Note that the City has granted variances for individual, pre-existing, separately owned s•ibstaniard lots in the Swan Lake Addition. The key is separately owned. B) 900 North Brown Road - this lot was created as part of the plat "Farm at Long Lake" in 1978 under current zoning standards. The lot at 900 North Brown Road contains about 2.1 dry acres in total, but of which only 0.9 acres is outside of an extensive drainage easement on the property. This lot was in separate ownership, was created under current lot area codes and obviously was not considered as being a substandard lot when created, as long as any house proposed to be built on it could meet the Cit.y's septic concerns (primary and alternate site) and setbecks, which it does. (NOTE that at that time in 1978, the City did not exclude drainayr easement area from the dry buildable. Now we do.) To: Council Members From: Michael P. Gaffron, Assitant Zoning Administrator Date: March 14, 1986 Subject: #990 Ward Ferrell - 3405 Watertown - Variance - Additional Information Note: Please refer to your memo from the March 10 meeting. List of Exhibits A - 1974 Public Hearing Minutes - Rezoning B - Similarly situated properties - A-M (map) C - Sketches I. Re: Ferrell comment that at time of rezoning, Ci_y stated that existing Tots would still be buildable. The attached copy of the 1974 rezoning public hearing minutes contains the only reference I could find regarding the status of existing lots (p.2.). II. Documentation of Similar Cases in the Rural Zone. I have again reviewed the "28 similar cases" referred to in the previous memo, i:. which substandard lots of record are commonly owned but separate for tax purposes. Actually, this second review uncovered a total of at least 30 such situations, of which I will document here the dozen or so which have a high potential for a future variance request: P) 320 Woodhill Road - 2 parcels: w/house-3.5 acre? vacant-1.1 acre; vacant lot fronts on Edgewood Hills Road. B) 105 Cygnet Place - 2 parce� s: w/house-1.0 acre; vacant-1.0 acre. C) 3865 Bayside Road - 2 parcels: w/house-0.7 acre; vacant-1.2 acre. D) 341 west Lake Street - 3 parcels: w/house-0.5 acre: vacant- 0.5 acre; vacant-0.5 acre. E) Lakeview Golf Course - 4 parcels: Golf Course-125 acres; vacant-1.98 acres; vacant-1.98 acres; vacant-0.75 acres(only par,,^e l with road frontage). F) 1080/1090 Heritage Lane - 3-plus parcels: w/house-7.0 acres(estat.�); vacant-1.0 acres; vacant-1.0 acres. G) 1425 Bayridge Road - 2 parcels: w/house-1.0 acre; vacant-1.1 acre. H) 1900 Shoreline Drive - 2 parcels: w/house-1.4 acre; vacant- 1.7 acre. File #i990 Page 2 of 2 I) 300 Sixth Ave. N.- 2-plus parcels: w/house-100 ac.+; vacant- 1.5 acre. J ) 879 North Brown Road - 2 parcels: w/house-1.0 acre; vacant- 2.6 acres. K ) 960 N. Willow Drive - 2 parcels: w/house-1.0 acre; vacant- 1.0 acre. L) 320 Turnham Road - 2 parcels: w/house-1.7 acres; vacant-1.1 acres. M) 200 Bederwood Road - 4 parcels: w/house-0.9 acre; vacant - 0.6 acre; vacant - 1.1 acre; vacant - 1.0 acre. These 13 cases can be broken down into a number of categories: 1. Total acreage of commonly -owned parcels is great enough to yield conforming lots if lot lines are re -arranged: A,E,F,I. 2. Total acreage of commonly -owned parcels yields only enough area for a single substandard lot with existing house: C,D,L. 3. Total acreage of commonly -owned parcels yields enough area for a single conforming lot with house, but not enough additional area for a second conforming lot: B,G,H,J,K,M (these are very similar to Ferrell situation). III. To help Council assess the impact of granting or denying the Ferrell variances, consider the following figures: - Number of existing developed lots in the unsewered residential zones: 1,050 approximately - Number of undeveloped, substandard sized lots, in single separate ownership in unsewered zones: 15 identified - Number of unsewered common ownership situations with a realistic potential for requesting variances to lot area in order to gain an additional building site: 22 identified (13 of these shown as A-M attached) - Within a 1/2 mile radius of the Ferrell properties (excluding the 3 Stubbs Bay Study Area streets Tonka Avenue, Crestview Avenue, Eastlake Street where sewer is contemplated) the existing developed lot sizes are: 2.0 acre or larger - 39 1.25 acre to 1.)9 acre - 13 .75 acre to 1.24 acre - 23 Less than .75 acre - 11 TO: Orono City Council Members EAN. IV 4000� FROM: Michael P. Gaffron, Assistant Zoning Administrator S"19-87 DATE: March 3, 1986 SOBJ: #990 Ward Ferrell, 3405-341_-j415 Watertown Road - Variances List of Exhibits: � `� " t"% " e°"'' ^ ' - A - Applications for variances on 2 vacant lots B - Plat Map �r C - Property Owners List D - Notice to Applicant 2/20/86 E - Composite Site Plan F - Survey, Soils Report, Site Plan for existing house, east lot G - Survey, Soils Report, Site Plan for center lot H - Survey, Soils Report, Site Plan for west lot I - Staff memos 11/13/85, 2/6/86 J - Minutes: Planning Commission 4/15/85; Council 5/28/85; Planning Commission 11/18/85; Planning Commission 2/18/86 K - Tax History, 1974 - 1985 L - Council Minutes September 22, 1958 M - Pertinent Ordinances Dating to 1950 N - 1981 Draft Denial Resolution - Alden Anderson property, 1900 Shoreline Dr. (similar case) Council originally reviewed this application in May, 1985 as a zoning appeal, at which time Council gave applicant general direction that perhaps 1 additional building site would be considered, but that 2 additional building sites would not be looked upon favorably. Please review Exhibit D, the composite site plan for this 2.9 acre group of parcels. Applicant is requesting permission to build houses on each of the two vacant lots adjacent to his home. The lots are substandard in area and width based on the current 2-acre, 200 foot width standards. To briefly review the code standards that previously and currently affect this property: 1950 Zoning Ordinance - (Prior to division of this property into separate parcels) - Property zoned 1-acre min. lot size. 1955 - Original Platting Code 1958 - Ferrell builds house at 3405 Watertown Road, requests to build a second house on property per minutes of 9,,22/58. Ferrell presumably told by Herb Ross, Mayor, that in order to build a second house wou l:' require a subdivision, since 1950 zoning ordinance allowed only o residence per lot. 1959 - Ferrell presumably completed subdivision. 10/12/59 - Adoption of Ordinance #22 - a) required minimum lot area of 1 acre, min. lot width of 140', which Ferrell lots would meet or nearly meet. b) also allowed Council to approve buildinq permits for substandard lots held in single separate ownership, interred that substandard common- Zoning File #990 March 3, 1986 Paqe 2 ownership lots would not be granted building permits, and established that the Council could allow variances to this section at Counci l's discretion. 1967 Zoning Code - Property still zoned 1 acre, 140' width, no substant_'.al changes from 1959 Ordinance #22, but did state that substandari -existing lots of record as of 9/14/67 under single separate ownership could be granted building permits if the Council finds they would not adversely affect public health or safety. Did not specifically discuss common ownership lots, but by omission inferred again they would not be granted pe ems. 1974 Zoning Code - Property rezoned to 2-acre, 200' minimum width. This code se. specific standards for use of substandard single separate ownership lots of record in the 2 acre zone i.e.: 1) must be at least 1 acre, 100' width 2) must meet all septic requirements or be sewered 3) meets all other applicable standards But again, the 1974 code specifically ii.d not discuss common ownership lots. The Alden Anderson common ownership lot buildability application at 1900 Shoreline Drive was denied in 1981 based on lack of the required 2 acre lot area, setting a precedent for denial of situations such as Ferrell's. 1984 Zoning Code - requires Council approval to separate (read "sell") adjacent undeveloped nrn-conforming commonly )wned lots if the resulting lots do not meet area or width standards. Clearly in the Ferrell case, Council approval is required 4 n irder to separate the conforming 2.0 acre group of parcels into substandard parcels. Note that the 0.85 acre center lot, which would only be approximately 0.97 acre even if road right-of-way was included, would likely have required a variance under all previous zoning codes, and both vacant parcels would hz,ve required variances since the 1974 zoning code. Finally, please review the exhibits, especially the memo's of 11/13/85 and 2/6/86. Planning Commission reviewed this application on 2/18/66 and recommended denial of 2 additional `)uilding sites, but recommended approval of 1 additional site for a density of approximately 1.5 acres per building site (see exhibit D). Approval of even 1 new site will set a precedent in complete reversal -)f the Alden Anderson denial in 1981. weigh this against the fact that applicant has shown that the 2 proposed building sites both can meet the septiL. code requirements if development of the property is minimal (no swimming pools, no tennis courts). Staff will draft a resolution for , -ir next meeting reflecting Council's direction. �,c To: Planning Commission From: Michael P. Gaffron, Assistant Date: November 13, 1985 Zoning Administrator erg. K 4000� Subject: #990 Ward Ferrell, 3405-3411-3415 Watertown Road Variances Application - Lot area/lot width variances to construct homes on two substandard vacant commonly -owned lots adjacent to the existing residence at 3405 Watertown Road.' List of Exhibit Exhibit A - Applications For 2 Vacant Lots Jxhibit B - Plat Map Exhibit C - Property Owners List Exhibit D - Survey, Soils Report, Site Plan. For Center Lot Exhibit - Survey, Soils Report, Site Plan For West Lot Exhibit F - Planning Commission Minutes 4/15/85 Exhibit G - Council Minutes 5/28/85 Exhibit H - Notice to Applicant 5/31/85 Exhibit I - Tax History Exhibit J - Council Minutes 9/22/58 Exhibit K - Pertinent Ordinances Dating to 1950 Code Sections Pertinent Section 10.03, Subdivision 6 (C) (Current code) C The separation by the transfer or sale of non -conforming, undeveloped lots not served by public sanitary sewer, aligned in a contiguous arrangement, :::divided by a public or private road or road easement and under same or common ownership is not permitted without Council ,approval. Council approval is not required if the separation of such lots results in individual building sites that sat _sfy the area and width requirements of the Zoning Chapter. Section 10.03, Subdivision 6 (A) (3) A. Existing Lots. A lot of record existing upon January 1, 1975 in an "R" District, which does not meet the requirements of the Zoning Chapter as to area or width may be utilized for a single famii� detached dwelling purpose provided that in the judgement of th, Council such ust does not adversely affect public health or safety ana the following requirements are met: 3. In "R" Districts Not Served by :'ublic Sanitar "ewer. A lot of record in -ny "R" District in the City not served ublic -anitar- sewer must meet the area and width requirements of ..e Zonir, Chapter and shall not be utilized f o r s i nq l e f am.: y detached dwe l l inq purpust ; without Council approval. Zonina File #1990 November 13, 1985 Page 2 of 5 Per Subdivision 6, a "Lot of Record" is any lot for which a deed or registered land survey has been recorded in the office of the Registrar of Deeds or the Registrar of Titles for Hernepin County, Minnesota, prior to January 1, 1975, and af'.Fr approval by the Council if required. The applicant owns four adjacent tax parcels in the RR-'B zoning district totaling 2.90 acres. The existing souse, well, and s.: :: system are contained within the twu easterly parcels totaling 1.01 The two westerly parcels are 1.04 and 0.85 acres respectively. Th=.,7 hnplicant wishes to obtain building permits for each of the westerly parc*&is. The 1950 Zoning Code (adopted 7/10/50) established a number of zoning districts, including the "Stubbs Bay bistrict" in which Ferrell's proper�:y was located. The "Stubbs Bay District" required minimum building lot size of one acre. This one -acre minimum was still in effect in 1958 when. FerrLil r,-quested to build a second residence on his property. It is very likely that Ferrell was told by the City at that time that in order tc build another residence he would have to subdivide, because in general the Code allowed only one principal residence per building lot (see Council minutes 9/22/58 ). Note that at that time his request was referred to the Planning Commission - minutes have not been found for the Planning Commission meeting or any suLsequent action. Although a platting code existed in Orono as of 1955, Ferrell apparently divided off 2 lots each of 140' width and approximately 1 acre in area, in or about 1959 without - itting, and the parcels have apparently been separate for tax purposes nce that time. The parcels including the road right-of-way would likely nave been considered conforming or nearly c. .(forming lots of record under the 1967 Zoning Coae which designated the property as Zone R-IC, 1 ac-e and 140' width, Single Family Residential. That 1967 Code stated, re- garding lots of record, as follows: 31.200. Existing Lots. A lot of record existing u;,(-n September 14, 1967 (tae effective date of the Zoning Code) under yin .Le separate ownership in a "R" Residential District, which dues not meet the requirements of the Zoning Code as to area or width may be utilized for a sirgle family detached dwelling purpose provided that n the judgment of the Council such tree does not adve*-rely affect public health or safety. Single separate ownership includes joint ownership by not mere than two persons. The 1967 Code did not discuss common ownership properties nor did it differentiate between sewered and unsewered lots of record However, by using the term "Single Separate Ownership", it inplied that other ty,-es of ownership would be treated differently but did not define in what way. Under this code, the applicant we-ild likely have r: allowed to build on the 1 acre lot without a variance ber7au7,e the �.:t met the standards of the i toning district. The 0.85 acre iot would likely hav - required Counci pproval, d pending on whether the ._,ea;i. the road right-of-way !as included in the _ot area 6t that time. Zoning File #990 November 13, 1985 Page 3 of 5 The 1974 Zoning Code declared this lani to be zoned RR-lP, 2 Acre Single Family Residential. As far as existing Lots of reco-d, it stated as follows: 31.201. Existing Lots. A lot (if record existing upon January 1, 1975 (the effective date of tale Zoni,.;g Code) under single separate ownership in an "R" District, which does not meet the re- qw.Lrements of the Zoning Code as to area or width may be utilized for a single family detached dwelling purpose r rovided that in the judg- ment of the Coundil such U,-,e does not adversely affect public health or safety and the following requirements are met: 31.203. In "R' districts of Greater Than One Acre. i. lot of record in any "R" District in the City in excess of one -Acre, which does not meet the requirements of thiF Zoning Code as to are i or wl.dth only, may be utilized for single family detached dweiiiny purposes if the Council finds: (1) it is at least one acre in size, and the average width of the lot is at I east 100 feet; and (2) it =s either served by public Sanitary sewer or meets all the septic system . iuirem_,nts of the City or ether gc,ic?rnmental body; and (3) it otherwise mess the requirements of this it other applicabl( -)rdinances. Under the 1974 Code, the Council at their option could have granted a lot area variance for a Jot of single separz ownership, but the Code again did not specifically discuss the stan • for the separation of commoply owned .ots. The gen. n l City policy, videnced by the outcome of at ieasL one typical xonln4 application 1., 1981 was thit unsewered as jacent lots owned in common could not },p considered bui idable and could not LAP separated unless each resulting lot or combination of lots included the luirr ' acreage in that zoning district. ,Von recodif'.c,i ion in 1984 the Zoninr+ Code was amended include the following Section :0.0+, Subdivision 6 (C): C. The separa*ion by the transfer or sale of non-confurmia un- developed lots not -erved by publ i : :sanitary sewe-, a 1 igtjr:.: Asti s contiguous ari • lement, undivided by r. public or pri—itr- road ,r road e3 -kent And under .;ame cr common; own -.-ship is n�, pe-ritted witriout 'ounci l approval is not requi_ - : f the separation f such .ota results in i.idividuaI building sites that aatisfy t`)e area and width requirements of the Zoning Chapt�, Zoning File #990 November 13, 1985 Page 4 of 1, Staff's interpretation of the current code is t. the applicant would be prohibited from separating his four adjacent lots, since separation of either of the westerly lots from the makii property would result in the creating of building sites less than two acres in area. The applicant appeared before you in April 1985 on an appeal asis rather than a full variance application at staff's urging because a similar application had been turned down in recent years and staff wanted applicant to get general direction from the Planning Commission and Council prior to spending large dollar amounts =n developing plans, septic testing, surveys, application fees, etc. The Planning Commission and Council directive to the applicant was that it is unlikely they would aprove two new houses, and perhaps would allow one new house resulting in a 1.5 acre density on the total property. Applicant now appears before you requesting that both westerly parcels be declared buildable. He has provided surveys of both parcels, and has 4 provided soil testing and septic system designs indicating that each lot could in fact support a primary and alternate drainfield system (mounds at all sites) to serve 3-bedroom houses, given no future encroachments. The? 4 applicant has not provides' a survey of the property with the existing house, nor has he provided septi^ testing to prove that the property has an alternate site for a drainfield. These items were specifically requested in the "notice of Council action" sent to the applicant on 5/31/85. Applicant refuses to accept the fact that in order to grant variances to build on the two vacant lots, we also grant variances to the existing developed lot (see notice of 5/31/85). Two questions, then, reed to be answered. 1. Does each lot, of and by itself, have the-apability to permanently support a house, septic system, well, and the other appropriate amenities in the rural zone? If so, 2. Is the Planning Commission and Council willing to set a precedent, i.e. do away with the common ownership limitation in the unsewered zone? The ramifications of Item 2 are significant. As many as 28 vacant lots in the rural unsewered zones are commonly owned with adjacent parcels and are 1/2 - 1 1/2 acres in at -a, an,' -ould expect to request the same benefit of buildabili.ty. Many more such 'Lots have been legally combined, which presumably denies them any status unless re -subdivided. We saw during the appeal that the tax valuations on Ferrells adjacent parcels were lowered as of 1983, which gives the appearance that the separated lots were then given "accessory lot" value and not building site value, since the main lot land value increased markedly at the same time. Perhaps this was a result of the assessor realizing that the two westerly lots were not buildable without variances. It would appear that perhaps up until 1979 and perhaps as late as 1982, the extra lots were valued much the same as the main lot. Ferreli obviously felt he was paying taxes on these -i. separate bu i 1 ,? i ng sites. Zoning File #990 November 13, 1985 Page 5 of 5 A further criteria to consider is how do the lots in question fit into the neighborhood as far as lot size. Given a radius of 1/2 mile from Ferrell's property, 39 developed lots are 2 acres or more, 13 are 1.25 to 2 acres, 23 are .75-1.25 acres, and 11 are less than .75 acre. (These increments were picked so that the Ferrell lots could be categorized in one group., (Note that the Stubbs Bay Study Area, where sewer is contemplated to serve Eastlake Stieet, Tonka Avenue, and Crestview Avenue, was excluded although it is within the 1/2 mile radius. Those 38 or so houses are on lots averaging 1/2 acre or less.) It is clear to see that in Orono's two acre zone north and east of Stubbs Bay, the majority cf xisting lots are less than two acres. In general terms, the existing density and lot sizes are detrimental to our long-term program of development without City sewers. Additional houses on relatively small lots will not help that situation. Recall that the Alden Anderson application to allow a second building site on adjacent properties totaling 3.5 acres, was in effect turned down a few years ago. Are there any circumstances or hardships in the Ferrell application that justify a recommendation of approval? 5 °J To: Planning Commission Members ex#. P we Frclm: Michael P. Gaffron, Assistant Zoning Fcimi.nistrator Date: February 6, 1986 Subject: #990 Ward Ferrell 3405-3411-3415 Watertown Road - Variances - Update to Memo of November 13, 1985 List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Memo of 11/13/85 With Exhibits Exhibit B - Survey of Property With Existing House Exhibit C - Soils Report, Site Plan For Existing House Exhibit D - Planning Commission Minutes 11/18/85 Ex►+. E - r-or..o-exire s#T* AcAN Mr. Ferrell has now submitted the additional survey and soils report to show an alternate drainfield site for the existing house. Given no future encroachments, there is adequate area on the lot with the existing house to replace the septic system with a fully conforming system. Please review the memo of 11/13/85, As noted in that memo and considering the additional information submitted, it appears technically possible to place a house, ga.-age, driveway, well, and primary and alternate septic systems on each of the lots. The possible house location would be somewhat limited by the drainfield sites. There would be potential conflicts if a situation occurred where an extremely large house, peel, tennis court, etc. were proposed. The properties lend themselves to relatively low levels of development. Finally, from a zoning code standpoint, even if only one new building site is granted, this is precedent setting. In the past, Council and Planning Commission have generally held the lane in similar unsewered c-^nmon ownership situations. Approval of 1 or 2 new building sites might have long-term impact on Orono's effectiveness in avoiding sewer. Weigh this against the applicant's real and preceived rights as a property owner and the history of zoning code changes over the years. Are there sufficient justifications to grant a variance? To: Orono Council Members From: Michael P. Gaffron, Assistant Zoning Administrator Date: April 30, 1985 Subject: #903 Ward P. Ferrell, 3405 Watertown Road - Zoning Code Interpretation List of Exhibits P, Exhibit A - Application Exhibit B - Property Owners List r �- Exhibit C - Plat Map Exhibit D - Survey Exhibit E - Proposed Site Plan Exhibit F - Staff Sketch of Lot Areas Exhibit H - Staff Letter to Applicant 2/27/85 Exhibit I - Draft Resolution From Alden Anderson (Application #635) Exhibit J - Tax History Exhibit K - Minutes From Panning Commission Meeting 4/15/85 Exhibit L - Staff Memo to Planning Commission 4/8/85 The applicant owns four adjacent tax parcels in the RR-lB zoning district totaling 2.90 acres. The existing house, well, and septic system are contained within the two easterly parcels totaling 1.01 acres. The two westerly parcels are 1.04 and 0.85 acres respectively. The applicant wishes to obtain a building permit for the 1.0.1 acre lot. In staff's preliminary review of this request by the appli- cant, it was clear that the application was nearly indentical to the request of Alden Anderson on Shoreline Drive in 1981, which was effectively denied before it was withdrawn. Based on the Alden Anderson denial, staff felt Council would likely not grant a variance for the Ferrell application. Rather than force the applicant to spend extreme amounts of money for the full variance application, soil testing, survey work, etc. only to be denied, staff felt obligated to advise the applicant to submit a zoning appeal application with $100.00 fee. Please review my memo to Planning Commission of 4/8/85 and the Planning Commission minutes, and the exhibits. Note that the informal consensus of the Planning Commission was that at most the applicant might be allowed one building site by combining Lots 7 and 8 for a total of 1.89 acres, leaving the existing house on 1.01 acres. Please advise the applicant whether or not you will consider granting a variance to the rural common ownership section of the code. Staff has told the applicant on numerous occasions over recent years that it is unlikely the City would allow building permits for his adjacent parcels. A similar application by Alden Anderson at 1900 Shoreline Drive resulted in Council voting 4-0 :o deny separation of adjacent 1.4 acre and 1.8 acre commonly owned parcels _rom each other, based on 1) lack of demonstrated hardship; Z) no sanitary sewer available; 3) insufficient area; 4) insufficient width. I have included the draft resolution from this application, which should help to clarify th,:� City's past position on applications of this type (note that the Anderson resolution was never adopted because he withdrew his application after Council. voted to have staff draft a denial resolution). I have included the tax history for 1974-1985 on the properties (see Exhibit J). It is noteworthy that the valuation of the parcel in question (P.I.D. 0007) was reduced starting in 1983, and the parcel. was assessed incrementally as compared to the parcel with the house; i.e. the adjacent parcels appear to be valued as part of the main lot, not as separate building sites. Because Mr. Ferrell insisted on bringing this application to you even though he was told of the slim chances for approval, staff accepted the application on an appeal/interpretation basis. Does the Planning Commission find any hardship or circumstance that would suggest the standards should not apply to this property? To: Planning Commission Members r,. 5•�9-87 From: Michael P. Gaffrun, Assi,tant Zoning Administrator Date: April 8, 1985 Subject: #903 Ward P. Ferrell, 3405 Watertown Road - Interpretation of zoning code regarding the of substandard commonly -owned lots in th sewered zoning district. List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Application Exhibit B - Property Owners List Exhibit C - Plat Map Exhibit D - Survey Exhibit E - Proposed Site Plan Exhibit F - Staff Sketch of Lot Areas Exhibit H - Staff Letter to Applicant 2/27/85 Exhibit I - Draft Resolution From Alden Anderson (Applic-tion #635) Exhibit J - Tax History buidability e RR-lB un- The applicant owns four adjacent tax parcels in the RR-1B zoning district totaling 2.90 acres. The existing house, well, and septic system are contained within the two easterly parcels totaling 1.01 acres. The two westerly parcels are 1.04 and 0.85 acres respectively. The applicant wishes to obtain a building permit for the 1.04 acre lot. Mr. Ferrell became owner of all four parcels prior to the 1967 zoning code. The 1967 Code declared the land in question as Zone R-lC, 1 Acre Single Family Residential. That 1967 Code stated, regarding lots of record, as follows: 31.200. Existing Lots. A lot of record existing upon Sept. 14, 1967 (the effective date of the Zoning Code) under single separate ownership in a "R" Residential District, which does not meet the requirements of the Zoning Code as to area or width may be utilized for a single family detached dwelling purpose provided that in the judgement of the Council such use does not adversely affect public health or safety. Single separate ownerships include, joint owner- ship by not more than two persons. The 1967 Code did not discuss common ownership properties nor did it differentiate between sewered and unsewered lots of record. Under this code, the applicant would likely have been allowed to build on the lot in question without a variance be- cause the lot met the standards of the 1 acre zoning district. The 1974 Zoning Code declared this land to he znned RR-1 R, 2 Acre Single Family Residential. As far as existing lots of reccrd, it stated as follows: 31.201. Existing Lots. A lot of record existing upon January 1, 1975 (the effective date of the Zoning Code) under sin le separate ownership in an "R" District, which does no meet t e requirements of the Zoning Code as to area or width may be utilized for a single family detached dwelling purpose provided that in the judgment of the Council such use does not adversely affect public health or safety end the following requirements are met: 31.203. In "R" districts of Greater Than One Acre. A lot of record in any "R" District in the City in excess of one acre, which does not meet the requirements of this Zoning Code as to area or width only, may be utilized for single family Oetached dwelling purposes if the Council finds: (1) it is at least one acre in size., and the average width of the lot is at least 100 feet; and (2) it is either served by public sanitary sewer or meets all the septic system requirements of the City or other governmental body; and (3) it otherwise meets the requirements of this or other applicable ordinances. Under the 1974 Code, the Council at their option could have granted a lot area variance for a lot in single separate owner- ship, but the Code again did not specifically discuss the stan- dards for the separation of commonly owned lots. The general City policy, as evidenced by t e outcome of at least one typical zoning application in 1981 has that unsewered adjacent lots owned in common could not be considered buildable and could not be separated unless each resulting lot or combination of lots in- cluded the required acreage in that zoning district. Upon recodif-cation in 1984 the Zoning Code was amended to include the following Section 10.03, Subdivision 6 (C): C. The separation by the transfer or sale of non -conform- ing, undeveloped lots not served by public sanitary sewer, aligned in a contiguous arrangement, undivided by a public rivate road or road easement and under same cr common '�• ,� owners ip is/required if the separation of such lots results V ; in individual building sites that satisfy the area and width requirements of the Zoning Chapter. t i Staffs interpretation of the current code is that the applicant would be prohibited from separating his four adjacent - lots, since separation of either of the westerly lots from the main property would result in the creating of buildinq sites less than two acres in area. 2 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCII. MEETING HELD JUNE 8, 1987 I ATTENDANCE 7:01 P.M. The Orono Council met on the above date with the following members present: Mayor Grabek, Ccuncilmembers Sime, Goetten, and Peterson. Councilmember Callahan was absent. The following represented the City staff: City Administrator Bernhardson, Public Works Coordinator Gerhardson, Building 6 Zoning Administrator Mabusth, Assistant Planning & Zoning Administrator Gaffron, and City Recorder Peterson. City Attorney Blatz and City Engineer Cook were also present. CONSENT AGENDA* 1. It was moved by Councilmember Sime, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to approve the Consent Agenda* subject to removal of: Item 025 - Issuance of Firearms Permits Guidelines requested by Councilmembers Peterson and Goetten. Motion, Ayes 4, Nays 0. APPROVAL OF MINUTES* It was moved by Councilmember Sime, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to approve the Minutes of the May 26, 1987 Council meeting as submitted. Motion, Ayes 4, Nays 0. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMEWTS There were no Planning Commission comments. Planning Commission member Edward Brown arrived later in the meeting. PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no comments from the public at this time. ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT: 1990 WARD FBRRELL -2AA3 MATERTOWN ROAD VARIANCE Council delayed this matter until the end of the meeting awaiting the presence of applicant or representative. It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Councilmember Goetten, to t a b l e t. h i s m a t t e r u n t i l applicant or representative requested to be present. Motion, Ayes 4, Nays 0. 1 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD MAY 26, 1987 #990 WARD FERRELL ,JAO-S.-IOATERTOWN ROAD VARIANCES CONTINUATION OF REVIEW Present for this matter were Mr. & Mrs. Ward Ferrell. City Administrator. Bernhardson explained that Mr. Ferrell owned a parcel of land appoximate 1 y 4.19 acres. which was subdivided into 4 lots in the winter of 1958. Mr. Ferrell's request, which commenced in April of 1985, is that he be allowed to build on the ? remaininc vacant parcels of land. The application was subsequently brought to Council in April 1986, who directed staff to draft a denial resolution which was tabled twice. At the June 9, 1986 meeting Council moved to adopt the denial resolution, the applicant then asked that it be tabled. Subsequent to that he requested that it not be considered at the June 23rd, 1986 meeting. City Administrator Bernhardson stated that is where the application currently stands. The previous Council had indicated one of the courses of action was to allow Mr. Ferrell to amend his request from two additional building units to one. The second option was to pass the denial resolution which would prohibit Mr. Ferrell from bringing up the request for another six months. Mr. Ferrell stated that his tax statement reads one property at 1.22 acres and the other property at .97 acres which makes it over two acres for both lots together. He asked the ^ouncil what they consider to oe a hardship. Mayor Grabek noted that when determining whether a hardship exists, the Council evaluates the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community and the applicant. Mr. Ferrel 1 notes that t!^ house proposed to be bui It on one, lot is a 2,000 s.f. mouse with garage on 40,000 s.f. of land which will not affect the light. He also noted that Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator Gafrron stated that both lots were satisfactory for septic systems. He feels that the surrounding property values will not decrease and may in fact increase with a new residence on the vacant lot. Mr. Ferrel 1 cued instances building permits were issued on acres of dry buildable land. -North Brown Road - Oberg was built "in the water". -Bill Mills residence property). in which he believes parcels with less than residence - septic system (just south of Ferrell -North Brown Road - house built on 1/3 acre and the rest oL- the lot is all ditch. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD MAY 26, 1987 i990 WARD FERRELL CUNT. Mr. Ferrell also noted that the assessed value for each property is at $5,000 and the average vacant lot in Orono is selling for $29,000, thus if the 2 vacant lots were combined and sold as one vacant lot at. $29,000 it would be a financial loss to him. Mayor Grabek stated he would like time to look into the properties that applicant says are similar cases. Mrs. Ferrell stated -she felt that since the lots were already subdivided with past Council's approval, they should be able to be built on. It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Councilmember Sime, to table this matter until staff has had time investigate the mentioned lots by the applicant and bring back the application again at the June 8th, 1987 meeting. Motion: t.yes 5, Nays 0. #1112 i #1142 SMITH HAY MARINA i YACHT CLUB 1950, 1955, 1960 SHORELINE DRIVE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT COMMERICAL SITE PLAN REVIEW VARIANCE Present for this matter were Woody Love, project planner, and Mr. Toberman, the owner. City Administrator Bernhardson explained that this is a request which covers three parcels of land. The application for 1955 Shoreline Drive involves a reconfiguration of the current structure, construction of a new structure, layout of a parking lot which is recommended to be asphalt with filtering strips to lessen the concerns for run-off, removal of some of the current wood platforms from the parcel, and proposed the new building would be further setback from the lake than the current structure. In addition, the new structure would be 25' in height, 2 story with an open deck on top. Currentl•r the property is zoned B-2, commercial marina district. The property at 1960 Shoreline Drive, currently Tonk3 Transmission property, is zoned residential which currently exists under a conditional use permit for a legal non -conforming use and structure. Proposed is a boat and accessory retail sales to be leased to a separate operator. Curb cut onto Shoreline Drive would be removed making the only access onto the property from Spates Avenue. The intent is to clean up the property plus put some additional parking on the property which does not currently exist. In part of the proposal brought to the City, the applicant has proposed to convert the 1950 Shoreline Drive property to a parking lot. SLch a change would necessitate a zoning amendment as parking lots are not permitted or conditional use permits allowed in a residential district.. On March 17, 1987, the Council reviewed a zoning amendment which would have allowed parkinq lots in residential districts. 3 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD JUNE 8, 1987 ATTENDANCE 7:01 P.M. The Orono Council met on the above date with the following r.embers present: Mayor Grabek, Councilmembers Sime, Goetten, and Peterson. Councilmember Callahan was absent. The following represented the City staff: City Administrator Bernhardson, Public works Coordinator Gerhardson, Building & Zoning Administrator Mabusth, Assistant Planning & Zoning Administrator Gaffron, and City Recorder Peterson. City Attorney Blatz an] City Engineer Cook were also present. CONSENT AGENDA* 1. It was moved by Councilmember Sime, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to approve the Consent Agenda* subject to removal of: Item #25 - Issuance of Firearms Permits Guidel'nes requested by Councilmembers Peterson and Goetten. Motion, Ayes 4, Nays 0. APPROVAL OF MINUTES* It was m(-)ved by Councilmember Sime, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to approve the Minutes of the Mav 26, 1987 Council meeting as submitted. Motion, Ayes 4, Nays J. PIANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS There were no Planning Commission comments. Planning Commission member Edward Brown arrived later in the meeting_ PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no comments from the public at this time. ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT: 4990 WARD FERRELL 31O3 WATERTOWN ROAD VARIANCE Council delayed this matter until the end of the meeting awaiting the presence of applicant or representative. It wxs moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Councilmember Goetten, t o t a b l e t h i s m a t t e r u n t i l applicant or representative requested to be present_. Motion, Ayes 4, Nnys 0. 1 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD MAY 26, 1987 1990 WARD FERRELL CANT. Mr. Ferrell also noted that the assessed •.3lue for each property is at $5,000 and the average vacant lot in Orono is selling for $29,000, thus if the 2 vacant lots were combined and sold as one vacant lot at $29,000 it would be a financial loss to him. Mayor Grabek stated he would like time to look into the properties that applicant says are similar cases. Mrs. Ferrell stated -shy felt that since the lots were already subdivided with past Council's approval, they should be able to he built on. It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Coun•--ilmember Sime, to table this matter until staff has had time investigate the mentioned lots by the applicant and bring back the application again at the June 3th, 1987 meeting. Motion: Ayes 5, Nays 0. i1112 i 11142 SMITH BAY MARINA i YACHT CLUB 1950, 1955, 1960 SHORELINE DRIVE CONDITIONAL USE PER14IT CONKER I C?.L S I TE PLAN RBV I EW {TAR I ANC E Present for this matter were Woody Love, project planner, and Mr. Toberman, the owner. City Administrator Be:nhardson explained that this is a request which covers three parcels of land. The application for 1955 Shoreline Drive involves a recanfiguration of the current structure, construction of a new structure, layout of a parking lot which is recommended to be asphalt with filtering strips to lessen the concerns for run-off, removal of some of the current wood platforms from the parcel, and proposed the new building would be further setback from the lake thar, the current structure. In addition, the new structure would be 25' in height, 2 story with an open deck on top. Currently the pro .erty is zoned B-2, commercial marina district. The property at 1960 Shoreline Drive, currently Tonka Transmission property, ;s zoned residential which currently exists under a cc ditional use permit for a legal non -conforming use and structure. Proposed is a boat and accessory retail sales to be leased to a separate operator. Curb cut onto Shoreline Drive would be removed making the only access onto the property from Spates Avenue. The i,itent is to clean up the property plus put some additional parking on the property which does not currently exist. In part of the proposal brought to the City, the applicant has proposed to convert the 1950 Shoreline Drive property to a parking lot. Such a change would necessitate a zoning amendment as parking lots are not permitted or conditional use permits allowed in a residential district. On March 17, 1987, the Council reviewed a zoning amendme-t which would have allowed parking lots in residential districts. F „ 3 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD MAY 26, 1987 1990 WARD FERREI.L 3405 OATERTOWN ROAD VARIANCES CONTINUATION OF REVIEW Present for this matter were Mr. & Mrs. Ward Ferrell. City Administrator Bernhardson explained that Mr. Ferrell owned a parcel of lar3 appoximately 4.19 acres. which was subdivided into 4 lots in the winter of 1958. Mr. Ferrell's request, which commenced in April of 1985, is that he be allowed to build on the 2 remaining vacant parcels of land. The application was subsequently brought to Council in April 1986, who directed staff to draft a denial resolution which was tabled twice. At the June 9, 1986 meeting Council moved to adopt the denial resolution, r_he applicant then asked that it be tabled. Subsequent to that he requested that it not be consiipred at the June 23rd, 1986 meeting. City Administrator ternhardson stated that is where the application currently- stands The previous Council. had indicated one of the --ourse; of action was to allow M Ferrell to amend h s request from two addiciona_. building units to one. The second option was to pass the denial resolution which would p_ohibit Mr. Ferrell from bringing up the request for another six months. Mi. Ferrell stated that his tax statement reads one property at 1.22 acres and the other property at .97 acres which makes it over two acres fo•- both lots together. He asked the Council what they consider to be a hardship. Mayor Grabek noted that when determining whether a hardship exists, the Council evaluates the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community and the applicant. Mr. Ferre 1 1 notes t iat the house propgsed to be built on one lot is a 2,000 s.f. house with garage on 40,000 s.f. of land which will not affect the light. He also noted that Asst Planning i Zoning Administrator Gaffron stated that both lots were satisfactory for septic systems. He feels that the surrounding property values will not cl•.crease and may in fact increase with a new residence on the vacant lot. Mr. Ferrell cited instance! building permits were issued on acres of dry buildable land. -North Brown Roar' - ob,+rg was built "in the water". -Bi ! 1 Mi 1 1 s residence property). in which he believes parcels with less than residence - septic system (lust south of Ferrell -Nortn Brown Road - house bui 1 t on 1/3 acre and th* rest of the lot is all ditch. INUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD JUNE 9, 1986 1990 jd FERRELL continued `� Councilmember Frahm withdrew his motion. It was moved by Councilmember Hammerel, seconded by Councilmember Adams, to table this matter at this time. Motion, Ayes 4, Nays 0. ;9' #1018 WILLIA14 J. ULRICH 15� 1595 BOHN'S POINT ROAD AFT1-.. I'HE-PACT CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS - RESOLUTION f2004 City Administrator Bernhardson reviewed the conditional use permits and variances and the drafted resolution addressing the following items: berms are limited to 3- 1/2' with no fences on them, staff has devised standards for the drainfield and the plan will be approved in accordance with those standards, alteration of the lagoon, fill between the the two properties, and letter of credit and developers agreement has been secured. Staff recommends adoption of the resolution. He noted that Planning Commission will review the requests for a geothermal system and extension of seawall in lagoon at their June 16th meeting. Present representing applicant were: Attorney Gregory Halbert, Surveyor Mark Gronberg, and Engineer Don Brauer. Mr. Halbert stated that they have reviewed the proposed resolution and request amendment of Condition M3 being that the former residence on Lot 2 must be removed by July 1, 1986. He stated that they are currently using the house for storing materials, housing and sanitation facilities for the laborers, therefore requesting that they allow the house to remain until September 1, 1986 subject to keeping the property neat and orderly. Staff stated that they had no problem with that request. City Administrator Bernhardson noted that they have not received any more complaints regarding the construction hours. It was moved by Acting Mayor Adams, seconded by Councilmember Hammerel, to adopt Resolution #2004 approving the after -the -fact conditional use permits and variance amending the date on Condition M3 to September 1, 1986. Motion, Ayes 4, Nays 0. p1q, a a S- I I-V7 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD JUNE 9, 1986 ATTENDANCE 7:04 P.M. The Orono Council met on the above date with the following members present: Acting Mayor Adams, Councilmembers Grabek, Frahm, and Hammerel. Mayor Butler was absent due to illness. The following represented the City staff: City Administrator Bernhardson, Public Works Coordinator Gerhardson, Building & Zoning Administrator Mabusth, Assistant Zoning Administrator Gaffron, and City Recorder Paterson. City Attorney Blatz was also present. CONSENT AGENDA* It was moved by Councilmember Frahm, seconded by Councilmember Hammerel, to approve the Consent Agenda* as submitted. Motion, Ayes 4, Nays 0. APPROVAL OF MINUTES* It was moved by Councilmember Frahm, seconded by Councilmember Hammerel, to approve the minutes of the May 27, 1986 Council Meeting as submitted. Motion, Ayes 4, Nays 0. It was moves: by Councilmember Frahm, seconded by Councilmember Hammerel, to approve the minutes of the 1986 Board of Review Meeting held on May 27, 1986 as submitted. Motion, Ayes 4, Nays 0. PARR COMMISSION COMMENTS 'There were no comments from the Park Commission at this time. PLANNING COMMI:SION COMMENTS Planning Commission member J. Diann Goetten was present and had no comments at this time. PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no comments from the public at this time. ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT: WARD FERR 3405 W EGAD VARIANCE DENIAL RESOLUTION City Administrator Bernhardson reviewed the three options in this application: 1. Adopt denial Resolution as drafted. 2. Table the matter indefinitely upon request by applciant. 3. Allow the applicant to revise his application to a 1-additional-building-site request. 1 l ,, 3 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD JUNE 9, 1986 1990 WARD FERRELL continued Ward Ferrell and his attorney, Jerry Rice, were present for this matter. Mr. Rice stated that he is familiar with the area in question because he lives in the area and also holds a contract for deed on property across the road from applciant's. He stated that he has researched the matter and feels there is a substantial issue of equitable estoppel involved and that this is a special situation based on an old promise by a Mayor. He stated that Mr.•Ferre11 is prepared to proceed with a legal suit if necessary. Councilmember Frahm asked applicant if he wanted the Council to act on the request for three lots, not considering any alternatives. Mr. Ferrell stated that was correct. Mr. Rice stated that they would be agreeable to Council tabling the request in order for Council to think about it. City Attorney Blatz wanted the record clarified regarding the apparent conversation between Mr. Ferrell and Planning Commission member VanNest, she noted that the record was researched and found no indication that word was given to Mr. Ferrell that he could plat his property accordingly and the code would not apply to him. She also noted that there is case law whereas the court ruled that regardless of indications made by a past council, the current council must uphold the ordinances. Mr. Rice clarified that he was referring to the word given by Mayor Ross when Mr. Ferrell platted his property. Acting Mayor Adams stated that he was always told that one council can not bind future councils. It was moved by Council —ember Frahm, seconded by Councilmember Grabek, to approve the denial resolution as drafted to be adopted June 9, 1986. At this point, Mr. Ferrell and his attorney were given the opportunity to request tabling this matter to reconsider the request for 2 additional houses. Mr. Rice stated that he would like the matter tabled in order for him to consult with his client, Mr. Ferrell. City Attorney B1atz stated that she would recommend tabling the matter if the Council's intent is to allow applicant to modify his application for 1 additional house to be constructed cn his property. Exy. �� MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD MAY 12, 1986 ATTENDANCE 7:15 P.M. The Orono Council met on the above date with the following members present: Councilmembers Adams, Grabek, and Fzahm. Mayor Butler arrived at 7:27. Councilmember Hammerel was absent. the following represented the City staff: Cit 4dministrator Bernhardson, Public Works Coordinator aerhardson, Building & Zoning Administrator Mabusth, Assistant Zoning Administrator Gaffron, and City Recorder Peterson. Also present were City Attorney Blatz and City Engineer Cook. CONSENT AGENDA* 1. It was moved by Councilmember Frahm, seconded by Councilmember Grabek, to approve the Consent Agenda* as presented. Motion, Ayes 3, Nays 0. APPROVAL OF MINUTES* It was moved by Councilmember Frahm, seconded by Councilmember Grabek, t- approve the Minutes of the April 28, 1986 Council meeting as submitted. Motion, Ayes 3, Nays 0. PARR COMMISSION COMMENTS There were no comments from the Park Commission at this time. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS Planning Commissioner McDonald was present and had no comments at this time. PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no comments from the Public at this time. ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT: i490 WARD FERRELL• 05 W&TERTOWN ROAD It was moved by C :rr.: member Frahm, seconded by Councilmember. Grabek ."r;er this matter until the May 27, 1986 Council Mee n ,r ji, requested by the applicant. Motion, Ayes 3, Nays 1991 i i1018 WILLIA14 J. ULRICH 1535 i 1595 BOHN'S POINT ROAD AFTER -THE -FACT CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS William Ulrich was present for this matter along with his -epresentatives: Attorney Thomas Humphrey Jr., Attorney Gregory Halbert, Project Coordinator John Noble, Landscape Architect James Robin, and Surveyor Mark Gronberg. 1 ems b -il-7 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING I(ELD MAY 27, 1986 ATTENDANCZ 8:28 P.M. The Orono Council met on the above date with the following member] present: Mayor Butler, Councilmembers ,,rabek, Frahm, Adams, and Hammerel. The fol low4 ng represented the City staff: City Administrator Bernhardson, Public Works Coordinator Gerhardson, Building and Zoning Administrator Mabusth, Assistant Zoning Administrator Gaffron, and City Recoider Peterson. City Attorney Barrett was also present. CONSENT AGENDA* It was moved h•,�Councilmember Frahm, seconded by Councilmember hammerel, to approve the Consent Agenda* as submitted. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. APPROVAL OF MINUTES* It was moved by Councilmember Frahm, seconded by Councilmember Hammerel, to approve the Minutes of the regular May 12, 1986 Council Meeting as submitted. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no comments from `ie public at this time. ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT: #990 ARD FERRELL WATEPTOWN ROAD VARIANCE - DENIAL RESOLUTION Mr. Ferrell was present and requested that this matter be tabled because his attorney was unable to attend this meeting. It was moved by Councilmember Adams, seconded by Councilmember Grabek, to table this matter until the June 9th Council meeting. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. #991 AND #1018 WILLIAM J. ULRICH* 1535 AND 1595 ROHN'S POINT ROAD AFTER -THE -FACT CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS Upon staff recommendation, it was moved by Councilmember Frahm, seconded by Councilmember Hammerel, to table this matter until the J,,lne 9th Council meeting pending additional information. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. 1999 BEI.DEN/MELINE 3598 NORTH SHORE DRIVE VARIANCE - DENIAL RESOLUTION Due to the fact that the applicant's, Benn Belden and Evan Meline, were not present, Assistant Zoning Administrator Gaffron recommended that this matter be tabled for a month and he will noti , applicants. 1 exfv . N 5-19- ®% MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD APRIL 28, 1986 PUBLIC COMMENTS continued for the sewer assessment that would not have to be paid back. He stated that he had not applied for the grant when it was proposed because it was just delaying the assessment, it was still going to be paid. He felt that the residents should have been notified that there was monies available to piy the assessments and there was no pay back. He felt that more people would have applied for that program. Mayor Butler stated that the money from HUD would have to be used to pay off the assessments or the money would be los* Councilmember Frahm asked if there was any more mone or the program. City Administrator Bernhardson stater here was none. He stated that the City staff was unaware that there would be residents who would qualify for the grant but had not made application because of the pay back. There might be funds available from CDBG in February 1987. Mr. Gabriel Jabbour, 780 Tonkawa Road, stated that he has read and heard some remarks regarding the Council's actions that were not favorable. At this time he wished to let the Council know that there are residents who feel the Council is doing an excellent job and wished to thank the Council for their good work and encouraged them to continue. ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT: aIAWNCE ARD FERRELL* ATERTOWN ROAD # 819 11 I LL IAM MILLS* 200 LEAF STREET FINAL SUBDIVISION RESOLUTION i1984 Motion by Councilmember Adams, seconded by Councilmember Hammerel to direct staff to write a resolution of denial, this resolution will be presented to the Council at their May 12, 1986 Council meeting. Ayes 5, Nays 0. Motion by Councilmember Adams, seconded by Councilmember Hammerel, to adopt Resolution A 1 98 4 approving a final subvidision for William Mills. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. 1998 MAUREMN S. BELLOWS* 265 BROWN ROAD SOUTH FINAL SUBDIVISION RESOLUTION 11985 Motion by Councilmember Adams, seconded by Councilmember Hammerel, to adopt Resolution 01985 approving a final subdivision for Maureen S. Bellows. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD APRIL 14, 19V6 #990 WARD FERRELL continued Attorney Blatz stated that she felt Mr. Ferrell :,jade a knowledgable waiver of attorney and was made aware that he could have delayed the matter in order to have his attorney present. Councilmember Grabek questioned if approval of this request would significantly impact the non-sewered area. Assistant Zoning M ministrator Gaffron stated that in his opinion, it would not have a significant impact in that particular area. Mayor Butler stated that taking into consideration that the request is for development of three residential units on 2.9 acres in a 2-acre zone; it was moves] by Mayor Butler, seconded by Councilmember Adams, to direct staff to prepare a resolution of denial based on the following: At this point, Mayor Butler again stated that she felt it fair to inform Mr. Ferrell, that before an actual vote and decision is made, he has the option to request tabling of his application in order for his attorney to be present. Mr. Ferrell's response was that he did not think it would make any difference because the Council has already made up their minds. 1) Extent of variances. 2) Known fallibility of septic systems on small lots. 3) Denial does not deprive owner's rights to reasonable use as residential property as it stands now. 4) No hardship to the land justifying request. 5) Zoning code demands 2 acres of dry buildable property per parcel wherein this parcel is 2.9 acres overall requesting 3 buildable lots. Motion, Ayes 4, Nays 1. Councilmember Grabek voted nay. 11007 CAROL TRAPP* 4701 WEST BRANCH ROAD PRELIMINIARY SUBDIVISION RESOLUTION 11979 Carol Trapp was present for this matter. It was moved by Councilmember Frahm, seconded by Councilmember Hammerel, to adopt Resolution 01979 granting P:.eliminary approval for a plat at 4701 West Branch (toad. Motion, Ayes 4, Nays 0. 7 y -i y, MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD APRIL 14, 1986 #990 WARD FERRELL continued Mayor Butler stated that the Council has to consider the legalities involved with future requests if they were to approve his application. Councilmember Adams noted that even by allowing one home to be built would require a variance of the 2 acre minimum lot requirement. Assistant Zoning Administrator Gaffron noted that the zoning code has changed during the time that Ferrell has owned the property, however the code did not specifically addr•�ss "commonly owned" lots until 1984. City Attorney Blatz stated t:iat it was the council's duty to enforce the code as it stands today and that comments made by previous ::ounci lmembers are not legally binding. Councilmember Grabek noted that (per memo) within a 1/2 mile radius of the applicants property, there were 37 houses with less than. 2 acres and 39 with 2 acres or more. He stated that part of the common ownership rationale was "how do these lots fit in the surrounding area"? He questioned if Ferrell's lots would support septic systems. Assistant Zoning Administrator Gaffron stated that the lots would support septic systems under limited development i.e. no tennis court, pool, etc. Councilmember Grabek asked City Attorney Blatz the legal ramifications involved if this were approved. Attorney Blatz stated that there is a potential problem which the Council should reveiw. As far as granting a variance, Council must find an undue hardship to Mr. Ferrell. She noted that in 1981 a similar request was denied because applicant did not demonstrate a hardship, no sanitary sewer was available, and insufficient area and width. She stated that it is her opinion that if Council cannot differentiate Mr. Ferrell's property from others, that by granting the request in effect they would be changing the ordinance. Councilmember Grabek questioned whether there would be legal justification to approve this application without changing the ordinance based on 1) a house can be built on each lot safely with septic system 2) it is consistent with the neighborhood size lots 31 applicant has been a citizen of Orono since 1936. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD APRIL 14, 1986 #990 WARD FERRELL continued Attorney Blatz stated that it is a policy decision Council must decide upon and that the undue hardship finding must be spelled out in the resolution to support the variance approval. Councilmember Grabek stated that it seemed to be the "just" thing to do to grant this variance and he felt it would not be making that much of an exception for other cases that may come up. Mayor Butler stated that this was a dilemma due to the unique circumstances however, she felt realistically she would have to recommend denial because, in her view, it would completely change the zoning policy. She expressed her Fear in having to plant another sewer system. Councilmember Frahm stated that he has problems with the "common ownership" issue and whether there is a difference between sewered areas vs. non-sewered areas. He noted that if this request were approved the ordinance should be changed and be more clearly defined. Councilmember Grabek stated that he felt the direction of the change made in 1974 was to be able to provide a reviewal on an individual basis. Planning Commission member Bellows stated that one way to differentiate between common ownership vs. separate ownership, in separate ownership the hardship would be not allowing them to use their property, whereas, in Mr. Ferrell's case he is able to live on his property and use it. She also noted that the only hardship in Mr. Ferrrel l's case is financial which cannot be considered as a valid hardship. Mayor Butler noted that she would be open to allowing one additional home but not two. Councilmember Hammerel stated that this is a hard decision but he felt tv o houses in an area where there is not enough area for one house without a variance is an excess, especialll in an unsewered zone. Councilmember Adams stated that he felt sympathetic in Mr. Ferrell's case but he felt 1 acre lots in an unsewered area is undesirable. Councilmember Grabek questioned whether there would be a problem because Mr. Lerrell's attorney was not notif.pd. r .r MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD MARCH 10, 1986 #990 FERRELL continued Mayor Butler explained the problems that are involved in this application and that the reason this area was rezoned in 1974 to 2 acre lots was the problem with septic system overcrowding and failure on 1 acre lots. She noted that other similar applications have been denied for this same reason and Council would be setting a precedent by approving this. Mr. Haglund stated that this situation is unique and that properly installed septic systems do not fail. Councilmember Adams stated that problems are showing up with septic systems in 1 acre areas. Assistant Zoning Administrator Caffron reviewed the history of the zoning code from 1950 to present. He noted the similar request by Alden Anderson in 1981 which set a precedent for denial in these cases. Mr. Haglund stated there there is no proof of setting a precedent by approving this because of the unique situation. Mr. Ferrell stated that the present zoning code would prevent subdivision requests of 2 acre parcels, but he has already subdivided his property, upon the request of the City. Mayor Butler stated that she felt the entire Council should be present to make a decision on this application. Mr. Ferrell stated that the Council has a moral obligation to honor previous councils' actions. It was moved by Mayor Butler, seconded by Councilmember Adams, to table this application until the April 14, 1986 Council meeting for the presence of the entire Council. Motion, .yes 3, Nays 0. i1006 CHRIS i DALE PALM 1710 SHADYWOOD ROAD VARIANCE RESOLUTION #1936 City Administrator Bernhardson explained the request for hardcover variances to construct a home addition and attached garage. The proposea hardcovers increases are from 17.5% to 18.2% in the 0-75' zone; the proposal shows a decrease from 27.3� to 26.8% in the 75-250' zone, but on staff's recommendation for safety reasons, a back-up apron should be included, so the proposed hardcover would be increased to 29.0%. 4 EXIy..� s-►2-ate ,MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL 14EETING HELD APRIL 14, 1986 #990 WARD FERRELL 3 4 0 5- WATERTOWN ROAD VARIANCE - SECOND REVIEW Acting City Administrator Gerhardson explained the request for a lot width and lot area variance for two rural properties on Watertown Road noting this was previously reviewed -by Ccunci1 en March 10, 1986 which at that time gas tabled because the entire Council was not present to review it. Ward Ferrell was present for this matter and stated his attorney unaware of this meeting and was unable to attend due to a previous appointment. Mayor Butler asked Mr. Ferrell if he wished to defer this matter until the next Council meeting in order fcr his attorney to be present. Mayor Butler informed him that if this application is denied, he must wait six months to reapply. Mr. Ferrell stated ttat he would like to proceed with his application and depending on the outcome will consult with his attorney. He noted that he still feels that he is entitled to build a house and sell one lot to help pay for his retirement home as long as he has owned the land since 1948. Ferrell stated he divided it because the Council asked him to in 1958, and the Counc-1 accepted the four lots and that the present Council has a moral obliqation to honor what that Council told him. Zoning Administrator Gaffron updated Councilmembers Grabek and Hammere 1 (who were absent at the March 10th meeting) that Mr. Ferrell was requesting permission for 3 homes on a total of 2.9 acres in a two -acre zone. The 3 lots are commonly owned by Mr. Ferrell and consist of 1.01 acres (upon which Mr. Ferrell's presen* home is located), 1.04 acres, and .85 acres respectively. He noted that applicant has submitted soil testing and site plans to indicate that both sAptic systems and houses can be placed on each lot. He noted that the question is whether this would set a precedent by granting approval. Mr. Ferrell noted that the "28 similar case" parcels noted in staff's memo are less than two acres with the exception of one and that none of these parcels have been owned as long as he has owned his property. Mr. Ferrell stated that he had planned to build a retirement home on one lot and sell the other lot for payment for the house and retirement equity. He feels that the financial hardship should be considered. Ii.�I�IT • .� MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD MARCH 10, 1986 #967 & #968 IDSTROM continued Assistant Zoning Administrator noted that the driveway has been reviewed by staf f and f inds no problem with the access location. He also noted the potential of a future third lot which would create problems for the applicant. Mayor ButlEr stated that the resolution should note the potential problems regarding future re -subdivision which would require the relocation of the access to properties off the private street. Mr. Idstrom stated -he was not concernea :with a third lot at this time and would deal with that problem in the future if it arose. Councilmember Adams stated he found no problem with the proposed subdivision of two lots only but would if there were three. It was moved by Councilmember Adams, seconded by Councilmember Frahm, directing staff to draft a resolution with the appropriate variance relating to the frontage and specifying that this is approval of two lots noting the future problems of a third lot, to be presented before final approval at the March 24, 1986 S,�RD Council meeting. Motion, Ayes 3, Nays 0. P':RR.ELL3411, 3415 WATERTOWN ROAD VARIANCE Ward Ferrell was present for this matter along with his attorney, -eroy Haglund. City Administrator Bernhardson explain,cd the request for a variances on two existing lots, which are in the 2 acre zone and are substandard under the current code. He stated that this was presented last May as a zoning appeal. He noted that applicant has had septic site testing done and has proposed acceptable primary and alternate sites. Mr. Haglund stated that applicant's dream was to build a house on one of these lots and was platted as such many years ago. He submitted a petition signed by the neighbors stating they have no objections to this proposal. ire also submitted aerial photos to show that the applicant's proposal would not be inconsistant with the area. MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD FEBRUARY 16, 1986 #990 WARD FERRELL continued All the Planning Commission members basically concurred with their opinions stated at the November 18, 1985 Planning Commission meeting, that this property should be allowed a total of only 2 buildable lots. Mr. Ferrell stated that the City of Orono requested him to divide the property back in. 1958 so there wculd not be future problems with building another home, and that this fact should be honored. He also noted that when the zoning changed from a 1 acre to a 2 acre zoning district, he was told that this would not affect existing lots. „ Assistant Zoning Administor Gaffron reviewed the history of zoning changes in that area from 1950 to 1984. He noted that the proposed lots meet the criteria required of lots in single separate ownership based on the 1975 zoning code, but a densi•y issue and setting a precedent are open, because these are substandard lots in common ownership. It was moved by Chairman Kelley, seconded by Taylor, to recommend denial of the 3 lots because they do not meet applic, bl a zoning code criteria. Motion, Ayes 2, Nays 3. Motion dies. Rovegno, McDonald, and Goetten voted nay. Rovegno stated that he felt this is a difficult decision because it seems , at 3 lots would have met -ode requirements up until a few years ago. McDonald stated that because of the many years of ownership by applicant, it would be inappropriate to deny. Goetten concurred with McDonald in this matter and stated that 2 lots would be acceptable. It was moved by Rovegno, seconded by Goetten, to recommend denial of 3 lots but could recommend approval of a total of 2 properly laid out building sites and recognizes the efforts, time and reliance the applicant has put in his 1958 application but still recommend denial of 3 lots. Motion, Apes 5, Nays 0. #999 EVAN MEI.INE 3598 NORTH SHORE DRIVE VARIANCE - SECOND REVIEW Henn Belden, being half owner of the property, was present for this matter. He noted that Evan Meiine was unable to be (resent because he is in Europe. This application was Planning Commission could firm -up plans to Hennepin County. 6 tabled from the December 16, IP85 meetinq, so that the applicants purchase additional property from 6)(4 4 Q f i �---- - L4 t � ) M.NUTES OF THE P!.ANNTNG COYMISSION MEETING HELD FEBRUARY 18, 1986 #84: ROBERT ZIMMER14AN continued Assistant coning Ad"ninistrator saffron stated that there is no known opposition from the neighbors and al 1 have been re -notified. It was moved by McDonald, seconded by Goetten, to recommend approval of the 3.5% hardcover variance in the 75-250' zone, conditioned on the applicant removing 2 areas of gravel and the existing detached garage structure. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. 1967 i f968 JOHN R. IDSTROM 2,80 FOX STREET PR9LIKINARY SUBDIVISION/CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CG.'TINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING 8:53 - 9:07 John B. Idstrom and David M. Ostreim were present for this matter. Mr. Idstrom's engineer, Mark Gronberg, was also present. Assistant Zoning Administrator Gaffron explained the request for a two lot subdivision (there are no houses on the lot presently) creating a rew building sites. He noted that both lots meet the 2 acre dry buildable minimum and standards for septic systems. He also noted that there is a potential for a future 3rd lot which would also meet the 2 acre requirement. It was noted that applicant is requesting approval for the driveway to access onto Fox Street to serve both proposed building sites. Planning Commission discussed the proposed driveway which will cross the designated wetland in order to access the rear building site. It was noted that the Watershed ')istrict has approved this crossing. There were no comments from the public and the public hearing was closed. It was moved by Rovegno, seconded by Taylor, to recommend approval of the preliminary subdivision and conditional use permit subject to staffs recommendations. Motion, Ayes 5, Nars 0. emaQn\ARD FERRELL 3 3411 41415 MATERTONN ROAD VARIANCE - SECOND REVIEW Ward Ferrell was present for this matter. Assistant_ Zoning Administrator Gaffron explained that this application was reviewed approximately 6 months ago on an appeal basis giving the applicant a general idea regarding the City's policy regarding situations ^f three contiguous substandard lots in common own*rshir. s MINUTES OF THE. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD NOVEMBER 18, 1985. PAGE 5 1990 FF.RRELL continued Chairman Callahan noted that the application was incomplete absent a survey of property containing the existing house and septic site information necessary for assurance of an alternate septic site if needed. Mr. & Mrs. ward Ferrell were present for this matter.. Mr. Ferrell stated that there should be no problem with an auxilliary system being the lot is 3/4 acre, therefore not necessary. Mr. Ferrell felt that a survey of the property with existing house was also not necessary. Chairman Callahan stated that thisinormation was necessary and was requested from him last May and they would not act until this information was provided. Mr. Ferrell stated he had a survey dated 1958 and would submit it. Assistant Zoning Administrator Gaffron stated he would look at the survey and determine if it would be adequate. There were no persons present regarding this matter at this time. It was moved by Chairman Callahan, seconded by Kelley, to table this request pending a complete application. Motion, Ayes 6, Nays 0. Chairman Callahan advised applicant that they would give him their general opinions regarding his request although submission of the survey and septic site information may make a difference. Goetten stated she was personnally opposed to three lots. Kelley, referring to hi:• statement in the Planning Commission minutes dated 4/ '95, felt that Lits 7 & 8 should be combined into one lot to ^w the existing home and one other lot. Taylor and McDonald agreed with Kelley's opinion. Rovegno and Callahan felt that two lots with dwellings would probably be reasonable with the proper septic site testing, three lots would be setting precedent. #991 WII.LIAM ULRICH 1535 BOHN'S POINT ROAD CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PUPIA C HEARING 9:40 - 10:37 Chairman Callahan explained the after -the -fact application for a conditional use permit and variance to do grading and fillinq within 75' of lakeshore. BRA ENGINEERING TES MINNESOTA: Mlnneapoh,. Hibbing. St Cloud. Rochester St Paul 9E co KLUEM k o E of 4ad,Aiec Of"(es N H ANOERSON OAIE R G r J LRAiG y v NORTH OAKOTA. Bismarck, Williston. MONTANA: Billings hAuSLER PE Reply To: P.O. Box 35108 Mpls., MN 55435 (612) 941-5600 May 28, 1987 Park Construction Attn: Mr. John Gannon 7900 Beech Street Minneapolis, MN 55432 RE: 73-157 ENGINEERING OPINION Addition of Fill to Existing Landfill South of TH-12 at Classen Lake Orono, Mi, nnesota Mr. Gannon: As you requested, we have reviewed the inr._..d:ion from three standard penetration test borings that we peri,�rmed in April, 1973, with respect to your description of the i.deltional fill placement that is proposed. The concern of memhe:'.> of the City Council is whether the addition of fill onto tt'.e existing land- fill area will be cause for instability and possiLle failure into the underlying organic soils. The results of the previous borings taken in the proposed land- fill area in 1973 encountered peat and mucx from the surface to depths ranging from 22 feet. to 35 feet. We understand that the landfill was not extended east over the proposed landfill area as depicted on the -ached sketch. Subsurface soil conditions in the area of thr: existing landfill have been assumed similar because the area is depicted as a large wetland; although depths of the organic soils likely vary. You indicated that the existing landfill area was first filled in the late 1950's. At the present time, you indicated your desire to place additions'_ fill over the existing landfill area which will consist of a uniform 5-toot cap of mineral fill over the existing surface elevations in the present landfill area. CONSt_1L.T1Nti FNGiNEEQS SOILS AND MA?ERIALS AM~ Company for Chem -col 3 Env,ron"vntei fest�nq and Comoun,nq - Afoun Enwro4,mental me 73-157 Park Construction -2- May 28, 1987 You indicated that the bottom of the existing landfill material is at about elevation 968+. The existing surface elevation of the undisturbed wetland area is at about elevation 972+ feet. This 4-foot difference in elevation probably represents what we would expect to be the amount of settlement that has resulted from the weight of the existing landfill material compressing the organic subsoils below. You indicated that the existing landfill material is about 14 feet thick. Judging from the length of time that the existing landfill material has been in place, and your indication that there have been no previous stability problems, it is our opinion that the Zproposed addition cf 5 feet of mineral soil above the top of the existing landfill grades presents a very slight risk of shear failure. Our experience with projects where additional fill is placed above existing landfill materials above swamp deposits has resulted in additional settlement, but no shear failures. The composition of the existing landfill material is such that it probably possesses a rather high internal angle of frictivi, and a rather high shear strength. The settlement that ha,_• occurred over the past 30 years has also increased the shear strength of the upper zone of organic soils which lessens the risk of shear or punching failure as a result of placing an additional surcharge load. Thus, based on this information, it is our opi- nion that the addition of 5 feet of fill over the area presents a very slight risk of embankment failure. Tt should be noted that soil borings with power equipment have not been taken in the existing :andfill area to evaluate the com- position and strength of the existing landfill material and the strengths and depths of the underlying organic soils. If the assumptions we have made are inaccurate, our evaluation of the potential risk may need to be re-evaluated. Additional borings and tests at this time do not appear warranted for the grading planned. However, at a minimum, we recommend that prior to placing any fill, several settlement monitoring plates be installed in various areas, preferably around the edges of the existing landfill limits, and that the additional fill then be placed in two stages of 2 1/2 feet per stage. Between lifts, the monitoring plates should be referenced to aid in evaluating the rate of settlement caused by the addition of new fill. Possibly a period of one to four weeks should be set aside between staged fill applications to allow more time for monitoring the plates. If the additional mineral fill extends over areas that are pre- sently virgin wetland, the risk of embankment failure is signifi- cantly higher and a much more controlled filling technique will be appropriate. 1 1 � 73 -157 Park Construction -3- May 28, 1987 Services performed by the geotechnical engineers for this project have been conducted in a manner consistent with that level of care and skill ordinarily exercised by members of the profession currently practicing in this area under similar budget and time restraints. No warranty, expressed or implied, is made. It is a pleasure performing these services for you. Should you have any questions regarding this correspondence, please contact us at your convenience. Very, truly yours, BRAUN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. uQdb4 , CzL c'-� r" William K. Cody, P.E. Senior Engineer Ja/ctor Craig Jr., P� Diof E ginee V WKC/JJC:gec Attachment: Sketch IY r.hfw f � i.y.r}.1 w•wi VMII..•I..x� . ff f,•w.r.�a 1•w '<rr r..w w.{ iv.f r..iY► •! ihw wM�.1YYPw '•+n wf.•�... w � • .�• V•'r.• '�.'l lnn ./.{f��•rM M .nw.w � ' ^f •Yn^lwln.n 1n.1 Maf.fwn ••rr r..rew a,ryl.h N. Ma fIM. nwr •.ra ,nrlwf n.nq W+ n rrYI.IMI 1� TO: Mayor Grabek Orono Council Members City Administrator Bernhardson FROM: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Zoning Administrator DATE: June 1, 1987 SOBJ: #1103 Howard Eisinger, 3245 Wayzata Blvd. - Conditional Use Permit - aesolution List of Exhibits - A - Braun Engineering Letter B - Council Notice of Action At Council's request, Mr. Eisinger's contractor, John Gannon has submitted the existing test data of 1974 to the original engineering firm that conducted the tests. Review Exhibit A, Braun Engineering states as follows: "it is our opinion that the proposed addition of five feet of mineral soil above the top of the existing landfill grades presents a very slight risk of shear failure." The following reasons are cited: 1. Past experience with similar landfill sites situated within a wetland. 2. Existing landfill material probably possesses high internal angle of friction and a high shear strength based on existing conditions. 3. Settlement -hat has occurred over the past 30 years will also increase the shear strength of the upper zone of organic soils . nd will lessen risk of shear as a result of placing an additional surcharge load. Staff has met with both Eisinger and Gannon to discuss the final preparatory steps required so that the permit at the 100,000 cubic yard level may be approved by Council. As Braun Engineering has suggested, we will ask that monitoring plates, minimum of 3, be placed along the edges of the fill area. Staff will be able to observe th ise plates upon inspections to determine if there is an abnormal rate of settlement. Staff has advised Gannon that the City will require a developer's agreement and appropriate security to insure that final grading and seeding will be completed even if the fill project as proposed is not realized. The Engineer's recommendations regarding erosion control, inspection schedule and monitoring fill project have also been referenced in this resolution. 101 Zoning File #1103 June 1, 1987 Page 2 Gannon has a l Wised that paying customers get first claim on fill. Haul ings to the site will be sporadic and not as intense as first imagined. Gannon feels assured the the 100,000 cubic yard project will be completed in a year. Both Eisinger and Gannon feel a Jun 8, 1988 deadline is acceptable. If an extension is necessary, the ordinance provides for the procedural steps for such requests. The attached approving resolution has been drafted with fill held at 100,000 cubic yards ar.d to be completed within 1 year. Fill shall be limited to an average level of 5 feet. The conditions of this approval have been recommended by staff in consideration of the issues discussed with both applicant and applicant's contractor. I /7 To: Mayor Grabek Orono Council Members City Administrator Bernhardson From: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building 6 'Zoning Administrator Date: May 7, 1987 Subject: #1103 Howard Eisinger, 3245 Wayzata Boulevard Conditional Use Permit - Zoning District - RR-lB Pertinent Section of the Code - Section 10.03, Subdivision 19, 20 - Conditional Use Permit for fill and grading in excess of 100 cubic yards. Section 10.09 - Conditional Use Permit procedure. Section 10.55, Subdivision 5 (B) - 26 feet setback from designated wetlands. Area to be Filled = 12.15 Acres - Former Dump Site Amount of Fill - a) Proposed by Applicant 150,000 to 200,00 cubic yards b) Recommended by Planning Commission 80,000 to 100,000 cubic yards (10 cubic yards - 1 dump truck load) c) 20,000 cubic yards of fill placed in a 12 acre area produces, 1 foot of verticial rise List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Application Exhibit B - Plat Map Exhibit C - Property Owner List Exhibit D - Acknowledgement Letters Exhibit E - Park Construction Letter Dated 1/14/87 Exhibit F - Park Construction Letter Dated 3/31/87 Exhibit G - Hennepin Conservation District Letter 3/10/87 Exhibit H - DNR Letter 3/13/87 Exhibit I - Department of Environment & Energy 3/18/87 Exhibit J - Minnesota P.C.A. Letter 3/20/87 Exhibit K - M.C.W.D. Letter 3/23/87 Exhibit L - Planning Commission Minutes 2/17/87 Exhibit M - Cook Letter 4/15/87 Exhibit N - Cook's Sketch of a Typical Section Exhibit O - Sample of Letter Sent to Reviewing Agencies on 5/5/87 Exhibit P - Park Construction - Site Improvement Plan for Proposed 200,000 Cubic Yards of Fill Exhibit Q - Section A -A Based on 200,000 Cubic Yards Exhibit R - Section B-B Based on 200,000 Cubic Yards I Zoning File #1103 May 7, 1987 Page 2 of 4 History of Property - Mr. Eisinger puchased the property in 1955 and in 1958 through 1970 operated a sanitary landfill (received garbage and refuse). The applicant obtained an annual license from the City each year of operation. In 1974, the applicant applied for a demolition land fill license from the City but was denied. Staff asked if the applicant has any idea how much fill exists today over the dump and he estimated anywhere from 6 to 8 inches to approximately 2 feet of fill. After a day of dumping it was Eisinger's practice to place 6 to 8 inches of clean fill over the new dump area. Review of Application - Mr. Eisinger proposes filling the 12 acre former dump site with approxiamtely 200,000 cubic yards of fill obtained from the I-394 upgrading. The contractor has submitted letters (Exhibits E & F), advising of their willingness to assist the City in the review of this permit. The fill is shown placed 26+ feet from the :surrounding wetlands. At the first review of the application, Eisinger proposed 80,000 to 100,000 cubic yards of fill but at the April 20, 1987 meeting the applicant's contractor submitted an amended proposal with plans for filling up to 200,000 cubic yards. Review Exhibits P, Q, & R, fill will be placed up to the 992 elevation (2 feet above Highway 12 elevation). Fill placements would range from 8' to 10' depths. Debris and building materials stored on the site must be removed prior to filling. As the contractor's letter states, the filling and final seeding will be completed by the spring of 1989. The applicant was asked what he planned for the fill site upon completion of the project. Eisinger wants to use the area either as a driving (golf) range or for some form of agricultural use. The DNR, M.P.C.A., Hennepin Conservation District and Hennepin County Department of Environment and Energy will not require permit reviews. All but the DNR has provided guidelines or assistance for the City if the permit is 3pproved. The M.C.W.n. will require a permit but will not issue the permit until the City formally acts on the conditional use permit. Zoning File #1103 May 7, 1987 Page 3 of 4 Future uses are very limited for the dump site - note for the owner - the Department of Environment and Energy must review all proposed uses of this dump site. Both M.P.C.A. and the Department of Environment and Energy discourage the use of the land for agricultural purposes - produce contamination, cultivation wr-lild endanger/weaken integrity of ground cover and increase leachate. No building construction because of unstable ground conditions created by decompositigp of underground debris. Construction increases potential of methane gas pollution and danger of explosions. Department of Environment and Energy finds no problem with use as a driving rang,: if no buildings are involved. Staff has not been convinced of the need to place excessive amounts of fill over the dump site - as Cook also concurs, the additional land could force organic materials to move out and cause a rise in the surrounding marsh. Staff agrees that it would be a benefit to fill the area but with no more than an average 5 feet of fill. The area should be leveled. If Council has the opportunit-• to walk the site, note the many pot holes, retention areas and uneven elevations. The current topography and condition of ground cover provides potential of leachate. Planning Cosssission Reco�endation - The Planning Commission recommended approval of the filling project but set the :limit at 100,000 cubic yards to be completed within a year (1988). If applicant and applicant's contractor responded in good faith to City's concerns and standards for operation, the City may consider approving a second stage fill project. Prior to any formal action on the conditional use permit, staff has asked all five reviewing agencies to address the City Engineer's concern (Exhibit O). At what point does the amount of fill placed on the dump site increase the! potential for organic materials to move out into the surrounding wetlands. Remember the 12 acre dump site now occupies a portion of the surrounding wetlands. Staff w.L l l ask for written confirmation for our records but we will call the agencies prior to your meeting to poll their position on this matter. Prior to asking the applicant for more detailed sur•:eying work and grading plans at this point in the review, staff seeks conceptual direction from the Council, if it is Council's intent to approve a conditional use permit. The Planning Commission has stated that it need not review the final plans as these final stages appear more appropriately placed in the hands of the reviewing staff. J Zoning File #1103 May 7, 1987 Page 4 of 4 Council Action - options of Action - Staff seeks conceptual direction from the Council as follows: A) To deny the conditional use permit as proposed by applicant or as amended by Planning Commission and to direct staff to draft appropriate findings for such denial f^r fcL-r+al ac- ion at your May 26th meeting. or B) To conceptually approve th-c conditional a,se permit as: 1. proposed by ipplif,;ant; or 2. recommended by Planning Corgi-rission and staff; and to direct the applicant to provide the following information to the City prior to formal acti.a:i on the conditional use permit by the Council: 1. Final grading plans must reflect more accurate elevations of existing topography (2 foot elevations). Side slopes not to exceed 5:1 ratio. 2. Sedimentation and erosion plan to follow the following guidelines: a) Silt fence installed on all sides 5 feet in from the top of existing slopes, (a distance from the edge cf the marsh (972') equal to 4 times the depth of existing fill (982') plus 5 feet (10'x4 - 40+5-45')]. b) Staked hay bales when necessary. c) Type of ground cover. 3. Schedule of fill activities: a) Time period; b) Plan for filling - segment - phased; c) Restoration of ground cover - disturbed areas must be restored within 30 days. 4. Applicant or Applicant's Contractor to execute a Developer's Agreement and post a letter of credit to cover final grading and seeding if project is abandoned. v PUN DATE 01/09/07 BATCH 003 38 32-118-23 11 0001 PROP ADOR 03220 WAYZATA BLVO OW11ER NAf1E ROBERT E DUfIAS ETAL TAXPAYER ROBERT E DURLAS NAME/ADDR 405 Ol0 CRYSTAL BAY ROAD LONG LAKE 1A1 55356 38 32-118-23 13 0003 PROP ADOR 00480 STUBBS DAY RD tl OIINCR HAIIE WALTER L LATHROP ETAL TAXPAYER WALTER L LATHROP NAME/ADUR 400 STUCDS BAY RD LONS LAKE MH 55!56 38 32-118-23 14 0002 PROP AOOR 03245 WAYZATA BLVD OWNER HAIIE H F EISIHGER ETAL TAXPAYER HOWARD F EISIHGER 11AME/ADnR 3245 WAYZATA BLVD LONG LAKE fill 55356 / 38 33-118-23 32 0001 PROP AUUR 03140 MATEPT0141 RD OWNER 114t1E H J PANUSV.A ETAL TAXPAYER DR HAPOLD J PAt:USKA NAI1E/IDOR 670 SOUITHDALE MED CLOG EDINA MI 51i435 HEtR1EPIN COUtITY PROI'Uim TNFOAMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY O.:IIEAS LIST 38 32-118-23 12 0001 03580 WAYZATA BLVD H WILLIAII LUPTON II WILLTAtt LL'RTON 550I NORIIAN CENTER OR MPLS t2l 551,437 38 32-118-23 13 0004 00440 STUCDS DAY RD N FREDERIC P RIEDEL FREDERIC P RIEBEL P 0 BOX 194 LONG LAKE 101 55356 38 32-118-73 41 0001 PAUL A STUBBS LY110011 STU^OS IP5 OLD CRYSTAL BAY RD LONG, LAKE 1111 55356 TOTAL Bt1CH 003 00i10 REPORT NO. P143540 PAGE 5 38 32-118-13 13 0001 03507 WAYZATA BLVD D 1 C FULMER D BRIAN FULMER 3507 WAYZATA BLVD LONG LAVE t01 55356 38 32-118-23 14 0001 03245 WAYZATA BLVD H F EISIHGERETAL HO:IAAD F EISItIGERHGER T� PT 2 BOX 454 LONG LAVE MI 55356 38 33-118-23 23 0002 t J 03025 WAYZATA BLVD PODEPT E & V.ATHRYN DUMAS RC13EPT E L KATHRYN OURIAS A 3025 WAYZATA BLVO-� •• Y• LOt1G LAVE t41 55356 I CERTIFY THAT III, FACTS RFVPESFNTEO APE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATI011 OF ,NFVrIlATlON AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE IIFif:'EPIN COU ITY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION, TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AID BELICF. DATE �� I i/ J �J i lit, ►. , t•e�f x i 2425 •r ZSJO� 1 '. o0 i s ov kqy 0 �'•�r�1 BURLIN -04/3/0 CITY OF ORONO - GENERAL LAND USE - Ioll�—, s. y --------------------------------- --------------------- PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address 2 J" `kTY OF 01kONO Property Identification Number (P.I.D. ) FINANCE OFFICE Jv7.;M - Please check one - Property abstract or torrens? 01 0 100.00 (for Conditional Use Appl cations only) IRM M 100.00 " E EiPt-1NANX Y0t1 Plea attach legal description to application if not incluft&0,0110 C001'k01 T09:; on . squired survey. 07/1. ------------------------------------ --------------------------------------- APPLICANT Phone ( home ) Name ,., 4zo 4/J1.VGaA Phone (work) Address -4 i !,S' WA Y-X Ar-4 Eat Y. _ City zivjs f 3!6 ---------- ----------------------------------------------------------------- ONNER (if different than applicant) Phone (home)_ Name Phone Address City Zip Date Property Acquired (month/year) I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parse s of land. -------------------------------------------------------- •-------------------- lENS - CONDITIONAL OSS PER11IT8 - Renew3l Fee - 1/2 Current Fee After -the -Fact Fee - Double Current Application Fee $100.00 a) Residential accessory Use $150.00 b) ?nstitu•�onal (church, school, etc.) $150.00 c) Duplex -4it/Bldq $250.00 d) Commercial/Industrial Use $200.00 f) Land Alteration Grading and filling - designated wetland or f loodplain r� Grading and filling - 101 cu. yd. or more Grading, seawall, retaining walls within 75' of lakeshore PRO/PID - see fee schedule of APPLICATIONS $150.00 Cosmercial Site Plan Review (+ consultar• fees) $250.00 Vacation $1!0.00 Rasenent Vacation $ .".00 3asessent Vacation With Subdivision $250.00 Rosoninq $100%00 Appeals _ Other - as* fee-hedule PRESENT USE OF PROPERTY Present Zoning District Present Use of Property Residential Other (specify)_ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Describe request in detail: --------------------------------------------------------------------------- RRQUIRRD SUBMITTALS 1. Completed Application Form. 2. Certified 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 (#10) pre -addressed to each of the namef on the above list with no return address. 4. Certificate of survey. 5. Topographic survey (existing and p-opcsed cuntuurs) if land alterations involve changes in elevation (grades). 6. Construction plan, if applicable (see staff for requirements). 7. Plat Map. 8. 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 s-gn 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. 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 verification of this request. Owner's signature Date Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. RUN DATE 07/15/88 BATCH 002 38 16-117-23 14 0004 PROP ADDR 01985 FAGERNESS POINT RD OWNER NAME A I OPHEIM A M V OPHEIM TAXPAYER ALAN I OPHEIM NAME/ADOR 1985 FAGERNESS POINT PO WAYZATA MN SS391 38 18-117-23 14 0007 PROP ADOR 01971 FAGERNESS POINT RD OW4ER NAME T A P MORTE►ISON TAXPAYER THOMAS MORTENSON ►IAHE/ADDR 1971 FAGERNESS PT RD WAYZATA MN 55391 HF►BIEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMA- ("I SYSTEM PROPERTY OWIiERS L1' 38 18-117-23 14 000 01981 FAGERNESS POI►, 0 rHARLES M CHRISTIANSEN ET t, CHARLES A EDITH CHRISTIANSEN 1981 FAGERFIESS POINT RD WAYZATA MN 55391 38 Id-117-23 14 0008 01973 FAGERNESS POI►IT RD A R BACKSTROM ETAL A R BACKSTROM 1973 FAGERP:jS PT RD WAYZATA MN 55391 REPORT NO. PI435401 PAGE 4 38 18-117-23 14 0006 01975 FAGERNESS POINT RD 10141 K PURDY ETAL JOHN K PURDY 1975 FAGERNESS PT RD WAYZATA MN 55391 TOTAL BATCH 002 00005 I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE PECORDS OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION, TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF. v��i DATE r Or��) BY I '? ^ J 1. 7 n �;( l �• q 1 1 4045, r, 17 a13 i T a 001 s s q of Shod '0/7 ;'•�M >. ' 1 yM'ood �..__.. •� .• J / l� AIYER R. FtEEMAN COUNTY SURVEYOR �h HENNEPIN COUNTY , MINN E 4-9— a�5 To: Mayor Mary C. Butler and Members of the Orono City Council Re: City Hardcover Definitions We have been asked by the City Zoning Administrator to write this note concerning the definition of what constitutes hardcover for the purpose of issuing building permits. We feel strongly that the current definition is, in many respects, inconsistent with she presumed intent of the ordinance. We are distressed that the vagueness of the current definition of hardcover has caused a major inconvenience for us and will add significantly to the cost of securing a building permit. We would sincerely hope that the Council will take this opportunity to examine and clarify the present definition of hardcover so that it can be applied fairly and uniformly to other residents of our area who are seeking to improve their homes. We believe that the purpose of the hardcover restrictions is, and should continue to be, to: (1) prevent excessive run-off into the Lake and thereby protect the quality of this recreational resource; and (2) to control overbuilding in the City and protect its aesthetic qualities. To accomplish the first part of this purpose, the operative definition of hardcover should be: Any artificial surface that causes rainwater to run-of4 that surface into the Lake, or tributaries of the Lake, rather than to be absorbed into the soil and filtered or to be retained and evaporated. If you accept this definition of hardcover, then there are certain landscaping features which should n o t c o n s t i t u t e hardcover: o Spaced, porous wood decking which has an absorbar t, porous natural surface beneath i!, i.e. no plastic sheathing. c Landscaping rocks with either no plastic beneath or with plastic that forms a basin in which the rain- water is captured and evaporated. o Stairs and retaining malls on steep slopes l Greater than a 33 degree incline directly to the Lake) that io ne crease the amount of run-off which would r►ormally reach the Lake. We also feel that the drainage patterns of a lot should be taken into consideration in determining the amount of eligible square footage upon which the hardcover limits are defined. For example, if the "ridge line" or highest points of a lot are within the 75-foot line, eligible square footage should be calculated from the "ridge line" to the 250-foot line. !n order to avoid future misunderstandings, it would be wise for the Council to clarify the policy regarding the "trading off" of existing for new hardcover. We wholeheartedly support the intent of the hardcover of jinances for the City of Orono in protecting the quality of our Lake and our City. As citizens, we have worked hard for both of those goals. We would hope that the Council will take this opportunity to clarify the ordinances in order to make them both effective and fair and consistent in their application. Thank you for your attention to this request. CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee $150.00 ' ($50.00 per each additional va Renewal Variance Fee $75.00 (no change from original application) After -the -Fact Fees (Double application fee) ----------------------------------------------------------- PROPERTY LOCATION WI i cre ya Site Address �Cf7S- ,C�� nQ�� -1� _F:', A.tit;c L'r-iC� A A a.•.�v:.vvLvl) Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) 0A, ,,-I 1W,+%•X / 14;�11;4sir Please check one - Property c, abstract or torrens? 01 C.El I.DC Attach legal description to application if not included ori.L,�: ;��'vv� required survey. -------------------------------- -- ,{ - ,------------- APPLICANT Phone ( home) C .� I - 7 __ ^;J�i L. J cc�� 9A "WVV ""A Name ��n. .3Zu-�� C.� Phone ( work ) � - ' V - y SM- Address: ' City: Zip:-j ----------------------4 -- OfiNER ( 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 PROPER-M Present Zoning District Present Use of Property Residential Other (specify) -------------------------------------------------------------------------- DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $ Describe request in detail: kid --------------------------------------------------------------------------- VARXJUKMS REQUIRED Lot Area Lot width L,"'�Hardcovssr Setback Variances ( Front Side •-Rear) Other HARDSHIP Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty resulting from strict enforcement of zoning regulations: o, `L/U!k .1-n,pra, _ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code Requirements: fety h �k REQUIRED 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. 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 ariance Application is complete. Zoning Official's Signature �'`-'C' 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 H` e "`�� 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 V c,_J_l Date '1—ti-W 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 schedL.led 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. Zoning File #1311 August 11, 1988 Paage 2 of 3 If the Council .:ontinues to treat such rockbeds/permeable fabric as hardcover, the percentages are as follows: 0' - 75': 21.6% (1708 sq. ft.) 75' -250': 28.2% (2493 sq. ft.) 3. The proposed addition encroaches approximately 10' additional distance past the average lakeshore setback line. However, due to topography and site layout, no lake views enjoyed by either adjacent property owner will be decreased due to the proposed addition. 4. The applicants have given no written justification or hardship for their request to expand the house toward the lake. Staff would ant'.cipate that floor layout of the house, topography generally sloping eastward, and substantial natural screening along the west lakeshore, migh_ all be suggested by the applicants as justification for the request. 5. The current proposal would require a revision to the 0'-75' hardcover maximum previously approved for this property, since the existing house, proposed addition and lakeshore deck and stairs in total comprise a larger square footage of permanent structural hardcover than was previously approved for the 0'-75' zone. Again, the justification that was previously used, and which may still be valid, is that the bulk of the rainfall that hits the existing house and proposed addition generally flows or can be directed to flow eastward through the front yard area. DISCUSSION: As of this writing, applicants were out of town and could not be reached for discussion of the project. The previous hardcover variance review of this property was quite rigorous, and the applicants have included a letter from that previous application which states their position regarding hardcover. To date, the applicants have complied with the letter and intent of the 1985 variance approval. City Staff continue to Support the concept that landscape beds underlain by permeable, geotechni%al fabric certainly will meet the intent of the hardcover ordinance if properly used and maintained. The applicant is advised that the current City Council has taken a conservative position on the use of permeable fabric under landscape areas, and generally continues to treat such areas as hardcover, because it is virtually impossible for City Staff to enforce the maintenance of those areas as non -hardcover. Working under the assumption that the applicants' landscape areas with fabric are not hardcover, the current proposal results in an increase in hardcover in the 0'-75' zone over what was previously approved. Notwithstanding the hardcover issue, the proposal does ask for additional encroachment near the lake on the west side, within the 0'-75' zone. The City has generally encouraged property owners in similar situations to Zoning File #1311 August 11, 1988 Page 3 of 3 construct new additions either outside the 0'-75' zone or no closer to the lake than the existing house. There is no question that this property has unique circumstances compared to most other lakeshore in Orono, but is certainly typical of other Fagerness Point properties that have lake on both ends of the lot. Looking at the other variances granted for properties "up and down the line" from Purdy's, the addition of above -grade structure closer to the west lakeshore than the existing house has no precedent since adoption of the 75' setback in 1975. Certainly, a file search would likely reveal a few such approvals in other areas of the City since 1975, but it would be unusual in this immediate neighborhood. STAFF RECOMMENDATION From the standpoint of hardcover and runoff, it would seem that the proposed additions can be constructed such that roof drainage can be directed eastward, and with the use of permeable fabric rather than plastic under decorative rockbeds, rainfall infiltration can be maximized, hence this addition can be completed in a manner that will meet the hardcover intent of Resolution #1814, if not the actual percentages previously approved. From the standpoint of view encroachment due to additional above -grade structure in the average lakeshore setback zone, the proposed addition will have an insignificant effect on views currently enjoyed by neighbors. From the standpoint that this addition will create additional above -grade structure closer to the west lakeshore than the existing house, this would be an unprecedented approval in the immediate neighborhood. Planning Commission must determine whether a reasonable hardship exists and whether the lakeshore setback variance is justified. If the Planning Commission recommends approval, Staff would suggest conditionincr that approval on limiting the height of the structure to just the single story proposed at this time, and that all roof drainage be directed to the east side of the property. Planning Commission may also wish to consider structural trade-offs of the various sheds on the property, not only west of the house, but at the lakeshore east of Fagerness Point Road, which according to plat maps, is still "no -mans -land". 1 S- VS ZONING FILE NO.1311 CITY OF ORONO NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 473-7357 Date of Notice: 8-18-88 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- TO: John 6 Susan Purdy COPIES TO: 1975 Fagerness Point Road Wayzata, MN 55391 TYPE OF APPLICATION: variance ----------------------------------------------------------- DATE OF MEETING: 8-15-88 VOTE: 6 For 0 Against Planning Commission recommends the following: Denial for reasons noted below NOTES AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS: Denial recommendation was based on Planning Commission's desire that no additional structural encroachment should be allowed closer to the lakeshore than the existing house. It appeared that while the hardships of lot size, existing house location and the limited building envelope might have been Persuasive as far as hardcover percentages were concerned, (in conjunction with the potential for removal of small buildings on the prol,erty), Planning Commission was unanimous in not wanting to set a precedent with the requested additional lakeshore setback variance. Applicant's next scheduled meeting is confirmed as: City Council Sel.tember 12, 1988; meeting starts at 7:00 p.m. Any additional information you wish to present for City Council review should be in this office by 9-2-88. 7f you desire certified colies of the official Planning Commission minutes, they are available from the City Recorder after review and approval by the Planning Commission. MINUTES OF THE PLANNING. COMMISSION MEETING .IELD AUGUST 15, 1988 ZONING FILE #1321 CONTINUED access to all new residential development. Johnson said that the School District could vacate the road if they do not need to use it when the four parcls are acquired by the School District. Kelley stated that he would like to see a topographical map of the area, along with other planning criteria. Moos asked if it would not be most beneficial to the owners to have the parcel platted in case the School District did not follow through with tine purchase of the entire parcel. Kelley asked whether the applicant wanted the Planning Commission to vote on the information as presented and forward it to the City Council. Applicant stated that he wanted them to vote and send the matter to the City Council. There were no comments from the public regarding this matter and the public hearing was closed. It was moved by Bellows, seconded by Cohen, to recommend denial of the request for a variance on the grounds that the request does not meet the required standards. The Planning Commission recommended that the parcel in question be properly subdivided tc ensure that future planning needs of the City are met regardless of the disposition of the property. Motion, Ayes-5, Johnson=Nay. Johnson suggested that the Commission approve this matter conditioned upon restrictive covenants as to transferance of "the remininggarcels B, C, and D. 1311 JOHN i SUSAN PURDY 1975 FAGERNESS POINT ROAD VARIANCES '`-,,PUBLIC BEARING 8:05 P.M. - IM P.M. ' The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were rioted. Mr. and Mrs. Purdy were present for this matter. Gaffron explained that the applicants were seeking variances for the purpose of adding a screen porch to their home on the Lakeshore side. The Purdys were qranted a variance back in 1985 to put an addition on the street side of their home. Applicants are in need of a hardcover variance as well as a variance to encroach in the average lakeshore setback and lakeshore setback. The Purdys had a 5 year plan at one point that has since been revised. The existing hardcover calculation in the 0-75' lone is 15.4% and does not include the permeable fabric underneath the rockbeds. Applicants are requestinq an increase in hardcover to 17.31. In the 75-250' zone, the requested increase in hardcover is 19.91 from 19. 1%. Kelley asked the app1icants if they would like to present MINUTES OF IaE PJJANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD AUGUST 15, 1988 ZONING FILE #1311 CONTINUED their matter. Mr. Purdy stated that they had revised their proposal from what they had submitted in 1985. Fie did not think that the addition would interfere with drainage because runoff flowed east from the addition. The addition would not be visible to any of their neighbors, and would riot interfere with any of the neighbor's view of the lake. Due to the internal configuration of their home, the addition, as proposed, is necessary. Their house is 80 years old and there is no other logical location for the addition. Mr. Purdy felt that the addition would not be detrimental to the lake nor to the neighborhood. Mrs. Purdy added that the screen porch would be virtually invisible from tho lake, and would aesthetically improve the house. She ' that they needed the added bathroom because they have er. Mr. Purdy stated that the average lakeshore setback _ somewhat because the house to the south of them is built on road. This made their property inconsistent with any of the neighboring properties. Bellows asked applicants if they had considered building the addition along the side of the house where the kitchen and family room were located. Mr. Purdy said that they had considered the plan. but there is a large counter area in the kitchen that would limit access to the porch and bathroom. The only other possible access would be through the family room, but that would limit the light in the kitchen and not be as aesthetica ly pleasing. Bellows stated that she did not see a hardship in this :natter. Mr. Purdy said that the proposed plan would allow access to the bathroom from the living room and dining room and access to the porch would be through an existing door. This would not be possible if they built the addition on the kite; en side oL the house. Mrs. Purdy added that the proposed plan would allow them to view the lake from their porch, which is a rightful benefit of living on Lake Minnetonka: Kelley asked if applicants would then request to add a deck to their proposed porch. Mr. Purdy stateri that they had no future plans to add a deck to their 3-season porch. Bellows stated that she did not like the fact that applicants were back before the Planning Commission with a more ambitious plan than the one they proposed in 1985. Mr. Purdy stated that the plan they now proposed was les!; ambitious. Their requests in 1985 included an extension to the garage and house. Kelley asked applicants why they could not turn their deck into a 3-season porch. Mr. Purdy stated that such a plan would not give them the required space they need. Mrs. Purdy added that they really need the bathroom. They currently have only one bath and a half and have no bath on the main level. Brown asked applicants how this plan varied from the original plan submitted in 1985. Mr. Purdy stated that the original plan had all of the additions on the south side. Mrs. Purdy stated that after they had added the family room, they H MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD AUGUST 15, 1988 ZONING FILE i1311 CONTINUED discov--red there was a greater need for the 3-season porch and bathroom, rather than enhancing the master bedroom. Bellows stated that the Planning Commission members have a real problem dealing with the concept of a 3-season porch. They look at them as being an addition to the house. Mrs. Purdy stated that they agreed with that. Cohen added that the bathroom only confirms that. Bellow_ stated. that it was more difficult to approve that than a screened porch. Mrs. Purdy asked why. Bellows replied that the 3-season porch was adding to the floor structure and mass of the house, and they are asking to do the addition in an area where they should not be building at -all. She added that if the applicants were requesting approval of a screened porch, the Planning Commission would have an easier time with the deliberation; a 3-season porch is in fact an addition to the house. Kelley inquired as to the original size of the souse when it was purchased by the Purdys. Mrs. Purdy stated that the only addition to the house in 15 years was the addition to the front. Cohen stated tnat he empathized with applicants' situation, but he felt that there was no demonstrated hardship and was afraid of setting a precedent. Mr. Purdy stated that in their proposed 5 year plan they intended to add two larger, very permanent structures to the house than what they were now seeking. What they are requesting should carry them through the next 6 years until their children are grown. Mrs. Purdy added that when they were before the Planning Commission in 1985, they were given the reverse precedent -setting argument and were told it did not matter what had previously been done, each case was iooked upon individually. Gaffron interpreted Cohen's comments to mean that if the Purdys were allowed to build further lakeward from the existing house, that would be unusual for Fagerness Point Road. All other additions clone in that area over the last 10 to 15 years have been done behind the line of the existinq house. Bellows stated that that was the problem, especially since there were other alternatives. Mr. Pv-dy stated that if hardcover near the lake was a concern they hail a storage structure and a kannel. area, now classified as hardccver, that they would be willing tc remove. There were no further public comments and the public hearing was closed. It was moved by Brown, seconded by Kelley, to recommend denial of the variances for #1311, based upon settinq a precedent for encroaching into the Lakeshore setback area. Kelley added that he felt there were other alternatives. Bellows st.a,.ed that she could not find a hardship in this matter. Applicant added that the hardship is that the house is 80 years old and they have exceeded its capacity. There is no other plan that would allow them as much useful space as the plan they now proposed. Gaffron 4 MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD AUGUST 15, 1.9h• ZONING FILE #1311 CONTINUED asked applicants if they would prefer tabling this matter so they could present a revised plan at a later meeting? Applicants wanted the Planning Commission to vote on the matter as currently proposed. Motion, Ayes=6, Nays=O, Motion passed. #1312 WILLIAM J. LAUER 3165 NORTH SHf - DRIVE VARIANCE PUBLIC HEARING 8:25 P.M. - 8:30 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. Applicant was present for this natter. Zoning Administrator i4abusth stated that the applicant was seeking approval for a ha- lccver variance for an addition that will not encroach in the average lakeshore setback cr 75' lakeshore setback areas. The variance would allow a 1.89% hardcover increase in the 75-250' setback area. The project will not require major excavation or land alterations. Bellows asked for readable plans. Mabusth stated that the sketch showing the proposal was staff's sketch. An updated survey showing the driveway was not submitted with the application. Bellows admunishod the Zoning Department for accepting incomplete plans. Applicant stated that he was not aware that the City required any further information. Mabusth noted for both applicant and Commission members that the land use application clearly states that a survey is required. Kelley suggested revising the variance application. He wanted to change item #4 under "Required Submittals" to incluCe the language "current and proposed". Mr. Laker stated that Le had reviewed the staff's drawings and felt that they were correct. Mabusth stated that the applicant showed 24a s.f. more hardcover than ff's calculations. Johnscn asked if the 1.89% hardcover inci was based upoi staff's ::alculation,, Mabusth stated 1 the percentage was based upon applicant's calculations, sLaff's percentage was less. There were no comments from the public regarding this matter and the public hearing was closed. It was moved by Cohen, seconded by Moos, to recommend approval of 01112, per staff's recommendations and option B regarding conditions of approval. Cohen asked Mabusth what percentage of hardcover needed to be removed from the 150- 500' zone. Mabusth stated that applicant nuld remove 1.89% hardcover by removing accessory structures iY a 250-500' zone. Mabusth asked applicant if he was lamilia th the language preceaed with an asterik that stated that -Ae hardcover variance was 10 4r0: Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Planning Commission Members City Administrator W.• nt :rdson FROM: Michael Gaffs :.sot. Planning & Zoning Administrator DATE: August 11, 1988 SUBJ: 11311 John & Susan Purdy; 1975 "agerness Point Road Variance - Public Rearing APPLICATION: Renewal and revisions of•variances gran. - 1985, to construct additions to residence. VARIAMCEB RBQUIRED: Lakeshore setback, average lakeshore setback, and hardcover. ZONING DISTRICT: LR-lC, singe family, 1/2 acre, sewered LIST OF 1=19ITS A - Application and hardcover position paper B - Plat Map C - Property Owners List D - Updated Survey with Hardcover falculations F - Average Lakeshore Setback Dia,,fam ! - Proposed Addition Plans G - Net Hardcover Revision Flar, at. Addition Location B - Previous Variance Approval Resolut:..)n 11814 I - Previous Hardcover Review, 1935 PEATINEXT PACTS: 1. In 1985, the Council approved variances for hare? -7ver in the 0'-- 75' and 75'-250' zcnes and granted approval for add!-..". rich partially encroached into the 0'-75' and average lakeshore setbf t. Recause of the applicants' phrased plan of additions, the variar._• _ng certain of the additions has oxpired. A:so, t' ; applicants he% .ghtly revised their proposal to ir•: " ude a rocr add Lion that wi11 be dpproximately 51' from the west lakeshc whereas tb- ^losest point of the existirr house is approximately 55' froi. .,a shorellr 2. The applicant IFr, removed plastic from virtually all of the pre- existing rockbeds, ar-eplaced it with a permeable fabric. A site insts*ction by Staff a after a downpour indicated that the permeable fabric definitely all%,... ._ail to pass throug►• -^.a into the ground. Current hardcover percentages .-ding the rock. with fabric under them, are -,.s follows: r 75': 15.40 (1, aq. ft.) -' ' TO: Mayor -nes Gt abek Members of the Orono City Council FROM: Susan and John Purdy 1975 Fagerness Point Road SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE TO THE LAKE SHORE SETBACK GUIDELINES TO CONSTRUCT A THREE -SEASON PORCH AND BATHROOM ADDITION Summary of Action Toyate: • ,'.ppr oved by the City Staff with conditional actions recommended. • Denied by the Planning Commission due to "desire that no additional structural encroachment should be allowed closer to the lake shore than the existing !vase". (Notice of Planning Commission Action Date ?/18/88.) Position of Applicants: We feel that a variance is warranted. The property is unique and the configuration of the house and it's position on the lot create hardships that ,iecessitate construction of the addition as proposed. • Hardships - Location of the house or, the lot -- The house was built in the early ' 900's in the logical position for any structure but well within what was to become the 0-75' setback zone. - Orientation and topography of the lot --The slope of the lot is eastward wilt, the house oriented westward towa-d the lake views. Expansion of the house in any other direction would require significant excavation and would not maximize the vie.i of the take. Also, the western side of the house has substantial natural vegr!.,ion that affords both shading and privacy. - Internal configuration ,- the house -- Given the external design and internal arrangements of the rooms and utilities, expansion in any other direction than the one proposed would be costly and disruptive. • Proposal If a setback variance is granted, we would remove two permanent structures '7at are closer to the lake than the proposed addition: 1) A storage si d, and; 2777enced kennel that is being used for storage, both of which were standing when we purchased the house in 1973. • Rationale for Granting a Variance - The propo ,-1 addition is V a on.r reasonable and affordable design to accomplis.. �Ijr purposes. The elimination of the two structures would enhance the neighbors' view of the lake and the lake users' view of the property. * The proposed additior would not be visible to the two adjacent neighbors. * Because of the natural vegetation, the proposed addition would not be clearly visible from the take. * The only structures on the property clearly visible from the lake are the storage house and the fenced kennel. The proposed addition • old also -equine the elimination of a spaced wooden deck and a small concrete slab that represent hard cover within 75' of the take. Thus, the addition would increase the hardcover in the 0-75' zone by only 83 sq. ft. The proposed addition is consistent with our five year plan and represents significantly less hardcover than the F roposed addition in that 5-year plan submitted with our variance application in 1985. Adjacent home has a free-standing structure which serves as a three season porch which is closer to the lake than the proposed addition. The structure was built before 1975. It represents the easternmost structure on the lot and shotIld be used in determining the average setback of adjacent residences. To: Mayor Grabek & Orono Council Members City Administrator Bernhardson From: Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator Date: September 8, 1988 Subject: #1311 John & Susan Purdy, 1975 Fagerness Point Road - Variance Application - Renewal and revisions of variances granted in 1985 to constrict additions to residence. Variances required: lakeshore setba(.:k, average lakeshore setback, and hardcover. List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Applicants' Leiter of Request Submitted 9/8/88 Exhibit B - Notice of Planning Commission Action 8/18/88 Exhibit C - Planning Commission Minutes of 8/15/88 Exhibit_ D - Memo & Exhibits of 8/11/88 Discussion - Please review the memo and exhibits of August 11, 1988. The applicants are protosing to construct an addition on the lakeshore side of their home which will reduce their west lakeshore setback to 51' where the existing house _s already only 55' from the shoreline. This proposal also involves an increase in hardcover in both the 0-75 and 75-250' setback zones. Further, the proposed addition will encroach approximately 10' additionally rasp the average lakeshore setback line. The Planning Commission, at their August meeting, recommended 6-0 to deny the application due to the potential of setting a precedent by allowing construction closer to the lakeshore than the existing house, when the existing house already has a substandard setback. Please review the I -'arming Commissio►, Action Not4 ce dated 8/18/88. The applicants have provided a memo stating their position. This memo presents their claimed hardships and rationale for granting a variance. Staff would note for the record that based on the staff memo of August 11, 1988, staff has not "approved" this application nor recommended approval, as the applicants state in their .nemo. Staff has recommended some proposed conditions to the Planning Commission if the Planning Commission recommends approval. Zoning File #1311 September 8, 1988 Page 2 of 2 Th applicants are suggesting that with removal of the 52 s.f. storage building and the fenced kennel area southwest of the ouse, that the proposed addition will increase the hardcover in the 0-75 setback zone by only 83 s.f. Per Exhibits D 5 G of the staff memo of August llth, presuming that areas of permeable fabric under rock are considered as non - hardcover, staff would view the 0-75' hardcover increase as 153 s.f. Then, removal of the 52 s.f. storage shea would leave a net 0-75' hardcover increase of 101 s.f. In the scheme of things, the 18 s.f. difference between their calculation and staff calculation amounts to about 0.2%. Staff Recommendation - The Planning Commission recommendation of denial was due mainly to the fact that in zontemporary times the City has held fast to the concept that no house additions should decrease already substandard lakeshore setbacks, and has been consistent with that policy in this very neighborhood. The Plaining Commission felt that approving the Purdy's request would set a precedent that weakens the City's position in dealing with substandard lakesiiore setbacks. However, the tenor of the Planning Commission discussions was that given the applicants' stated hardships, the additional hardcover proposed does not place a significant burden on the property, and that the average setback encroachment has little impact on neighbors' views of the lake. Staff reco►rmends Council Members view this property ..and review the memos and exhibits provided. Staff concurs with the Planning Commission recommendation. A resoluticn reflecting Council's final action on this matter will bo drafted for formal adoption at your next meeting. l TO: Mayor Grabek Orono Council Members City Administrator Bernhardson FROM: Michael P. Gaffron, Asst. Planning & Zoning Administrator DATE: September 21, 1988 SUBJECT: #1311 John & Susan Purdy, 1975 Fagerness Point Road - Variance - Request For Consideration of Revised Proposal At your September 12th meeting, Council voted 5-0 to direct staff to draft a resolution for denial of the variances for construction of a bathroom and enclosed perch addition which would encroach further into the lakeshore setback. Subsequently, the applicants have requested a deferral of that resolution and they request consideration c;f a revised plan. Although that plan has not been submitted as of this writing, staff would recommend that the resclution for denial be deferred and the proposed revisions be referred to the Planning Commissicn for a recommendation. Proposed Motion: Moved , Seconded , To refer the revised proposal of John & Susan Purdy for additions a 1975 Fagerness Point Road, to the Planning Commission for further recommendation. Ayes, Nays. APPLICATION NO. 1311 CITY OF ORONO NOTICE. OF COUNCIL ACTION P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 473-7357 Date of Notice: 9-21-88 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- TO: John & Susan Purdy COPIES: 1975 Fagerness Point Road Wayzata, MN 55391 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- TYPE OF APPLICATION: Variance -------------------------------------- =------------------------------------- DATE OF MEETING: 9-12-6-8 VOTE: 5 For 0 Against COUNCIL ACTION - NOTION: Council voted to direct staff to draft a resolution for denial of the requested variances per the Planning Commission recommendation. Howevei, per your subsequent request, staff will defer drafting that resolution and recommend that Council refer this item back to the Planning Commission for review of a revised proposal. Such a proposal must be submitted at least 7 days prior to the Planning Commission meeting at which you wish to appear. Deadline for the October 3rd Planning Commission meeting is September 26. Deadline for the October 17th Planning Commission meeting is October. 10. If you desire certified copies of the official Council minutes, they are available from the City Recorder or City Clerk after review and approval by the City Council. Gl/ES T Esc EvATi o N / ie0 S/ /97S �i4GE.�vfSS PT �PoA/J f� F/ i(P)r u to Vol F11 4.P, R&F _ no"Iy, M 8� y1• �l o ONTO✓ f[/3 w � � x'ro" —+N ►JIRDY NUM E h}--} IS ktr'ke. accqr7'r, r�.j Ena,,sz arm co�� `q rru jA s 01 cc rGvz u va.r; vt �� Lrvpa�-�L . ,4u �-, •t 7Vt cL,t �f rJkt cu, s !tit o(. u 5 C?evt-m fh.O- pro sd2 c+7 yr 5 �r. AWt, hTm 1 &r7i S-C atx L "(� , ►YL_!Y'.L � Gn 5 �c^G �7 /-�xJo S.c.Q� i u^e Are Lcc rrC�y :t.�.c�-r i� dra t✓z�n�S lYL �ccCC cLrteL R'lt� Su .bm.. Ztc 1D�- Otis i�/ect 5-� y r✓c �c.5 a r7,�Cc rz,� �� o f ho Y7 Q 5 Sc.t nett US, �-t ✓u �.t1 D-t�t � � ct -bCc �o CQ-y� l.�c.�l C� ot- S�n.z,CCcf' t� sr Zap+-�xcf- `lo-tc �'-r'�Gcrn/ r�s�v'L! a..ts cl.urt.c.Ea-b�e WG rn."st- Wa�.E- A ru. -or daxt wA s a. f�rrrc�C c,� I9 Ps cz.,�.� �u� ci/-e t a I I I tIA t 4�,t,tLy h eerd . �Lt � llC•ii.I✓ ��..0 .r To: Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernha,dson From: Michael P. Gaffren, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator Date: October 10, 1988 Subject: #1311 John & Susan kurdy, 1975 Fagerr.ess Point Road - Variance - Revised Proposal - Referral From Council Note - Applicants' original 1988 prop:. reviewed by the Planning Commission at your August 15th mF ::T, was reviewed by the Council who directed staff to draft a o'er, resolution. i'he applicants subsequent •1 requested Council to consider a revised proposal, which has been ieferred back to Plani,ing commission for review and recommendation. List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Applicants' Letter of Request Submitted 10/;/88 Exhibit B - Proposed Site Plan Exhibit C - Proposed Floor Plan Exhibit D - West Elevation View r:xhibit E - Council Action Notice 9/29/88 Exhibit F - Staff Memo 9/21/88 Exiii'oit G - Council Action Notice 9/21/88 Exhibit H - Memo & Exhibits of 9/8/88 Pertinent Facts - 1. The revised proF:isal r%-^Arts back to the five-year concept E'an that was approved by the City in 1985. Th.;_s plan result , in no encroachment towards the lake from the exis�ing house, and is locited strictly to the south side of the house. The addition would be one story in height, being 16' wide, and 42.5' long or 680 s.f. in total floc area additional. 2. Baaed on this proposal, the hardcover on the property would result in the following: 0-75': (area = 7,900 s.f.) Lakeshore DeCK & Stairs 418 s.f. Shed (could b -emoved. . .) 52 s.f. Deck 160 s.f. Slab 17 Trampoline (rock over. fabric) 360 s.f. Hc,use Edging (rock over fabric) 135 s.f. Housc (existir:gi 566 s.f. House (portion ,. .�.oposed addition) 96 s.f. 1,804 s.f. ' i'S` T)?- ))pcsaI -snited in approximately 21.51 in 0-75' ) Zoning File #1311 October 10, 1988 Page 2 of 2 75-2501: ;Area - 8,850 s.f.) House (existing) 869 s.f. Walks 227 s.f. Garage 441 s.f. Deck/Tub 152 s.f. Rock/Fabric (15+394+345+50)-108-50 646 s.f. House (proposed portion of addition) 584 s.f. 2,919 s.f. = 33.0% * Appli:7ants removed plast c and replaced with permeable fabric which was a 1 lnwed in 1985. Technically, the Council. now considers hese areas as hardcover. Applicants would prefer not to have to remove the fabric, but could if necessary. 3. Based on the above, the proposed add_.i(,n will be in kePF=ng with the hardcover approvals granted in 1985. Removal of the j2 s.f. shed would be a b`nefit in the 0-75' zone. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval the revised proposal, which technically includes a variance to average akeshore setback, a variance to the 75' setback of 7', and hardcover varia.ce in the 0-75' and 75-250' zones. Note chat the applicants' sketch suggests a width for the new addition of 16 to 20'. The hardcover calcula`ions noted in this memo were based on a 16' width, whirl 4s con istent with the 19R5 proposal. Staffwould recommend the following conditions of approval: 1. 52 s.f. shed shall be removed prior t.) issuanc- of a building permit. 2. Any additional landsca-e areas that are constru-ted around the new addition shall have no f or Elastic placed under th,.m. 3. The sting landscap areas under'iin by fabri• may continue to have Zhe fabric in place. 4. The maximum a 1 lowab le. hardcover on the proper- y shall be 3,663 s.f. t(-tal, in addition to 1,141 s.f. of r.)ck beds underlaiO Dy porous fabric and the 160 s.f. deck underla" -y sand only, whic.i were not -onsidere(4 ardccver in ti.e 1985 ft. -dc, -r approval resolution. 190M Thio applicants should be advised that e 1 ,rariance appr,)v.. for the 9arsge side setback has not been a s::bject of v a4 cc,issions fo tt C:*igAt variance request, and if applicants-xpec'. to construct-1 T. on the gara,,le prior to -he one yer - v--iance expiration date, if the current request is approved, app. --ants should advibo the Planning CosMission to address the subjec* at _j,,s time. 9c in.t-)," r_ - `'r ZONING FILE NO. 1311 CITY OF ORONO NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 473-7357---------------Date-of-Notice: 10/20/88 ----------------------------------- ----------------- TO: John & Susan Purdy COPIES TO: 1975 Fagerness Point Road Wayzata, MN 55391 TYPE OF APPLICATION: Variance ---------------------- DATE OF MEETING: 10/17/88 VOTE: 6 For 0 Against Planning Comission recos ends the following: Approval subject to conditions noted below NOTES AND SPECIPL CONDITIONS: 1. 52 s.f. shed shall be removed prior to issuance of a building permit. 2. Any additional landscape areas that are constructed around the new addition shall have no fabric or plastic placed under them. 3. The existing landscape areas underlain by fabric may continue to have the fabric in place. 4. The maximum a 1 lowab le hardcover on the property sha 1 1 be 3, 663 s. f. total, in addition to 1,141 s.f. of rock beds underlaid by porous fabric and the 160 s.f. deck underlaid by sand only, which were not considered hardcove.- in the 1985 hardcover approval resolution. Applicant's next scheduled meeting is confirmed as: City Council Monday, October 24, 1988; meeting starts at 7:00 p.m. If you desire certified copies of the offi.cial Planni Commission minutes, they are available from the City Recorder after review anti approval by the Planning Commission. A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.22, SUBDI. ISIONS 1 & 2 AND SECTION 10.55, SUBDIVISION 8 FILE #1311 WHEREAS, John & Susan Purdy (hereinafter "the applicants") .ire the owners of the property located at 1975 Fagerness Point Road within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as )lows: Lot 5, Fagerness, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicants have applied to the City for variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivisions 1 & 2 and Section 10.55, Subdivision 8 to permit the constructior of an addition to the existing residence, such addition being located partially in the 0-75' lakeshore setback zone Nhere no construction is normally allowed, and such construction technically encroaching past the defined average lakeshore setback line where no encroachment is normally allowed, and which conjtruction shall comprise additional structural hardcover on the property in excess of the 08 hardcover normally allowed in the 0-75' zone and i excess of the 25% hardcover normally allowed in the 75-250' lakeshore setback zone. Minnesota: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #1311. 2. The property is located in the LR-lC Single Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District. 3. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on October 17, 1988 and recommended approval of the proposed variances based upon the following findings: A) The applicants have revised their original proposal to now include only an addition of 16'x4216", identical to the 5-year phased addition plan which was reviewed by the City in 1985. Eel The proposed addition encroaches no closer to the westerly lakeshore of the property than the existing house, and only a small portion of the addition wil; be located within the 0-75' setback zone. The proposed addition continues the existing west line of the house. Page 1 of 4 C) The proposed addition technically is a further encroachment into the defined average lakeshore setback zone. However, due to topography of this property.and the neighboring properties, no lake views enjoyed by neighboring property owners will be encroached upon as a result of this addition. D) The proposed addition will result in a final hardcover in the 0-75' lakeshore setback zone of 1,152 s.f. or 22.2%, which includes a 160 s.f. deck and 495 s.f. of landscape areas underlaid by porous fabric which were not considered hardcover by tha City in the 1985 approval, but are considered hardcover by the City Council currently. The resulting hardcover of 22.2% results partially from the applicants' intent to remove a 52 s.f. shed on the westerly lakeshore side of the property which is considered as a non -conforming structure. F.) Hardcover in the 75--250' zone as a result of this addition will be 2,919 s.f. or 33.0%, which includes 646 s.f. of landscape rock beds underlaid by porous fabric. There is no additional hardcover that can be feasibly removed on this property to decrease hardcover percentages. 4. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicants and the ef`ect of the proposed variance on the heal`h, 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 applicants, but is necessary to alleviate a demon- strable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicants; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoninq Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the findings noted above, the Orono City Council hereby grants variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivisions 1 6 2 and Section 10.55, Subdivision 9 to permit the construction of an addition to the existing residence, granting variances to allow construction of an addition located 68' from the lakeshore where a 75' setback is normally required, allowing an encroachment of 22' past the defined average lakeshore setback line where no encroachment is normally allowed, and allowing hardcover in the amount of 22.2% in the 0-75' lakeshore setback zone and 33.0% in the 75-250' lakeshore setback zone where only 0% and 25• hardcover is normally allowed in those respective zones, subject to the following F.?,rl ; ,?psJ 1. The maximum allowable hardcover on the property shall be 3,363 s.f. total, in addition to 1,1.41 s.f. of rock beds underlaid by porous fabric and the 160 s.f. deck underlaid by sand only which were not considered hardcover in the 1985 hardcover approval resolution but which are currently considered as hardcover. The applicants are advised that these figures include a 240 s.f. allowance of hardcover for the garage addition proposed in the 5-year phased proposal originally reviewed in 1985, which has not been a subject of this current variance application, and which would require additional set- back variances prior to approval for that garage addition. 2. Th;: 52 s.f. shed shall be removed prior to issuance of a building permit for the addition. 3. Any additional landscape areas that are constructed around the new addition shall have no fabric or plastic placed under them. 4. The existing landscape areas underlaid by fabric may continue to have the fabric in place 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 (October 24, 1989). 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 applicants have read, understood and hereby agree to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of themselves, their heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agree to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 24th day of October, 1988. ATTEST: Dorothy M. HallIn, City Clerk James R. Gratek, Mayor Property Owner(s) Page 3 of 4 To: Mayor Grabek & Orono Council Members City Administrator Bernhardson From: Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning AdministratoL Date: October 20, 1988 Subject: #1311 John & Susan Purdy, 1975 Fagerness Point Road - Variances - Resolution List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Planning Commission Action Notice of 10/21/88 Exhibit B - Proposed Resolution Exhibit C - Memo & Exhibits of 10/10/88 Discussion - Council had referred this application back to the Planning Commission after applicants proposed to revise their addition plans. Planning Commission reviewed this item at their October 17, 1988 meeting, and voted 6-0 to recommend approval per the four conditions outlined in the staff memo of October 10, 1988. The revised proposal includes an addition to the south side of the house, which continues the existing westerly line of the house and which results in only a minor addition of hardcover in the 0-75' setback zone. The addition encroaches no closer to the lakeshore than the existing mouse. The Planning Commission found that the addition does not have any effect on neighbors' views of the lake, even though there is technically an average lakeshore setback variance involved. Planninq Commission recommended that applicants be required to remove the existing 52 s.f. shed at the westerly lakeshore bank of the property. Planning Commission recommended, per the sl:aff recommendation, that any additional landscape areas that may be created around the new addition shall have no fabric or plastic placed under them, but that the existing landscape areas which had previously had the plastic removed and replaced with the fabric, need not have the fabric removed. The resulting hardcover percentages with this specific proposal, with the fabric underlaid rock beds included as hardcover, are 22.2% in the 0- 75' zone and 33.0% in the 75-250' zone. The applicants total hardcover allowance granted in 1985 was 3,663 sf., which excluded the deck with sand under it and excluded any areas where plastic was replaced by fabric. However, based on the Council's current view of porous fabric, those areas have been Included within the hardcover percentages noted. The garage addition that was proposed with the 5-ypar plan has not beAn a subject of discussion with the current application, and such a garage addition would be subject to further variances for setback and continuation of a right-of-way encroachment, hence a future application for work on the garage would be anticipated. Please review the memo and exhibits of October 10, 1988, which descr:r.,e the pr,-posed addition. Staff Recos endation - 5taff recommends approval per the Planning Commission recommendation, per the attached resolution. CONSTRUCTION CO. • COMMERCIAL AND 6UIF INDUSTRIAL EXCAVATING �Of • ROAD BUILDING /� w � A ■PILE DRIVING e` Ir�` ■SEWER, WATER INSTALLATION I111 •BRIDGES EsrABLISHED @GOLF COURSES t916 ■SUB DIVISION AND LAND DEVELOPMENT IPMENT RENTAL MiitgiUNG AND DESIGN 7900 BEECH STREET N.E • MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55432 E TELEPHONE 786.9800 I- s September 29, 1988 City of Orono Box 66 Crystal Bay, Minnesota 55323 Attn: Ms. Jeanne Mabusth Re: File No. 139-1310 Howard Eisinger Dear Jeanne, In respcase to your letter of August 8, 1988, I will address the concerns raised by the Planning Commission. Park Construction, with a steady supply of fill, would be able to place 100,000 cubic yards of fill on the Eisinger property in approximately five weeks. This is based on placing 5,000 cubic yards each day, working five days per week, with a 20% weather delay factored in. Conversely, if fill material were available sporadically, whether from different projects, or one project with stage construction, etc., the material could be placed at a rate of 5000 cubic yards per week up to between 70,000 to 80,000 yards per week. The latter example would only occur if time were a factor and Park Construction elected to work a double shift six days per week. A tandem truck can legally carry about 9 cubic yards (bank volume). 100,000 cubic yards of material would be approximately 11,100 truck loads of material. Park Construction has an excellent safety record on all of their construction projects. When trucking to a disposal site located on a major highway Park Construction would place a series of signs which would warn both directions of traffic of the construction ahead. These signs would be placed well in advance of the egress; stating, Road Construction Ahead, Trucks Entering Highway, and, if required. Flagman Ahead and Prepare to Stop. AN EOUAL O►PORTUNITV EMPLOYF R CONSTRUCTION CO. C 'y tifi ESTABLISHED 1916 7900 BEECH STREET N.E. • MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55432 • TELEPHONE 786-9800 ■COMMF RCIAL A-D INDUSTRIAL E rCAVAT"VG .Rn^L)'i UI SDI NG ■PILE DRIVING fyl- 8SEWER, WATERINSTALLATION ERIDGES •GOLF CDLIRSES ■ SUB DIVISION AND LAND DEVELOPMENT ■EQUIPMENT RENTAL ■ ENGINEERING AND DESIGN PAGE 2 w The Minnesota Department of 'Transportation requires advance signing for any construction that may disrupt traffic. Temporary construction is allowed on State Highways with a permit; however, in this case TH 12 has a 10 foot paved shoulder and a bypass lane would not be required. All major state highways are designed to carry truck traffic as described above. The shoulder section at the point of entry to the Eisinger site would probably break up with the volume of turning truck traffic into the site. If this should occur, Park Construction would be responsible for any repair required on the shoulder. I will be attending the special meeting of the Planning Commission on October 3, 1988 to clarify any questions that may arise on the above mentioned subject or answer Any other questions you may have. Sincerely, PARK CONSTRUCTION COMPANY John Gannon, P.E. Project Manager JG:gp cc: Howard Eisinger AN EOUAC OPPO RTUNITV EMPLUVFR Otto G Borteuroo. PE Kenn A Gordon. PE Thomas W Melton. PE Chants •Bones Ai t rod poor" W Rosene. PE Josepn C Andentt, /E RKnard w Foster. PE Donald C Burgardt. PE W(hael C LyrKn. ►E Leo M Paweiskv lames R Malartd, PE Harlan M Olurn L.7 Rosene Anderiik & Bradford A Lemberg. PE RKhard E Turner. PE Jam" C Olson. PE Glenn R coot. PE Jerry A Bawoon. PE Mart A Hanson. PE Ted K Field PE m MK heel t Rautann. PE Kenneth P Anderson, PE Susan AAEbeni� Keith A Bah.nann, PE Mart A Se,p Mark R Ross. ►E Robe t C Russet. A I A ' Associates Inor" . E. "s. PE Naft" G. SdkoWnt. ►E Robert R Pfefletil, PE Dead O LCStota. /E Thoma: E Angus. PE Howard A Sanford. ►E , s,tatvtn L Spvna ►E Engineers a Architects August 31, 1988 !J City of Otono Box 66 ' Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Attn: Me. Jeanne Mabusth Re: File No. 139-1310 Howard Eisinger Dear Jeanne, The proposed filling on the Howard Eisinger property at 3245 Way?ata Boulevard will be completed over a one year time period. Restoration of the site is a concern because of the length of time over which the work will be done. We would recommend that unfinished side slopes be graded and seeded periodi- cally during the course of the project. The top of the fill area should be graded and seeded when the finish elevation is reached. The seeding should be completed c,: or about the 15th day of the month of May, June, September, October and November. if any filling work has been done. This :ill help prevent erosion of she site during the construction operations. If you have any questions, please contact this office. Yours very truly, RONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK 6 ASSOCIATES, INC. Gle R. Cook GRC:li 24 233S West Highway 36 a St. Paul, Minnesota SS113 • 612 636-4600 k ZONING FILE NO. 1310 CITY OF ORONO NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 473-7357 Date of Notice: 8/23/88 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- TO: Howard Eisinger COPIES TO: Park Construction 3245 Wayzata Boulevard Attn: John Gannon Long Lake, MN 55356 7900 Beach Street NE Minneapolis, MN 55432 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- TYPE OF APPT.TCATION: Renewal Conditional Use Permit --------------------------------------------------------------------------- DATE OF MEETING: 8/15/88 VOTE: 5 For 1 Against Planning Co=aission Recossaendation Tabled for reasons noted below. NOTES AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS: Prior to reviewing once again, the questions raised by the Planning Commission in their preliminary review of your application, staff has contacted the City Engineer and has requested that he provide a report with a recommendation for guidelines to staff concerning the issue of the duration of time disturbed earth should be allowed to remain on the site. Mr. Cook has just briefly suggested that once filling has begun, specific time periods can be established whereby if earth remains in an undisturbed condition from one ir.spec.tion period to another, that at the second inspection period, the earth be required to be graded and seeded at t'-e appropriate elevations. You will be sent a copy as soon as we are in receipt of his comments. As for the Planning Commission's concerns, it would be helpful i. Mr. Gannon could respond to certain concerns raised by the Planning Commission, as follows: 1. Cite an example of the duration of time it would take to fill 100,000 cubic yards if , steady suprly of fill was available, and then contrast another example where filling could go over a 6 month period of time. 2. Confirm the carrying capacity of a tandum truck and establish the number of trips the tandum vehicles would require for the 100,000 cubic yards of fill. 3. Review the traffic safety procedures when entering sights, especially a limited area like the Highway 12 area where Mr. Eisinger's property is located: A) Can a temporary passing lane be provided? B) Can temporary filling signaqe be provide,] to alert on-cominq traffic? C) Does the State Highway Department allow such signaqe and temporary turning lanes if needed? rj; Point of information: who repairs road sections when private construction vehicles damrge the roadbed? Domes the State Highway Department provide such prctection to the .. community? 5395190 Cite of ORO�+�O RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO 2192 A RESOLUTION GRANTING A CONDTIONAL USE PERMIT PER MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.03, SUBDIVISIONS 19 i 20 FILE i1103 WHEREAS, Howard F. Eisinger (hereinafter "the applicant") is the owner of properties located at 3245 Wayzata Boulevard within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as follows: ,P.I.D. 32-18-23 14 0002) Section 32, Township 118, Range 23, Commencing at a point in the East line of Government. Lot 1 distance 393.24 feet South along said line from the South line of State Highway No. 12 thence at right angles West from said East line 418 feet thence at right angles North 393.02 feet to South line of highway thence West along said highway line to West line of said Lot 1 thence South along -laid West line to Northerly line of Great Northern Railroad rig,it-of-way thence Southeasterly along said right-of-way line to East line of Lot 1 thence North to beginning. WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City of Orono for a Corditional Use Permit to permit filling of 100,000 cubic yards of clear, fill over a former dump site of approximately 12 acres in area per Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.03, Subdivision 19 S 20. Fill stall be placed such that the average height of fill is maintained at five feet. Filling shall take place 35 feet in from the adjacent wet lends at the 972 elevation. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of V-ono, Minnesof .i FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File i1103. 2. The property is located in the RR-113, Rural Residential :zoning District. 3. On April 20, 1987, the Orono Planning Comission reviewed the application as proposed and recommended unanimous approval of the application as amended based on the following findings: N N��IrI----------•- Ii1 io�o ;occ 94C Is, IriG acausE GP.nor ql 1 - �' •• 17p I � � 1 •1' City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. _'1-,_, The Department of Natural Resources, Minnesota Pollution trol Agency, Hennepin County Department of Environment and Energy, Hennepin Conservat•on District, and Minnehaha Creek watershed District find that the application as proposed will have no negative impact on the surrounding wetlands or intersecting drainageway. w b) The adjacent property owners have been advised of the applicant's proposal and none have voiced objectio,► or submitted written opposition to the City. c) The application as modified by the Planning Commission will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties o= improvements in the vicinity. 4. Braun Engineering in a letter dated May 28, 1987 has opined as follows regarding the placement of approximately 100,000 cubic yard, of fill over a former dump site: "... it is our opinion that the addition of 5 feet of fill over the area presents a very slight risk of enbankment failure." 5. 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 #-he proposed use on the health, safety and welfare of the community. 6. The City Council finds that granting a Conditional Use Permit to allow the filling of 100,000 cubic yards of clean fill within the area as defined by the Orono staf f wi 1 1 not be det rimenta 1 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 values 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 findings noted above, the Orono City Council hereby grants a Conditional Use Permit. per Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.03, Subdivisions 19 6 20 to permit the placing of 100,000 cubic yards o. fill within an area approved by the Orono staff, subject to the following conditions: Page 2 of 5 City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 2192 1. Prior to the hauling of fill to the site the applicant or applicant's agent must submit the following: a) Six cross sections of existing topography. b) Final grading and Erosion Control plan designating the following: 1) Side slopes 5:1. 2) One percent slope to be maintained within inner fill area. 3) Silt fence installed 30 to 35 feet from wetland at 972 elevation -- no :.and alterations allowed within 26 feet of wetland. 4) Average height of fill to be maintained at 5 feet. 5) Monitoring plates to be installed as-equired by the City Engineer. c) Executed Developer's Agreement and appropriate security to insure final grading and seeding if fill project is not completed. Letter of Credit must be written for 150 percent of the estin,ated cost of the improvement. 2. Fill shall not exceed allowed amount of 100,000 cubic yards. Side slopes shall be seeded as soon as 5:1 slope ratio has been realized. 3. Park Constriction shall be responsible for advising t e City of monthly schedule of hauling activities so that staff can arrange an approximate inspection schedule for each month. Prior to hauling any fill to the site Park. Construction must arrange for a preconstruction meeting with the Orono at'#ff to review ail final submittals and tentative hauling schedule. 4. Park Construction shall cease all hauling to the site upon evidence of shearing and/or other signs of instability created Ly filling over the former dump sit#*. Applicant shall not proceed with hauling until the City Engineer has had adequate time to review the evidence and submit a written report to the Council for their review and action. If Council determines that it is in the public interest to cease all hrulinq to the site, this conditional use permitshall be to urinated immediately and the applicant shall complete the final grading an,i seeding of the entire disturbed area. 5. Authorities granted by this r, solution run with the property net with the owner, but ate permis,ive only and must be completed 11 within one year of the date of Coy nci 1 approval or the special conditions of this revolution wi 1 . expire on that date (June Q, Page 3 of 5 199*7. City of OR ONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO 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 harein, and shall be punigha ble as a misdemeanor. 7. The undersigned owner has read, un 'srstood and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and un behalf of himself, h heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agrees to the recording this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 8th day of June, 1 JarS is . Gr , Mayor 106 d Page 4 of City of ORONO RESOLUTION Of THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 19 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this llth day of June 1 1987- before me a Notary Public within and for said county, personally appeared Howard F. & Ruth n Fisi�nger 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. 7"ApA L NAAS WMMRY PUftX - MINNESOTA HENNEPIN COUNTV MY 001nmr3400n . STATE OF MINNESOTA ) )ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) NOTARY PUBLIC 9/8/92 MY COMMISSION EXPIRES r On this day of , 198 , before me a Notary Public within and for said County, personally appeared known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foreg6inginstrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC MY COMMISSION EXPIRES Page 5 of 5 N. �i.I; Jr L—r., C i:-l.'u'1 4/•j. �3_' 1•aN. _ �� :�t i ,;;i 1„ tea\ .� 1 ' . 1y a;,�..► S. ,% ., ! tIrv, ' / ` OYES MNT E�,f;�jtAl, N -uNCafs , �t`\ � P50RR.aW AW.E& PLAN S ...� I 1 , i K woo 1 I O tJ A - A Rs hr 'ii f >~f►.1 tT .�1, ,QO' 1 RU►1 DATE 08/18/88 HE1NEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM R' PORT 110. P1435401 PROPERTY OWNERS LIST PAGE 3 BATCH 003 38 07-117-23 44 0003 38 07-117-23 44 0004 38 07-117-23 44 0005 PROP ADDR 04005 NORTH SHORE OR 04009 NORTH 5110RE DR 04017 140R Ill SHORE OR 01114ER NAME SUSAN 11 WALKER R J SEGIIER ETAL JOIIN F TIIEODALD ETAL TAXPAYER SUSAN BILGER RICHARD J SEGIIER JOHN F 111EGBAL0 NAME/ADDR 4005 N SNORE DRIVE '4009 NORTH SHORE OR 4017 NORTH SHORE OR MOU11D I14 55364 MOUND 101 55364 MOUND MH 55364 38 08-117-23 33 0032 38 08-117-23 33 0033 38 08-117-23 33 C 34 PROP ADDR OW11ER NAME GALE R LANDBERG GALE R LANDBERG GALE R IANDBERG TAXPAYER GALE R LANOBEWG GALE W LAND' 9G GALE R IANOBERG ►tAN[/ADDR RT 1 BOX 429 RT 1 BOX I RT 1 BOX 429 MOUtID MN 55364 MO11t10 M1 -.,364 MOUND M1 55364 38 08-111-23 33 0035 38 08-117-23 33 0048 38 08-117-23 33 0049 PROP ADDR 03898 NORTH SHORE OR OWNER 11At1E GALE R LANDBERG ROGER GRAIIIIIIIG A WIFE D M ENGLUIID ETAL TAXPAYER GALE R LANDBERG ROGER GRANNING COL i MRS D M ENGLUND NAME/ADDR RT I BOX 429 3698 NORTH SHORE DR 5101 SPRING ROCK CT MOU110 MI 55364 HOUND t01 55364 FAIRFAX VA 22032 38 08-117-23 33 0050 38 08-117-23 33 0053 38 08-117-23 33 0054 PROP ADDR OWNER NAME D M ENGLUND ETAL STATE LAUD DEPT STATE LAND DEPT TAXPAYER COL A MRS D M E11GLU►ID CITY OF ORONO CITY OF OR011O NAME/ADDR 5101 SPRING ROCK COURT PARK PARK FAIRFAX VA 22032 4/13/79 ST DEED 156754 4/13/79 ST DEED 156754 38 08-117-23 33 0067 38 08-117-23 33 0068 38 08-117-23 33 0069 PROP ADDR 03950 NORTH SHORE DR 03970 NORTH SHORE DR 03980 NORTH SHORE OR OWNER NAME JANICE M BLIWAS SAtIDRA J MARTIN ADM OF VETERANS AFFAIRS TAXPAYER JANICE M BLIWAS SANDRA J MARTIN R:CHAPD A1DERSON NAME/ADDR 39SO 1O SHORE DR 3970 110RTH SHORE OR 3980 NOPIN SHORE DR MOUND MI 55364 tI0Ut10 M11 55364 MOUND MI 55364 38 08-117-23 33 0071 38 08-117-23 33 0080 38 17-117-23 22 0001 PROP ADDR 01570 NORTH ARM DR 03860 NORTH SHORE DR 03845 NORTH SHORE OR Ol1NER NAME ALICE V NELSON DANIEL J OIILAND LOREN R FRITZ ETAL TAXPAYER GLORIA J HAGE14 DANIEL J OIILA110 LOREN FRITZ NAIIEiADOR 1570 NORTH ARM OR 3860 NORTH SHORE DR 3845 NORTH SHORE OR 11OLN10 MI 5536 , MOUND MN 55364 MOUND MN 55364 RUN DATE 08/18/88 HFHflEPI1I COUIITY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNERS LIST BATCH 003 38 17-117-23 22 0002 PPOP ADDR OWNER NAME STATE LAND DEPT TAXPAYER THOMAS R A COOKIE J SARENPA HARE/ADDR 1670 SHADYWOOD RD WAYZATA MN 55391 38 17-117-23 22 0007 PROP ADDR 03925 NORTH SHORE DR OWNER NAME L i F CHRISTINE TAXPAYER LYNN R CHRISTINE tIAfIE/AUOR 3925 NORTH SHORE DR MOUt1D MN 55364 38 17-117-23 22 0011 PROP ADDR 01675 CONCORDIA ST OWIIER NAME HELEN K TRAINOR TAXPAYER HELE14 K TRAINOR NAME/ADDR 1675 CONCORDIA ST WAYZATA MH 55391 38 17-117-23 22 0019 PROP ADDR 01745 CONCORDIA ST OWNER NAME ALICE S OSKEY TAXPAYER PAUL J BOZONIE NAME/ADDR 1745 CONCORDIA ST WAYZATA MN 55391 38 17-117-21 22 0022 PROP ADDR 01685 CONCORDIA ST OWNER NAME T L PALM A M A PALM TAXPAYER THOMAS L PALM NAME/ADDR 1685 CONCORDIA ST WAYZATA MN 55391 38 17-117-23 22 0003 03895 14GNT11 SHORE DR DALE F BEROUIST DALE BEPQUIST 3895 NORT11 SHORE OR MOU►ID HN 55364 38 17-117-23 22 0009 03995 NORTH SHORE OR CHARLFS J MACIOSEK H RICHARD ZUCKMAN 1819 DUPONT AVE MPLS M11 55403 38 17-117-23 22 0012 01635 SHADYWOOD RD RALPH E MILLER ETAL RALPH E MILLER 1635 SHADYWOOD RP WAYZATA MN 5 t 38 17-117-23 22 0020 01725 CONCORDIA ST CHARLES W OLSON CHARLES W OLSON 1725 CONCORDIA ST S WAYZATA MN 55391 38 17-117-23 22 0021 01695 CONCORDIA ST DONALO BEIAWSKI ET AL W/L E DAVID J BELANSKI 1695 CONCORDIA ST WAYZATA MN 55391 REPORT IIO. PI435401 PAGE 4 38 17-117-23 22 0006 STATE LAID DEPT LYNN A FAITH CHRISTINE 3925 NORTH SHORE DR HOUND MN 55364 38 17-117-23 22 0010 01635 COIICQRDIA ST HOWARD B L ELAIIIE H JOH►ISON HOWARD B i ELAIIIE It JOIIIISON 1635 CONCORDIA ST WAYZATA MN 55391 38 17-117-23 27 0013 01645 SHADYWOOD RD RALPH HARVEY ETAL RALPH AARVEY 1645 SHADYWOOD RD WAYZATA MN 55391 38 17-117-23 22 0021 01705 CONCORDIA S- JANET JACOBSON SAC"S JANET SACHS 7545 17TH AV SO RICHFIELD t04 55423 38 17-117-23 22 0024 01687 CONCORDIA ST ALEX W BELANSKI ETAL GLEN BENNETT 1687 CONCOPDIA ST WAYZATA MN 55391 38 17-117-23 22 0028 38 11-117-23 22 0029 38 17-117-23 22 0030 HRCn Ab'w 01750 CONCORDIA ST 01755 FAGEP14ESS POINT RD 01740 CONCORDIA ST OWNER NAME PAUL J BOZONIE ETAL JEDCO FINANCIAL CORP A S OSKEY i D L SCHFOER TAXPAYER MR PAUL J BOZONIE PAUL J BOZONIE ALICE S OSKEY Atll: NAME,'ADOR 1750 CONCORDIA STREET 1745 C014CORDIA 5T DIANNE L SCHROER WAYZATA MN 55391 WAYZATA hN 55391 1740 CONCORDIA ST WAYZATA M14 55391 PUN DATE O8/18/88 HE1114EPIIA COUNTY PROPERTY IIIFOPMATION SYSTEM REPORT 140. PI435401 PROPERTY OWNERS LIST PAGE 5 BATLI► 003 38 17-117-23 22 0031 18 17-117-23 22 0032 38 17-117-23 22 0034 PROP ADDR 01695 C014C0RDIA ST 01680 COIICURDIA ST 01735 FAGERNESS P0I14T RD OWNER NAME DAVID BELAIJSKI ET AL DAVID BELAIJSKI ET AL TONEY J WILLIAMS A WIFE TAXPAYER DAVID BELAIJSKI DAVID BELAWSKI T0NEY AL CHERYL WILLIAMS NAME/ADDR PO BOX 154 PO BOX 154 1735 FAGERNESS POINT RD CRYSTAL BAY M 55323 CRYSTAL BAY MH 55323 WAYZATA MIA 55391 38 17-117-23 22 0035 38 17-117-23 22 0037 38 17-117-23 22 0039 PROP ADDR O1729 FAGER14ISS POINT RD 03905 NORTH SHORE OR CNNER NAME D A P RADEMACHER JULIA F OIHISWORTH DALE F BERQUIST TAXPAYER DONALD A PATTI RADEMACHER WILLIAM JOHN DUNNE DALE F BERQUIST NAME/ADDR 1729 FAGERIESS PT RD 14057 TOLEDO CT 3895 1l0RTH SHORE OR WAYZATA M1 55391 SAVAGE Mll 55378 MOUND MA 55364 {l(Y` • l PROP ADDR OIRIER NAME TAXPAYER TOTAL BATCH 003 00042 1lAl1E/ADOP U C', •,v I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AIO TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATI0N AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE OH THE RECORDS OF THE ►1E101EPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PROP RTT TAXATION, TO THE BEST OF MY K11OWLEDGE A1ID BELIEF. 00ll DATE BY �l _.. bLL�7P ''t • 283.28 fist••• -- it �y � • \t . \A ,7� . •279.71 Aint 1097.05 V. west of the west line of SHADYWOOD Z TRACT C J:iEGALS fiat part of Government Lot 2, Section 17, Township 117, Range 23, described 1►e intersection of the South line of the North 148.5 feet of said Government drawn parallel with and 777.85 feet West, measured at right angles, from the dy Wood"; thence Southerly along said parallel line 280.61 feet to the South 428.S feet of said Government Lot 2; thence West along the South line of the of said Government Lot 2 a distance of 300.65 feet to a point thereon 1077.85 ed at right angles, from the West line of "Shady Wood"; thence Northwesterly South line of the North 368.5 feet of said Government Lot 2, distant 1097.85 ed at right angles, from the West line of "Shady Wood"; thence West along the North 368.5 feet of said Government Lot 2, to the shore of Lake Minnetonka; •rly along said shore to its intersection with the South line of the North d Government Lot 2; thence East along the last mentioned South line to the 1q. het part of Government Lot 2, Section 17, Township 117, Range 23, described point on the Southerly line of the North 428.5 feet of said Government Lot 2, 'eat West, "soured at right angles, from the west line of "Shady Wood"; thence r txiint on the South line of the North 368.5 feet of said Government Lot 2, - _ _._ Grovel Fbi,►t 1077.65 P. west of — fhe west line of SHADVWooD u Q 0 W IW Z ~ 0 V TRAC1 LAZABUS APTD KELLEY ATTORNEYS AT LAW TITUS BUILDING - SUITE 405 6550 YORK AVENUE SOUTH MINNEAPOLIS. MINNESOTA 55435 BARRY LAZARUS (612) 920-2300 THOMAS R KELLEY September 28, 1988 Mr. Charles Kelly Chairman, Planning Commission City of Orono P. O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Re: Howard Johnson -- Helen Trainor Proposed Subdivision Our File No. 4121-04 Dear Mr. Kelly: This office represents Helen K. Trainor, 1675 Concordia Street, Orono, Minnesota. The purpose of this letter is to advise you that Mrs. Trainor supports the proposed subdivision applied for by Howard Johnson to be heard by the Orono Planning Commission on October 3, 1988. In his application, Mr. Johnson is requesting approval of a subdivision and a transfer to Mrs. Trainor of the property denominated as Tract B on the proposed registered land survey. This Tract B is intended to encompass the encroachment of Mrs. Trainor's house onto Mr. Johnson's property that has existed since the house was built in 1951. Our understanding is that the Planning Commission previously failed to approve this proposal because the transfer to Mrs. Trainor did not result in meeting the City's 10-foot sideyard set back requirement. Since Mrs. Trainor's house has existed for 37 years with a zero sideyard set back, she is willing to accept either the 10-foot setback requested by the Planning Commission or the 5-foot setback suggested by Mr. Johnson. Mrs. Trainor's main concern is to have the problem settled once and for all and eliminate the encroachment that has existed for all these years. IRK: LLF cc: Mrs. Helen K. Trainor Mr. Neil J. Trainor Mr. William Wangensteen very truly yours, LAZ D KELLEY r� //-�� i Thomas R. Kelley /a -Opel VAOIA ;ALS • , _... 283.28 E46t... _ I A�cR�4N►`E M t TRAC1 "AVE tO' SCT S AMA of SHADIM & ss �SU&GF�rrD By 9rQF-V�' A S ,4 OFrttr � t-vg cot f DE�Zp7 !�N flint 1097 06 V. west of the west line of SHADY W000 TRACT C East— — •" r part of Government Lot 2, Section 17, Township 117, Range 23, described intersection of the South line of the North 148.5 feet of said Government .4n parallel witti e•d 777.85 feet West, measured at right angles, from the flood"; thence Southet!v alonq.said parallel line 280.61 feet to the South 3.S feet of said GovernmenL Lot 2; thence West along the South line of the -iaid Government Lot 2 a distance of 300.65 feet to a point thereon 1077.85 it right angles, from the West line of "Shady Wood"; thence Northwesterly DI i• �47 Z J G 6rovsl .�yel Poi^+ 1077. t5 P, wes+ the west line of SNAOYWOOD I K Q ~ 0 s W WWTI ICr Z TO: Mayor Grabek & Orono Council Members City Administrator Bernhardson FROM: Michael P. Gaffron, Planning & Zoning Administrator / DATE: October 19, 1988 SUBJECT: #1330 Fullerton Properties Inc., 880 Townline Road - Subdivision For 7 New Building Sites - Preliminary Plat Approval - Resolution Zoning District - RR-lA, 5 acre minimd'm LIST OF BXHIBITS: Exhibit A - Planning Commission Action Notice Dated 10/19/88 Exhibit B - Revised Site Plan Exhibit C - Memo & Exhibits of 10/14/88 Exhibit D - Proposed Preliminary Plat Approval Resolution DISCUSSION - Please review the memos of September 13, 1988 and October 14, 1988. Applicant's are proposing a 7-lot rural subdivision with each lot containing 5 acres or more in area. Each exceeds the required 2 acres contiguous dry buildable land. Lots 2, 4, and 5 require variances to the defined width at. the 100' front setback line. Painters Creek runs through this property, and the applicants have been granteo approval by the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District for 2 privats driveway crossings of the creek. The Watershed District maintains a dam nat straddles the boundary between proposed Lots 2 and 3, and the Distr ' :t has an access easement for maintance of that dam. This easement will 1,.,e no effect on buildability of the property. The dam controls the flow through Painters Creek to a degree that peak flows downstream from the dam are reducer' significantly enough to allow use of 24" arch culverts for the driveway crossings. Regarding the required drainageeasement ever that creek, the City Li.gineer has recommended that a 50' drainage easement centered on the creek be dedicated on the plat. The wetland within Lots 2 and 3 will be subject to a conservation and flowage easement. This is intended to be a private road with a cul-de-sac. Length of the road is 1000'. The road access lines up directly across Townline Road from another road access point in Independence. Sight distance is not a problem. Paved width of the road has been proposed at 24' (urban section). The City Engineer has recommended and Planning Commission has similarly recommended that for this 7-lot division, minimum paved width must be 28'. City Engineer and staff have looked at current and potential development of the surrounding properties and the location of the existing wetlands, and halve recommended that dedication of additional roadway is not necessary since no future connecting roads are anticipated to adjacent properties. Zoning File #1330 October 19, 1988 Page 2 of 2 The applicant proposes to construct an island at the private road entrance to Towi,.Line Road. This would certainly be a problem if this was intended to be a public road. However, because it is a private road and will be privately maintained, Council could easily approve such a configuration with the stipulation that if this ever becomes s public road, the City would have the right to remove the island. This stipulation would be a condition of the approval resolution (and appears in the attached resolution). Applicant prop-ses no berms or unusual grading on this property. He does plan to maintain the vegetative screen along Townline Road. Staff has carefully reviewed the soils and feasibility of building sites and drainfiel.d sites on each lot, and finds that each lot contains numerous suitable sites for houses and drainfields. Applicant had submitted 3 choices for a name for this private road, each incorporating the name "Painters". Applicant has been advised that there are too many other "Painters" street names in the area and that additional road name choices or suggestions not incorporating "Painters" should be submitted. This subdivision will be subject to the standard park fees, dedication on the plat of standard drainage and utility easements, and dedication of 33' of City right-of-way for Townline Road. STAFF RECOMMENDATION - Staff recommends approval per the recommendation of the Planning Commission. A preliminary plat approval resolution incorporating findings, conditions, and procedures, is attached for Council review. A RESOLUTION GRANTING PRELIMINARY APPROVAL FOR A PLAT AT 880 TOWNLINE ROAD APPLICATION NO. 1330 WHEREAS, Fullerton Properties, inc. on August 24, 1988 f i led a formal subdivision application with the City of Orono for approval of a seven lot residential plat of property legally described as follows: The Southwest quarter of the Southwest quarter of Section 30, Township 118 North, Range 23 West of the 5th principal meridian (Hennepir. County, Minnesota) (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, after due published and mailed notice in accordance with Minnesota Statutes 462.358 et. seq. and the City of Orono Zoning and Platting Codes, the Orono Planning Commission held a public hearing on September 19, 1988, and October 17, 1988, at which time all persons desiring to be heard concerning this application were given the opportunity to speak thereon; and WHBRB.%S, at their regular meeting held on October 24, 1988, the Orono City Council considered the subdivision application of Fullerton Properties, Inc., 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 lot area of which a minimum of 2 acres must be contiguous dry buildable land within each newly created lot. 2. The property contains a total of approximately 40.1 acres, of which 38.4 acres is considered dry buildable. 3. The proposed plat contains 7 lots each exceeding the 5 acre minimum lot area requirement. 4. The proposed Lots 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 require a variance because they do not have frontage on a public roadway. 5. All 7 lots are proposed to front on and access to a private road. Lots 2, 4, and 5 require a variance because they do not contain the required 300' lot width as measured at the 100' front setback line. 6. The private road intended to serve the plat shall be constructed subject to the conditions of a Developer's Ac,reement to be executed between the City and the developer. Standards for this road are as follows: Faqe : of 5 ZONING FILE NO. #1330 CITY OF ORONO NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 473-7357 Date of Notice: 10/19/88 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- TO: Fullerton Properties Inc. COPIES TO: Coffin & Gronberg Inc. 608 Second Ave S, Suite 1100 P.O. 482 Minneapolis, MN 55402 Long Lake, MN 55356 Attn: Joe Franks Attn: Mark Gronberg --------------------------------------------------------------------------- TYPE OF APPLICATION: Subdivision --------------------------------------------------------------------------- DATE OF MEETING: 10/17/88 VOTE: 7 For 0 Against Planning Commission recommends the following: Approval subject to conditions noted below NOTES AND SPRCIAL CONDITIONS: ReconLm,ndation for preliminary plat approval subject to the following conditions: 1. Lot width variances are granted for Lots 2, 4 and 5. 2. Private road will be subject to normal private ownership and maintenance covenants and road and utility easements. 3. Access for Lots 3 and 4 shall be allowed separate creek crossing points, subject to any permits that may be required by the watershed D i st r i ct and the Department of Natural Re,— .rces. 4. Dedication on the plat of Conservation & Flowage Easements for the wetland occuring in Lots 2 and 3 and a Drainage Easement of undetermined width along the length of Painters Creek in Lots 2, 3, 4, and 5 (City Engineer has recommended an easement width of 50' for Painters Creek). 5. Dedication on the plat of standard Drainage & Utility Easements 10' along perimeter and roadway lot lines and 5' either side of interior lot lines. 6. Dedication on the plat of 33' of City right-of-way for Townline Road. 7. Payment of Park Fees of $100.00 per lot per the current fee schedule. 8. Subject to additional requirements regarding drainage easements or structires as may ;;e required by the City Engineer and the Watersho District. 9. Prior to Council apprcva1, applicant shall provide specifications for any signs, monuments or any unusual grading that may be proposed. Applicant's next scheduled meeting is confirmed as: City Council Monday, October 24, 1988; meeting starts at 7:00 p.m. If you desire certified copies of the official Planning Commissic' minutes, they are available from the City Recorder after review an approval by the Planning Commission. Right-of-way minimum width! 50, Minimum paved width : 28' ;Urban Section) Base: 9" Clasps 5 100% crushed Suiface: 3" 2341 bituminous surface Cui-de-sac: 50' min. right-of-way radius, 40' paved radi,is min. In areas where a rura 1 section may be used fc.r short distances, a 3' gravel shoulder shall be provided in addition to the 28' paved width. 7. It is intended that the private road be privately owned and maintained. The City will require that the neveloper execute the Standard Road s Utility Easement over the private road, and shall execute the Standard Declaration of Private Road Easement and Declaration for Maintenance of Same. 8. The wetland occuring within the boundaries or Lots 2, and 3 shall be subject to a Conservation & Flowage Easement to be granted by the developer. A drainage easement for Pain`ers Creek shall be dedicated on the plat. 9. Right-of-way of 33' shal 1 bz� dedicated on the plat for Townline Road. 1.0. All -7 Lots have 1=een demonstrated to contain suitable sues for construction o singlQ family residences and the soil types within each lot have teen prelLminarily investigated and are found to contain numerous potentially feasible drainfield sites 'o serve the proposed single family residences. Each lot exceeds acres and therefore the lots have not been required to ^omplete forTal soi'. testing fur drainfield sites during the subdivision process. 11. Single family residences can be constructed on Lots 1 thru 7 without the need for further variances. NOW, THRRBFORN BB IT RHSOLVED, 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 for Fullerton Properties, Inc., at 880 Townline Road per the survey attached as Exhibit 4 hereto, by Coffin and Gronherg Inc. dated 8/16/88, revised 9/14/88, revised 10112/88, subject tc the following c,.nditions: 1. A variance will be granted for Lots 2 thru 6 which do not front. on a public roadway as required. 2. A variance wi 1 1 be granted to the 300' lot width standards for Lots 2, 4 and S. 3. All 7 lots shall access to the private road. Page 2 of S 4. The private road shall. be constructed to City private road requirements, subject to a Developer's Agreement to be executed between the City and the developer. Private road construction can begin as soon as the engineering plans for the road have been formally approved by the City and the Developer's Agreement has been executed. 5. Zhe private road shall be privately owned and maintained per the appropriate access easement/maintenance documents to be executed by the developer. 6. The Standard Road & Utility Easement and Private Road Maintenance Covenants shall be filed with the plat. 7. The "island" within the private roadway near the entrance to Townline Road does not meet public road standards. If at some future date this private road becomes a public road, the City reserves the right to have this island removed. 8. Private driveway crossings of the Painters Creek drainageway shall be allowed for each of Lots 3 and 4, subject to any permit approval the may be required by the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. 9. A Co.servation & Flowage Easement document shall be executed for the wetlands occuring on Lots 2 and 3, and this easement shall be shown on the plat drawing as a drainage easement. A 50' drainage easement centered on the center line of Painters Creek shall similarly be dedicated on the plat drawings. 10. Standard Drainage & Utility Easements shall be shown on the plat along lot lines. 11. Payment of standard Park Fees of Si00.00 for each of Lots 1 thru 7; Total = $700.00. 12. No building permits will be issued until the private road base work has been completed and been approved by the City. The following list of final submittals must be submitted to the "oning Administrator two weeks prior to the regularly scheduled Council meeting on the second and fourth Mondays of the month: 1. RECORD PLAT drawings in the form of two (2) mylar copies and one (1) copy reduced to 1"=200' scale. Drawing to include: a) Lot lines platted per preliminary survey by Coffin & Gronberg Inc. attached as Exhibit A hereto. Page 3 of 5 b) Dedication of "Drainage & Utility Easements" 10' wide along all perimeter property lines and 5' each side of internal property lines. 1. c) Dedication of a Drainage Easement 50' in width, centered along the center of Painter Creek. d) Designation and dedication of the wetlands in Lots 2 and 3 as Drainage Easements on the plat. e) Dedication on the plat of 33' of right-of-way for Townline Road. 2. LEGAL DOCUME14TS 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) Signed and executed Flowage & Conservatir ?ments: Blank area requiring description may .`.illed out as follows "Over the Drainage Easements as shown nn the plat of Painter's Woods". d) Signed and executed Developer's Agreement end letter of credit for construction of the private road. e) Signed and executed Road & Utilities Easement over the private road outlot. f) Signed and executed "Declaration of Private Road Easement and Decle-ation for Maintenance of Same". g) Revised "Apr ication for Private Road Name" conraininq additional name choices. 3. FEES TO BE PAID: Total Due 51,000.00. a. Park dedication fee per cutrent schedule: 7 new residential lots at,- acre density = $10(-,.00 :er 'ct Total = $700.00 b) Final plat fee - `150."J. c? Legal review and f i 1 ing fs of 515v.00. Page 4 of 5 Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held this 24th day of October, 1988. 1. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk James R. Grabek, Mayor Page 5 of 5 CITY OF ORONO Control No. A. The Subject of this request is: I I T @ [R 0 �/ L5 v �—`1 an existing private roadway. a proposed public roadway which is to be condition of pending subdivision approval B. Owner(s) of the subdivision C. The above owners) hereby request -that this Roadway be known by the following name: 1 Choice No. 1 �,Q/ �!%�F9,5- Choice No. 2 �tQl/✓��' ,(�/� ✓< Choice No. 3 �iQii✓��25 ��.��tiC (List three choices in order of preference. The City Council —i11 approve a name provided no conflict exists with existing names or naming policy. If all names have a conflict, you will be asked to make new choices. The approved name will be used for all mailing address and official identification purposes.) D. The above owner(s) hereby request the City of Orono to install the following standard street and traffic signs and said owner(s) hereby agree to reimburse the City for all costs of said installation. (Such signing may be required as part of a seo_arate Developer's Ar iment and/or subdivision request.) _X standard city street name sign(s) - numbez required A— V standard "STOP" sigr(s) - number required The above owner(s) do hereby acknowledge the (future) existence of said public road, and that the City of Orono has no obligation to maintain or service said roadway until that roadway has been approved by the City of Orono as meeting all public road standards specifically the completion of the paving. Signature(s) of owne (s): ,e AE s ID I AZf 1 Date Date Date Date To: Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson Fron: Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator Date: October 14, 1988 Subject: #1330 Fullerton Properties, Inc., 880 Townline Road - Class III Preliminary Subdivision - Second Review Note - This item was tabled at your 9/19/88 meeting subject to applicant providing additional information regarding soil types and potential building sites on each lot. List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Planning Commission Action Notice 9/22/88 Exhibit 3 - Memo & Exhibits of 9/13/88 Exhibit C - Soils Information From Applicant's Engineer Exhibit D - Revised Site Plan Exhibit E - Road Name Request Discussion - At your September 19th meeting, Planning Commission requested additional information for this project to verify that each lot would contain suitable building sites and septic system sites. The applicant has provided the requested information. Please review the attached revised site plan. The locations of possible drainfield areas are shown for each lot and locations of soil borings have been noted where the soils make-up was somewhat questionable. As was expected, soil borinqs indicated that the extent of the wetter Hamel type soils was not as great as shown on the soil survey, and those Hamel soils occur mostly in the drainage swales. Each lot would appear to have any number of feasible house sites, and there appears to be ample area on each lot that would be suitable for primary and multiple alternate drain - field sites. Having reviewed the soils data and having walker' `he site with the applicant's engineer, staff finds that the subdivision roposed will provide excellent building lots. Note that the dividing line between Lots 3 and 4 has been revised slightly so that Lot 3 contains the required 5.00 acres of dry buildable land. Zoning File #1330 October 14, 1988 Page 2 of 3 Staff has revised its recommendation regarding access driveway to Lots 3 and 4. Staff recommends approval of separate driveways and separate creek crossings for each of Lots 3 and 4 per the Watershed District approval. In discussions with the applicant, there is no plan to do any unusual site grading nor to create any berms along Townline Road. The applicant does wish to request approval for the center island within the entry area of this private road, and notes that it would be acceptable for the City to stipulate if the City ever takes over maintenance of this road, the center island could be removed. Staff has arced that applicant discuss the maintenance ramifications of this center island with the Public Works Director. Three road name options have been presented by the applicant. Staff would note that in the 1985 Hudson Map Directory, street names Painter Road, Painter Drive and Painter Circle are already used, and refer to streets less than 3 miles from the Fullerton property, in Minnetrista. Since both locations are served by Maple Plain Fire Department, the use of Painter in the new road name is not advisable. Applicant should submit additional choices. Applicant has been advised that the City will definitely require the 28' paved .road, urban sec ion, per the City Engineer's recommendation. In addition, ditch grading along Townline Road, as noted by the City Engineer, will be required. Staff Reconsendation - Staff would recommend preliminary plat approval subject to the following conditions: 1. Lot width variances are granted for Lots 2, 4, and 5. 2. Private road will be subject to the normal private ownership and maintenance covenants, and underlying road and utilities easements. 3. Access for Lots 3 and 4 shall be allowed separate creek crossing points, subject to any permits which may be required by the Watershed District and the Department of Natural Resources. 2 Zoning File #1330 October 14, 1988 Page 3 of 3 4. Dedication on the plat of Conservation & Flowage Easements on the plat for Lots 2 and 3, and a Drainage Easement of yet to be determined width along the length of Painter's Creek in Lots 2, 3, 4, and 5. (Staff will ask City Engineer to recommend an easement width.) 5. Dedication on the nlat of standard drainage and utility easements 10' along perimeter and roadway lot lines and 5' either side of interior lot lines. 6. Dedication on the plat of 33' of City right-of-way for Townline Road. 7. Payment of Park Fees of $100 per lot per the current fee schedule. 8. Subject to additional requirements regarding drainage easements or structures as may be required by the City Engineer and M.C.W.D. 9. Prior to Council preliminary plat review, applicant shall provide specifications for any signage, monuments, or unusual grading that may be propcsed. C , f0 - 17 -52, kcr-.f+PPR"yL Pam- A- Jvg I To: Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson From: Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator Date: September 13, 1988 Subject: #1330 Fullerton Properties-, Inc., 880 Townline Road - Class III Preliminary Subdivision - Public Hearing Application - A 7 lot residential subdivision with private road. Zoning District - RR-lA, Rural Residential, Unsewered, 5-Acre Minimum List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Application Exhibit B - Plat Map Exhibit C - Property Owners List Exhibit D - Preliminary Plet Survey Exhibit E - Air Photo Exhibit F - Soil Survey Mai.. Overlay Exhibit G - Soil Association Diagram Exhibit H - Portions of Pioposed Road Plan Exhibit I - Code Section 11.33, Subdivision 4, Regarding Required Road Width Exhibit J - Staff Diagram Indicating Slopes Exceeding 68 Pertinent Facts - A) Subdivision Specifications: I. Seven lots are proposed; each contains 5.0 acres or more in area. 2. Each lot has 2.0 acres or more of contiguous ary buildable land. 3. Lots requiring width variance (300 feet required): Defined Width Lot N at Setback Line Variance 2 285' 15' 4 175' 125' 5 1S0' 1S0' Zoning File #1330 September 13, 198P Page 2 of 5 4. Road length proposed is 1,000'; proposal is for a 50' outlot with 100' cul-de-sac; paved road section is proposed as urban (with curbs rather than shoulders), 24' paved width is proposed (note: Code Section 11.33, Subdivision 4 (F) requires 24' paved width for "more than" seven lots being served,- 24' for "3 through 6" lots, but does not define for seven lots. . .) 5. The road access point onto Townline Road is directly across from a private road in Independence; sight distance appears to be adequate and has been approved by the Public Works Director. 6. This will be a private road, subject to the normal ownership; and maintenance covenants. 7. Access for Lots 3 and 4 will require crossing Painter's Creek; staff recommends a single shared creek crossing point adjacent to the cul-de-sac, at the shared lot line. 8. As of this writing, the City Engineer has not commented regarding whether special outlet structures will be required where run-off leaves the cul-de-sac area near the creek. Applicant's surveyor has noted that thev are working with the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District regarding specifics of this application. B) Buildability: 1. Each lot contains at least 1.5 to 2.0 acres with slopes at 68 or flatter. This should allow for development of mound -type septic systems dhich are anticipated to be necessary on most of the lots, due to high water table soils. 2. Soil types on the property, according to the soil survey, include extensive areas mapped as Hamel loam, Kilkenny loam and clay loam, and lesser areas of Lester, Lerda 1, and I.eSeur soils. All but the Hamel are normally considered to be suitable for mound type septic systems, with the Lester often being suitable for trenches. 2,oning File #1330 September 13, 1988 Page 3 of 5 The areas mapped by the Soil Survey as Hamel are likely incorrect, given that by definition Hamel soil normally occurs in flatter depressions between steeper hills, and the soil survey overlay onto the topographical survey shows Hamel in areas of 6% to 16% slopes, not very likely (see Exhibit C, Soil Assuciation Diagram from Soil Survey). 3. Orono Codes do not require septic testing at the time of subdivision for lots exceeding five acres in area unless anasual site conditions are anticipated. This code requirement presumes that it is difficult to determine where houses will be located on a five -acre property, and that most lots containing five dry buildable acres have a very high likelyhood that suitable sites exist on the property. For this currently proposed subdivisi.,ii, staff would recommend that soil borings be completed by the applicant's consultant for Lots 2 and 6, both of which indicate that the f latter areas of the property are mapped as Hamel soils. Staff feels it is appropriate at this time to request this information to determine whether suitable mound sites are feasible on those two lots. Staff will work with applicant's consultant regarding the location and number of borings required. C) Future Road Extensions: Staff and the City Engineer have reviewed the development in the surrounding properties in relation to the need for future road access to the east or south. Staff and the City Engineer concur that, since the neighboring properties are generally developed to the maximum five acre density for this area, under the current zoning standards no future toad connections would be anticipated. D) Easements Required: The City will require dedication on the plat of Conservation and Flowage Easements over the wetlands occurring in Lots 2 and 3, and an Easement of a width yet to be determined along the length of Painter's Creek in Lots 2, 3, 4, and 5. Additionally, the standard 10' perimeter and roadway drainage and utility easements will be required, as well as similar easements 5' in width each side of interior lot lines. Zoning File #1330 September 13, 1988 Page 4 of 5 E) Roadway Dedication: The proposed plat indicates 33' of right-of-way will be dedicated to the City for Townline Road right-of-way. F) Park Fees: The Park Dedication Fee per the cuiient pity Fee Schedule of $100 per 5+ acre lot shall be pai-i with the final eubdi ision application. Diacnasion - This proposed subdivisio. appears to have been well thought out, with each lot appearing to contain suitable areas for construction of single family residences. items for further discussion at this time may include: 1. Does the developer propose any permanent signage or monuments at the entry to the subdivision? 2. Are there any specific grading proposals for berms, etc. that are not shown on the preliminary plat drawings? Two questions staff will address at the meeting after discussions with the City Engineer: 1. with the minimal likelyhood that the City would take this over as a public road in the foreseeable future, is the island in the private road entry a cause for concern? 2. Does the City Engineer have any concerns regarding run-off control at the cul-de-sac area, given that the road is intended to be curbed, hence virtually all run-off will be transported directly to an outlet at the Creek? The Public works Director has indicated this proposal will not create a need for any upgrading of Townline Road. Zoning File #1330 September 13, 1988 Page 5 of 5 Staff Recoa ndation - Staff would recommend preliminary approval subject to the following: ✓ 1. Lot width variances granted for Lots 2, 4 and 5. 2. Private road will be subject to the normal private ownership and maintenance covenants, and underlying road and utility easements. 3. Access for Lots 3 and 4 shall share a single creek crossing point, subject to any permits which may be required by the Watershed District and the DNR. 4. Prior to preliminary plat rc view by the Council, applicant's consultant shall provide boringr confirming acceptable soil types on the property. 5. Dedication on the plat of Conservation and Flowage Easements for the wetland in Lots 2 and 3, and r: Drainage Easement of yet -to -be - determined width along the lengtt of Painter's Creek in Lots 2, 3, 4 and 5. 6. Dedication on the plat of standard Drainage and Utility Easements 10' along perimeter and roadway lot lines and 5' either side of interior lot lines. V 7. Dedication on the plat of 33' of City right-of-way for Townline Road. ✓ S. Payment of Park Fees of $100 per lot per the current fee schedule. 9. Subject to additional requirements regarding drainage easements or structures as may be required by the City Engineer and M.C.W.D. ✓ 10. Prior to Council preliminary plat review, applicant shall provide specifications for any signage, monuments, or unusual grading (berms, etc.) that may be proposed. # eb- 2--�i�� ` r CITY OF ORONO -,SUBDIVISION APPLICATION --------------- -------------------------------------------- t1TY OF GkM PROPERTY LOCATION CE ,tFINAWE MFI Site Address - 11„0,0�'000 - e1 goo. Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) 1J,;1-00000 - 01 Gb�l 1��0.0i Please check one -Property �_ abstract or torrens? �•,+U R 1.907Q0.�: IOC IPT-TAW YOU Attach -legal description to application. 41eWS0, Co01 li'01 TOp: -----------------------------------------------------------;i------------�f` APPLICANT : _ Phone ( home) 4 2-1 T 4,. b Name 't Phone (work)_ Address: k4g - :-^� Avc 10 ,., ��6b City: i w Zip: ------------------- ON (if different than applicant) Phone (home) Name 5 F' Phone (work) _ Address: city: Zip: _ (attach list if more than one --------------------------------------------------------------------------- ZUSTIIG LAND USE Number of Tax Parcels 2 Development Size -qP.q Acres Dry Land /. 7 Acres Wet Land yo, i Acres Total, all parcels ire/w.r�;�-�ea�✓r Present Use (check) Residential; no. of units - x Other ( specify) a�Is�• /fifce 6r••/.r _ Present Zoning District lCe - /A - --------------------------------------------------------------------------- PROPOSAL Divinion for Tax Purpot es - - Lot Line Rearrangement Only no:new building rites) X Subdivision for New Building Cites Number of Building Sites: o Existing Units New Units Total Units Proposed Gross Density: 7 Units per D / Acres Minimum Lot Size: 2/] you ♦Sq Feet Dry Buildable Land Proposed Use: (check) Residential Other (specify) ZONING FILE NO. 1330 CITY OF ORONO NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 473-7357 Date of Notice: 9/22/88 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- TO: Fullp.---n Properties, Inc. COPIES TO: Mark Gronberg 608 &ad Avenue South, i1100 Coffin & Gronberg, Inc. Minneapolis, MN 55402 482 A Tamarack Avenue Attn: Joseph W. Franks Long Lake, MN 55356 TYPE OF APPLICATION: Subdivision ----------------------------------------------------------- DATE OF MEETING: 9/19/88 VOTE: 5 For 0 Against Planning Commission recosssends the following: Tabled for reasons noted below NOTES AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS: Planning Commission requested additional information as follows: 1. Define a proposed suitable building envelope for each site. Staff interprets this as meaning you should show on the survey the location of one or more potential and feasible house locations for each lot. 2. Based on the above, then show that feasible soil types and slopes are available on each property to support septic systems. 3. Provide soil boring:, on at least Lots 2, 3, *, and 5 to verify actual soil types. Recal! that discussions at the September 19th meeting, staff suggested that the 1 survey maps and the topography don't match, and areas shown as Hamel loam may in fact be other more suitable soil types for septic system development. Please have your soils consultant contact Mike Gaffron at 473-7357. 4. Attached, please find the addendum to the staff memo of September 13, 1988 that was transmitted to the Planning Commission at the meeting. Please note the following: A) Although the Planning Commission did not specifically address the issue, Lot 3 should be expanded by 0.1 acres in orl*r that it (and all other lots) contain a minimum of 5.0 acres of dry buildable land. B) Please note the City Engineer's comments in his letter of September 9, 1988, including 28' required paved road width, elimination of entry island, and ditch grading along Tr- line Road. 5. Please show , lans for any entry monuments or berming that may be proposed. Zoning File #13'0 Planning Cc.nmi_ssion Notice of Action September 23, 1989 Page 2 of 2 6. Staff will recommend approval of separate creek crossings for driveways to serve each of Lots 3 and 4, per your Watershed District approval. Applicant's next scheduled meeting is dependent upon receipt of additional information. Deadline for the October 3rd meeting is Wednesday, September 28th or Monday, October loth for the October 17th, 1988 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 Commission minutes, they are available from the City Record-r after review and approval by the Planning Commission. GtJES T t`,c Ev�9Ti o �+/ �,PvPpSED ADD/T/O�/ wig, /o 5.90 7-1y ELF✓*r1C& ,�ol z 7-99 Pi�OPOSEO fI DD/Ti oN S(%(/Tis/ FLE�/ATiO^/ i't/�Di�h'Or�E 9 7 S `4&"Me-55 PT P0A D 7-1Z-88 ,. i%�r /�"-i. Z40"OA5PNAL 1 5H TO MATCH ENiSf/N6 OveQ 5/•I TIG J♦Y6A�/ii✓G 0 IS . AVF FEa.r 2xb ODI2 HAN69R-1 �•.e ' vAIoR �w,vQ,�a 3 o if/ r RfMOrL' Jrvcco rv/ S 500 AI/r41& r„je go /VFW PoRc/J DOOM !'wowauw MArJNT/,✓G J/v TIG P/-'V"'pof 5u9F1aoR Gi.�+E/yrfu I ♦vAicdD 9 yL" F•6.W 5 ys"X(pALL rt y'�S:AI y New s x�o J3T Ib •�o OK JOIST NMIC/! " GRAw�. SPA c!jRywuoO vowV oven _Sol" ti Ica -1,°,c c O,.v vd c4m Fyw _ - REVAP- /"v Fao r,.vl s • ' - EXISTING HOUSE ��— SA" INS UI •o ./eiST /�1F111.— tiEiTtl CODM 7'b" K v •• NfA,pj*z 6♦eovrvo CCi+EL ASP♦vAcT UJ♦!T PPvot c'vn r..v� Y nz."� ,Z "fOAM — 1lr�PEA,r,iv�v occ FO,ta'�it P,ci9cE ys " /?t 8/1♦t T/� Yi►' EvE.er 7iyit �ou�eSE - _ --- - �JPoPasEo �oDir/niv r?J�D✓NOMtr /917s 19W66e�l/E5s Pr RoAv 1� Z-Zxy TYPJ J �rD � Ate cwNoaA - MON-RAY 6 SS- � lb' /D" 9, `w CIA w 1 / Vt - �, r EX/7T/NG DpO� �z�`+-I Av /vim NAvmC D� --n . �,.nll � � IC 0XOCK- h�� 503051 s &(14 - H City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO 1814 TRAwS'Eh EN' -1 2,7. "c0 CE"' Of cr+`u 71 r,• i M180CRECOM A RESOLUTION GRANTING SEP 10 10 A VARIANCE TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE Nr`�M£P�N OOV,ITY MINN. SECTION 10.22, SUBDIVISION 1 i 2 / AND SECTION 10.25, SUBDIVISION 6 (B) •""+ t ` UBD"�I FILE !943'. - WHEREAS, John & Susan Purdy (hereinafter "the applicant") are owners of the property located at 1975 Faqerness Point Road within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as follows: Lot 5, Fagerness, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "property"); and WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City fir variances to Municipal Zoning Code Sections 10.22, Subdivision 1 & 2 and 10.25, Subdivision 6 (B) to permit the construction of additions to the existing house end garage which will increase hardcover in the 75-250' lakeshore setback - -)ne so that the total amount of hardcover on the lot would exceed the amount of hardcover allowed by the Municipal Zoning Code; and which additions will increase the amount of structure in the 0-75' setback zone where no structure is allowed; and which additions will encroach into the average lakeshore setback Zone where no encroachment is allowed; and which garage addition will be located 8.5 feet from the side property line where a 10 foot setback is normally required. Minnesota: NOW, THEREFORE., BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File 0943. The property is located in the LR-lC Single Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District. 3. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this appl ication on July 15, 1985, and recommended approval of the proposed variances based upon the foilowinq findings: A) The hardshirs to the property are the !slopes and con- figuration of the lot, the location of thf. existing struc- tures, and the fart that there is lnke!ahore on two sides of the property. Pnge I of A Y i City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 1814 H) The property contains certain items of hardcover which may be changed so that they become non -hardcover, with a relatively minor effect on the applicAnt's current use of the property. C) The variances, if approved, with certain concurrent removals of hardcover will be approximately equivalent to variances recently granted to the adjacent property to the north. 4. The existing garage is non -conforming in that it is located partially upon the road right-of-way. The existing topography of the Int creates a hardship in relocating this garage to a con- forming location. 5. The proposed addition to the south of the house will create approximately 96 square feet of new structure in the 0-75' set- back zone, of. which 72 square feet is new (not pre-existing) hardcover. This encroachment extends 8' into the 75' setback zone but continues an Axisting house line, and due to topography and the relative locations of the adjacent houses, the en- croachment will have no effect on the lake views of the adjacent property owners. 6. From the :standpoint of drainage, the majority of the proposed new hardcover is located more than 100' from the lakeshore, and most of the resulting additional runoff would have substantial yard area for absorption before reaching the lakesnore. 7. The total existing hardcover in the 0-75' setback zone is 1921 s.f. or 24.3%. The total existing hardcover in the 75-250' setback zone is 1.99 s.f. or 16.91. After all proposed additions and concurrent removal of hardcover, the net increase in overall hardcover on the property is about 275 s.f., with final 0-75' hardcover of 1095 s.f. or 13.91 and final 75-250' hardcover of 2568 s.#. or 29.0%. S. The Ci _y 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. Papa 2 of 6 City of ORONO RESOLUTION Of THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 1814 9. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variance would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the appli- cant; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. CONCLUS'ONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Fused upon the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants variances to the Municipal Zoning Code Sections 10.22, ..^ub- division 1 i 2 and 10.25, Subdivision 6 (8) to permit the consaruCtion of additions to the existing house and garage which will increase hardcover in the 75-250' lakeshore setback zone so that the total amount of hardcover on the lot would exceed the amount of hardcover allowed by the Municipal Zoning Code; and which additions will in- crease the amount of structure in the 0-75' setback zone where no structure is allowed; and which additions will encroach into the average lakeshore setback zone where no encroachment is allowed; and which garage addition will be located 8.5 feet from the side property line where a 10 f)ot setback is normally required, subject to the following conditions: 1. Variances are granted so that the maximum allowable hardcover on this property shall be 3663 square feet total, based on the additions and removals of hardcover as described below: a) East side of house - additional hardcover - 10x24' addition; net +146 s.f. - Deck with hot tub, east ^io:• net - +117 s.f. Step minus existing walk; net - +14 s.f. b) uth side of house - additional hardcover 'x42.5' addition; net - +5'5 s.f. c) Garage addition - 12'x24.1' addition; net - +289 s.f. Total new hardcover addition before concurrent removals - +1141 s.f. d) Concurrent removals of existing hardcover - Ae,"ove patio block and any plastic or other hardcover from kennel arcs - -213 s.f. Paqe J of 6 City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 1914 ve plastic from under rock from trampoline area - -360 s.f. ecemvVe plastic from under- 10'xl6' deck; (staff to confirm deck spacing and ground conditions) - 160 s.f. Remove plastic from under " +end NE house rock edging • - 165 s.f. Total concurrent removal 4 hardcover • -898 s.f. Total net increase in hardcover after additions acid removals • 1141-898 0 243 s.f. 3420 s.f. existing +243 s.f. additional - 3663 s.f. of which 1095 s.f. is in the 0-75' setback zone and 2568 s.f. is in the 75-250' setback zone. The removals of hardcover shall be staged in such a manner so that when each portion of the entire --^leer_ is constructed the appropriate equivalent amount of hard- cover shall be removed concurrently, so that the total hardcover at any given time never exceeds 2163 square feet. 2. A variance is granted to allow the nen-conforming--arage structure to continue, with an addition to the rear of the garage being 8.5 feet cro+t the side lot line rather than the 10' nor- mally required. 3. A variance is rjranted for the addditional encroachment into the avirage lakesh,ire setback and additional structure in the 0- 75' zoos for the :Addition south of the house. 4. The apr-,..ant is place on notice that no other variances are granted with this application, and that future requests for additional hardcover variances above and beyond that granted at this time may not be approved. 5 Authorities granted by this variance run with the property n,t 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 (July 22, 1986). The applicant is placed on notice that if one or more of the 3 specificilly allowed projects are not commenced within the 1 year variance approval period, a renewal variance must be applied for. The granting of the variances under the current application does not grant any vested rights to the property owner after the expiration date, and a future city Council is not legally bound to grant the same variances in the case of a renewal variance. 6. Violation of or nen-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of th,s variance shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. rn,y- 4 of 6 City of OR ONO RESOLUTION Of THE CITY COUNCIL Poo.1814 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 ..hain of title of the property. ted by the Orono City Council on this 22th day of July, 19 wt. �� vN RTM� �. mot'» • r • n, City Cler v PropeYty Own* Mar Z. eu� ftyor 9 P'Iff- '" of +, Pa qe 1 Hardcover Calculations - 1975 Faq#.-ness Point Road NUTS: A.1 numbers refer to c.11eul.-Itions and me;%sutements within the actual lot boundaries. All Values •Asteriskpd are approx1frate and calcuiated by staff Total Area = •16,750 sf Total Area (0-7-3') - •7,900 sf Total Area %75-250') = •4-950 of _- ____-- _________ Total Area Denning Eas'. - 114,04 Total Area- raWegt - 2,711, �f -------_ Traditional Hardcover Calculation Method AI Existincr Hardcover 0-75' Lakeshore der7ks anci stairs 101 + Pock over f i.7s• i c 1 _i1 418 of Ze Shed 52 sf v r Kennel r a r l 1'r,1r,pol1nr array s -.7,60-9 rut'IC_ Csv�t {tear Deck - 160 sf ✓ C,increre Slah 1 % sf Nou';r f I . 2 w a r!sn t_ C, c�+t Rock edetnq irounr! hrI< < A r.lge ` t (excluriinri _7,nhn4%on0r, enrro.ichrnenf ,) Tot.l; -1 24.11� Qou 9` Existinq Nardcovor 75-250' House + 1985' *tL(T700 —Rock Edvinq Around House Front Step and talk+STAi L Garaqe , L, CW �t►or r' j& (excluding Johnson's encroachments) Total P,�90 C) Proposed Additional 75-250' )'a rricover Adcsition minus rxIstinq rock anu walk - 1i6 of roock with hot tub minus exrstznq rock T 14 of 7 of Step minus e�xist0q walk _ Total Net Proposed Add t ionAI Nar8c;over -L277 •[ f _1 -etr--r-- no Piyrnt. Zi •441 of r .r1,499 sf iG8 ` FK0ofN1.,aR�cf rL.,rZ t99s uPb^TV' u3= 210 MAX Final Proposed Hardcov. rprc-ntage z 1,490 + 277 0.1�) r2 1- ---- + 8.850 D) 5-Year P1.i.. Additi- .•J House Addition less ex.st -a, ;ocr 42.5 x 16 - 105 = 575 sf . 5 in 75-250') Garaqe audition 12 x = 2P9 sf 864 sf Final 5-Year Proposed Hardcover 75-?50' r ` 77 Percentage = 1,499_+-277-+_7U--= 2,568 = [2. lll��-J 8,P50 8,F7)0 Final 5-Year Proposed Hardc( ver 0-7` ' _ ��" • ' ' "C =�;: -Hardcover Calculation based on drainage break an a bound&cy A) Existing Hardcover Drain.;q west Shed 52 sf Lakeshore Docks 6 Stairs 418 Pf Total West-Drain,nci Har(ico�•P.- 470 sf West -Draining Hardcover Per,-entagt' 4,70-I17.34 �,710 B) Exist ing 'far !cover Dra i n i n7 East Kenn-1 PAd 213 sf Rock over Plastic (tr.impolire area) 360 sf House &,187 sf Deck 160 sf Slab 17 sf Rock Around House 3P0 sf Sidewalk + Stoop 172 sf Stairs •20 4f Garage •441 sf Total (excluding J )hncon' . encroachm*nts) 2,950 sf Total Ervt Drainin ; Naroicov-r Pt entire 2,950 I21.0:; 14,040 Proposed Net Adrtitiona. Fast Draininc Hardcover - 277 sf Proposed Total East -C '{ardcover Percentagr - 2,950 277 -2�_O% 14,040 C) 5-Yoar Plan Additions House Addition less oxistinq rock bed 42.: r. 16 - Carage Addition 12 x 24. 10: = 575 sf = 289 sf 864 sf rinal 5-Year Proposed Hardcover, Drainage Freak Method = 2,950 • 277 •• 80;4 Q.1I ----------------- L: 14,040 -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Total Maxamum Ilar�iecvr technically allowed within property boundaries - 8,85C sf x = 2,212.5 sf Total Existinq Hardcover 3,420 sf Total Proposed Hmrd-over 3,697 sf Total a -Year Propvs^bd fV.::t' over 4,561 st 6:"_A �r�• - N ��• �. /I rZ0 .. v • googol ter • .... ��. �„� .�� _ r ; Vft !. ISO ` t „' • .s • �Y4 M +� �w we sat o 'UP � ' v X� r v�rr^fl' _ w .00 000 goo G T ... IOO/ 000 N - , IX /� N VwoeA ^, %N i I ' ;K To: Mayor Grabek & Orono Council Members City Administrator Bernhardson From: Michael P. Ga.ffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator Date: October 20, 1988 Subject: 01323 Jon 11. Papas, 3369 Crystal Bay Road - After -the -Fact Variance Application - An after -the -fact variance request for 10'x20' deck on lake side of house. within 0-75' setback zone and encroaching past the average lakeshare setback line. Zoning District - "R-IC List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Planning Commission Action Notice of 10/20/88 Exhibit B - Memo & Exhibits of 10/10/88 Discussion - The applicant is proposing after -the -fact approval for construction of a deck in his front yard, requiring variances for hardcover, lake setback, and average Lakeshore setback. Applicant provided a certificate of survey as requested by the Planning Commission. Construction of the 10'x20' deck was initiated without a building permit and subsequently was stopped by the Building Inspector when it was discovered. Please review the memo and exhibits of October 10, 1988 and the various letters that have been submitted by the applicant explaining his position and reasons for constructing the deck. Planning Commission found no hardships to adequately justify granting after -the -fact variance approval. The initial Planning Commission motion at the October 17th meeting was to approve the variances for the deck as constructed. That motion failed on a vote of 2-5. The second motion was for denial, which passed on a vote of 5-2. t. xff Recommendation - Staff generally concurs with the Planning Commission recommendation for denial, noting that the only potential justification for a deck in this location is that a deck to the rear will have no lake views, and a deck to the side will overlook the neighbor's house and driveway. The Planning Commission briefly congiuered whether the deck would be less of a problem if rail4ngs were omittua, but ultimately voted for denial. Applicant may wish the Council to consider allowing retention of at least a portion of the deck to provide for a front door access. Staff will draft a resolution reflecting Council's action on this application for your next meeting. ZONING FILE NO. 1323 CITY OF ORONO NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 473-7357 Date of Notice: 10/20/88 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- TO: Jon W. Papas COPIES TO: 3369 Crystal Bay Road Wayzata, MN 55391 TYPE OF APPLICATION: Variance 11 ----------------------------------------------------------- DATE OF MEETING: 10/17/88 VOTE: 5 For 2 Against Planning Commission recommends the following: Denial for reasons noted below NOTES AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS: 1. Planning Commission found no hardship presented that adequately justified this after -the -fact variance. 2. Approval of this structure will not enhance the quality of water entering Lake Minnetonka. 3. This application, if it had been before -the -fact, would likely have not been approved since approval would be inconsistent with past City practice in similar situations. Applicant's next scheduled meeting is confirmed as: City Council Monday, October 24, 1988; meeting starts at 7:00 p.m. If you desire certified copies of the official Planning Commission minutes, :hey 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: October 10, 1988 Subject: #1323 Jon W. Papas, 3369 Crystal Bay Road - After -the -Fact Variance - Second Review Application - An after -the -fact variance request for 10'x20' deck on lake side of house. Zoning District - LR-lC List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Notice of Planning Commission Action 9/23/88 Exhibit B - Planning Commission Minutes 9/19/88 Exhibit C - Letter Submitted by Applicant's Representative at Meeting of 9/19/88 Exhibit D - Survey Exhibit E - Memo & Exhibits of 9/14/88 Discussion - This item was tabled at your September 19th meeting pending receipt of a Certificate of Survey for the property. The Certificate of Survey has now been submitted, and includes hardcover calculation results compiled by the survey-r. Note L.iat the deck is totally within the 0-75' setback zone. The surveyor has not omitted the paved portion of Crystal Bay Road from his calculation, however on the survey, staff has indicated the hardcover fiqures omitting Crystal Bay Road from both sides of the calculation. Presuming that a 50 s.f. front step structure pre-existed the deck, original 0-75' hardcover was about 550 s.f. or 20.7%. With the addition of the deck, 0-75' hardcover is about 696 s.f. or 26.3%. Staff would noto- that the staff sketch from the September 14th memo (Exhibit K) shows the relationship of this deck to the average lakeshore setback line. The defined encroachmen*_ past that average ^etback line is about 11'. The edge of the deck is approximately 21' `rom the paved roadway. The hardcover on this 6,900 s.f. property (0.16 acre) in staff's opinion is not unusual for a lot of this size. Note that as you go further east on Crystal Bay Road, there are lots that are e-en smaller than this one. Staff Recommendation - If the Planning Commissi(-^ finds that the applicant's hardships are adequate to support the hardcover and setback variances requested, then a recommen(:ation for approval would be appropriate. ror+ )" is , 1, ,•i�.'.<L n .� M r . r C_ Y �C r� � � M��1ew� 7 �/Ifl" �.,�.... INNM+f• LuhCt Q-A W 3 Ac' ZONINC PILE N'.). 1323 CITY OF ORONO NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 473-7357 Date of Notice: 9/23/88 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- TO: Jon W. Papas COPIES TO: 3369 Crystal Bay Road Wayzata, MN 55391 TYPE OF APPLICATION: 'variance ,. ----------------------------------------------------------- DATE OF METING: 9/19/88 VOTE: 5 Foi 0 Against Planning Commission recommends the following: Tabled for reasons noted below NOTES AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS: Tabled Fending receipt of a Certificate of Survey showing existing and proposed structures on the property. If you have the certified property owners list, please submit that also. At-plicant's next scheduled meeting is dependent upon receipt of additional information. Deadline for the October 3rd meeting is Wednesday, September 28th or Monday, October loth for the October 17, 1988 meeting. In all cases, the application must be continued with the submittal of requested information within 90 days or the City -ill consider the application as formally withdrawn. If the aLplicant 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. MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING SEPTEMBER 19, 1988 ZONING FILE #1321-HAISLET CONTINUED the application, provided that Outlot A be an easment, either privately or publicly dedicated so that when the School District filed the de -ads of conveyance it would automatically trigger the vacation of the easment. He added that the School District would have no problem adhering to the conditions for developing the road as set forth in the Developer's Aqreement. He would like the Developer's Agreement to also,.expire upon the filing of the deeds. Robert Floyd, an interested party, inqu:rt�-i about Liability for the easemer..: should an accident occur in that area? Attorney Leung stated that it would depend upon whether the City dedicated the easement to be private or public. Cohen stated that the Developer's Agreement would indicate that the School District indemnify the City. Chairman Kelley a3ked what would happen to the road should the Ste.-ol District not purchase all four lots in 11 years? Mahusth stated that would need to be addressed in the Developer's Agreement. It was moved by Planning Commission member Johnson, seconded by Planning Commission member Cohen, to recommend approval of #1321, subject to the preparation of a Developer's Agreement by the City Attorney and the School District's Attorney with City Staff input. zoning Administrator Mabusth added that the agreement should be drafted in time for the October 10, 1988 City Council Meet-ng. Kelley clarified that the motion involved four lots with the outlot being an easement for a period of 11 years. The Developer's Agreement would address the specifics of indemnification and development. Attorney Leung added that the road would be vacated upon the showing of a deed so that it would be an automatic process. Chairman Kelley responded "absolutely". Motion, Ayes=5, Nays=O, Motion passed. #1323 JON PAPAS 3369 CRYSTAL BAY ROAD AYTER-THE-PACT VARIANCE PUBLIC HEARING 7:25 P.M. - 7:35 P.M. The Affidavit of Put-lication and Certiticare of Mailing were noted. Applicant could net be present for this matter. Mr. Jay Keiser, a neighbor of the applicant's was present and distributed a letter written by Mr. Papas to the Planning Commission. Chairman Kelley read the letter for the benefit of the Public record. Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator Gaff ron ex; laine, that the app Iicant was seekiig an after -the -fact building permit and is in need c f a number of variances to complete the construction of a decti.. -he entire deck is within MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING SEPTEMHER 19, 1988 ZONING FILE #1323-PAPAS CONTINUED the 0-75' lakeshore setback area. An average lakeshore setback variance is also required. There is a garage on the east side of the property with a deck above it and the property to the west has a second story deck. Mr. Papas's deck will extend 10' beyond the average setback line. The existing house is located in the 0-75' setback zone. Without the deck and excluding the paved road, hardcover is approximately 20%; with the deck it increases approximately 200 s.f. and would increase hardcover to 27.4%. The hardcover existing within the 75-250' zone is 39.6% and will not change. All existing hardcover is legitimate (house, garage, driveway) and there are no reasonable feasible removals. Planning Commission member Cohen expressed the need for a survey. He was sympathetic to the fact that the survey would cost nearly as much as the project, but felt a precedent would be set should an exception to this requirement be made. Cohen suggested tabling this matter to allow the applicant time to submit a survey and avoid having to resubmit the $150.00 fee. Planning Commission member ganson explained to Mr. Keiser that at this time, the Planning Commission was not denying Mr. Papas's application, they were merely requesting compliance with the required application documents. Mr. Keiser stated that at the present time, the deck was an eye3cre and had remained half finished all summer. Planning Commission member Jot.nson questioned the pictures yr. Keiser submitted. Mr. Keiser explained that the pictures showed neighboring properties with decks extending more toward the lake than Mr. Papas's deck. Planning Commission member Bellows reiterated Hanson's explanation of documents required with the submittal -)f a variance application. Mr. Keiser asked if Mr. Papas would then have to spend $600.00 to have a survey done' Bellows replied that it would not be necessary to do another survey if there was an existing survey. Kelley stated that the certified property owners list was also not included with the application. Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator Gaffron stated that the list must have been misplaced by the owner. City personnel could verify that envelopes and labels with neighboring property addresses had been received with the application. Gaffron verified that the notices were legally sent, but the list indicating those persons was missing. Jciinson stated that he could undarat, the 1-nnfusion on applicant's behalf regarding the variaar!^ aowev er, had Mr. Papas applied for a permit to build the decn he would have been informed of all the requirements. There were no comments from the public regarding this matter and t.,e public hearing was closed. 24 MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING SEPTEMBER 19, 1988 ZONING FILE #1323-PAPAS CONTINUED It was moved by Planning Commission member Cohen, seconded by Planning Commission member Hanson, to table application #1323 to allow the applicant time to submit all required information. Motion, Ayes-5, Nays=O, Motion passed. #1324 MR. AND MRS. iiILLIAM GREGORY 1099 TAMARACK DRIVE CONDITIORAL USE PERMIT PUBLIC HEARING 7:35 P.M. - 7:40 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. The applicants were not present for this matter, but were represented by Mr. Clifford Reep from Minnetonka Portable Dredging. Assistant Planning s Zoning Administrator Gaffron explained that the applicants were seeking a conditional use permit for excavation within an existing wetland area to create a pond. The designated wetland is approximately .6 of an acre. Excavation would occur at the northwesterly end of the wetland and will create a pond approximately 120' in length and about 60' in width. The spoils would be placed along the east and south side of the existing driveway. The City Engineer has reviewed t.is application and recommended approval. The Minnehaha Cree'- Watershed District has also recommended approval of this projer'_ subject to erosion control and restoration of the distur-�=d areas. Chairman Kelley stated that at one time there was concern about soil removal from the croperty. He inquired whether there was still concern in that regard. Gaffron replied that at this time the cuts and the fills were equal. Mr. Reep confirmed this. Plann'zg Commission member Johnson inquired as to water existing around the 84 contour. Gaffron responded that it was presently wetland and the proposal is to make one end of the 1,ond deeper and leave the other and at its present elevation. Mr. Reep ex lained that the wetland area is approximately 15" deep, which in not sufficient for wildlife habitation. Presently there are no cattails, only weeds. The purpose of this project is to add approximately 2' to the depth of the pond to maintain a level of water in that area. There should not be any change in the s#-orage capacity. There were no comments from the public regarding this matter and the public hearing was closed. It was moved by Planning Commission member Johnson, Seconded by Planning Commission member Hanson, to recommend approval of application #1324, for a conditional use permit for excavation in a wetland area, per staff recommen!.i' _ons. Potion, Ayes-5, r, ,A-PPL /c.4NTS �—r9-av SEPTEMBER 19. 1988 I TY OF nRONO P.O. BOX 66 CRYSTAL SAY, MN 55 3 REs VARIANCE APPLICATION DEAR MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION: PLEASE ACCEPT MY APOLOGY FOR NOT BEING r'RESENT AT THIS MEETING. BUT AS I AM BEING INSTALLED AS THE MASTER OF MY MA;-no,;1 C 1_CIDGE TONIGHT. I WILL NOT BE ABLE TO ATTEND THIS MEETING UNTIL WELL AFTER POUF: 7:+'++_, F-.M. START TIME. I HOPE THAT I AM ABLE TO BE PRESENT AT THIS MEETING BEFORE IT ENDS. I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO THANE" JAY KEISER. MY NEXT STORE NEIGHBOR. FOR SITTIhrG IN FOR ME AT THIS MEETING UNTIL I CAN GFT DUWN THERF. MR. F: E I SER IS THE PERSON WHO WILL BE MOST EFFECTED BY THE BUILDING OF THIS DECF OTHER THAN MYSELF OF COURSE. AS NEITHER HE. NOR ANY OF MY OTHER NEIGHBORS. HAVE ANY OBJECTIONS TO MY BUILDING OF THIS DECF::. I HOPE THAT WE CAN PROCEED WITH THE COMPLEl10N OF THIS PROJECT WITHOUT ANY FURTHER DELAYS. I WOULD LIKE TO GIVE iOU SOME BACF:GROUND FIRST. THE ORIGINAL IDEk FUR THE BUILIING OF THIS DECK CAiIE THROUGH SOME AD HCIC THERAPY BY ME FOR MY FATHER. Mti FATHER SUFFERED A STROFE LAST YEAR. ALTHOUGH HIS RECOVERY HAS EFEN 'czTROD INARY, 1-1+ E MOST STRUf:E VICTIMS, HE STILL HAS EOTH UOUL' AND BAU DAYS. 1 VISITED MY PAf •ENT' S HOME ON ONE OF HIS BAD DH v S EaRL I ..;+ THIS SPF I Nh. HE j I DN' T SEEM TO EC AE(_E TO CONCENTRATE ON Wl-!', T Wr: '� HAPPENING ARGUNG HIM VEP Y +E:LI_ (HE WASN'T GETTING INVOLVED IN ANY CCJNVER;ATtONS. HE WOULD WHICH ABOUT IVE SE�.UNDS OF ONE T.V. SHOW AND THEN CHA'N(:,Ic" 1HF CHANNEL AND THI:14 LH"N6V THE ZH"NNEL AGAIN AND SO ON) . AS HE ALWAYS Hk'o, REEK QUITE A HANI?'iMp N. 1 TRIFL• TO Hr;VE HItl APPLY HIMSELF- by (331VINIJ HIM A k.Nfi► i.t #44D I TLIL_D HIM TO DESIGN A DE0 F"UF: THE RONT OF M•r H_'USE. Az' HE HASGE5itVlIE+' "-'4 � BUILT I'--) OR �1Ukt DECr S FOP;7 I ENDS. I WAS SURE 11-fr•►T HE COIJI.D HANDLF Tf 11 T.:;;I ANr' IT D I L _+E.E "1 TO FOCUS HIS. AITENTI1IN NrID Ct EAR UP THE F"Ob THAT HE WAS 114. HE WAS NOW READY TO BUILD THE DECF . (fJGETHC-"R WE WLN, OUT 'rL, THE -iUPPLIES WHICH WE NEEDED AND WITH rHE HELP Qf- r1.' YOU14GEF. BROTHL F. WE SIAR1ED TU E+I t I LD THE DECF ON GOOD FR I DAY. THAT NEXT MOtdDAN F, k: I T Y I NSF EC TOf, CAME B + AND ADVISED US THAT WE WOULD NEED A E+UI1.t)1NG FERMI, AND POSTED A STOF- WUR1 ORDER. I D16 NOT fNOW THAT WE WOULD NEED SUCH .; PERMIT AND NATURwt.l-'r STUF'F::L WORT EL' ;MMEDIATELY. I THEN WENT DOWN TO THE CIT( HALL AND BY CHANCE MET wall-+ rHE .)AME INSPECTOR IN THAT Of•F ,CE. THERE HE GAVE ME FERM17 AF—PL ILAT ION FIND LO(ri ED THROUGH MY FILE TO F: F'F I ( r�L SUPVE v HAD BEEN CGM1:='LE TED. IT ►Ir:D NOT. HGWfV DIlL ..t:.'ISE ME rHAT ON Off+ r~ LIMALL &-Ai-E FROJECT, r'•!— :UF;�'EY L7ULD AND FUE<LABL•+ WOULD BE WAIvED 1 ! SENT IN AN ra`r:UFwTL D1AC;&AM HOW I NG WHERE THk Of U iLD DECF WOULD Ef urL T :.r�� L;.. I Nt, GU 1 .:1! 0 iHEF H.+RD ,:OVER EXPOSURES. N o �� IT? ]F ORONO PAGE M2 )ECK PERMIT h.� •. Yn 4. IN ADDITION TO TWOSF REQUIREMENTS, I ALSO HAD MY THREE NEAREST JEIOHBORS ON 30THS SIDES OF MY PROPERTY (SIX(NEIGHBORS IN ALL) SIGN A STATEhENT SAYING THAT THEY DID NOT OBJECT TO MY PROJECT. AS I HAVE P.ECENTLY STARTED UP. A NEW BUSINESS ;ND MY WORKING HOURS ARE OFTEN 6100 A.M. UNTIL. 10300 OR 11tOG P:'M. PLUS THE =4CT THAT I TOOK A WEEKEND JOB AS A BAP.TENDER TO PAY THE BILI.S.;GR A WHILE, IT TOOK ME A COUPLE OF WEEKS TO PUT ALL THIS 'INFORMATION Ti-GET-R.".-'AG SOON AS I -LAD ALL OF THIS INFORMATION, ABOUT •10 DAYS TO TWO WEEKS AFTL2 THE ORGINAL STOP AORK ORDER, I MAILED EVERYT►•IING THAT I HAD TO THE CITY. THE NEXT TIME THAT I -4EARD FROM ANYONE REGARDING THIS MATTER WAS THE JULY 222nd LETTER FROM LYLE ]MAN. NEEDLESS TO SAY I WAS MORE THAN UPSET. I ZALLED THE CITY AND THEY ADVISED ME THAT THEY NEVER HAD RECEIVED MY ORGINAL '3UBMISSION AND THAT I WOULD HAVE TO AGAIN FILE ALL OF THE NEEDED FORMS. WHAT HAPPENED TO MY ORIGNAL FILINF STILL STUMPS ME AS I NEVER RECEIVED IT BACK AND COULD ONLY ASSUME THAT IF I SENT IT TO THE WRONG ADDRESS IT WOULD BE RETURNED. AFTER AGAIN COMPLING ALL OF THE INFORAATION WHICH YOU NEED, I HAND DELIVERED THIS INFORMATION. IN MY EARLIER TELEPHONE CONVERSATION, I WAS ALSO INFORMED OF THE $150.00 FILING CHARGE. THIS WAS NOT IINCLUDFD IN MY FIRST SUBMISSION AND I BELIEVE THAT 1S WHERE THE PROBLEM ACTUALLY AROSE REGARDING THE "LOST FIRST SUBMISSION. THAT BASICALLY SPIN,--' US OF TO DATE. THERE ARE ABOUT FIVE HOURS OF' WORI'. LEFT TO DO UN THIS PROJECT. THE PEOPLE LIVING ON CRYSTAL DAY ROAD HAVE NO OBJECTIONS TO THE COMPLETION OF THIS PROJECT. CERTAINLY. A DEC► FACING THE LAI.E DOES NOT I NTERFER WITH ANY AE7 HE7 IC DESIGN WHI17H THE CITY FATHE$ S MAY HAVE FOR THE l Ai E FROr4T. IN FACT THERE ARE VERY FEW CAFE FRONT PROPERTIES IN THIS AREA WHICH DO NOT HAVE AT LEAST A DECI EXPOSURE FACING THE LAI•E. WITH THE EXCEPTION OF A LAND SURVEY I THINI THAT I HAVE COMPLETED ALL OF YOUR REQUIRED FORMS. I WOULD HOFE THAT YOU WOULD AGREE WITH ME THAT PAYING $600 TO $800 FOR A LAND SURVEY FGR A PROJECT WHICH COSTS UNDER: $600 TO COMPLETE 1S AN ONEROUS PRICE TO FAY FOR SUCH A PROJECT AND THAT YOU WILL WAIVE THIS REQUIREMENT. LASTLY. ► WOULD THIN► THAT YOU WOULD AGREE WITH ME. A SLOTTED WOODLN DECK DOES NOT HAVE MUCH OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL INFACT. IN FACT. I FAIL TO SEE WHERE. THERE I.: ANY MEASURAFLE CHANGE ON THE RUNOFF PATTERNS OF tY PROPERTY DUE TO THIS ,'E:W FXF'OSUFL . I CEF 1..,NLY HOPE T -iAT WE CAN PUT THIS SITU"TION TO SEE. I I NGW THF;T THERE MUST BE MUCH WEIGHTIER PRO'.+LEMS WHICH YOU SHOULD GO GN 10. Mr SIMPLE DESIRE `IS TO COMPLETE TH1., PROJECT AS SOON I CAr4 AND BE ABLE TO ENJOY Tr - LIFESTYLE WHICH THE LATE PROVIDES THE RESIDENCE OF OUR AREA. $,NCERELY. art �l - "; ON W. FAF AS ;'ca CRYSTAL PAY ROAD Okrir'lO. nN `S' 91 To: Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Comm.=lion Members City Administrator Bernhardson From: Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & 'Zoning Administrator Date: September 14, 1988 Subject: #1323 John W. Papas, 3369 CryE-al t koad Variances - Public 4earing Application - This is an afte--the-fact variance for hardcover, lakeshore setback, and average lakes.ore setback. Zo.ninq District - i,R-1C List of Exhibits E:;hibit A - Stop Work Order Dated 4/4/88 Exhibit B - Letter to Property Owner Regardinq Deck Exhibit C - Application Exhibit D - Plat Map Provided by Staff Exhibit E - Signatures of Neighboring Property Owners (rQ .:ertified property ciners list was submitted) Exhibit F - Appli-ant'e wetter f Application Exhibit G - Photographs Submitted by Applicant Exhibit H - Hardcover Calculations Submitted by Applicant Exhibit I - Site Plar and [peck Plan Submitted by Applicant Exhibit J - Site Plan Sketch by Staff, 9/14/88 Note: No survey has bee,, submitted by applicant Exhibit K - Staff Diagram Indicating Average Lakeshore Setback En-roachment Pertinent Facts - 1. on April 4, 1988, applic, • was found to be constructin7 a deck in hi-; front yard without the necessary permits or approval A Stop Work Crder was Foss 9 on the properr.y on that day. the applicant apl.arently ),d stop work, however, the deCK was not removed and a letter of ,,otif ication w.•i ;,cnt on July 22, i988. This rest: 'ted in applicant's letter of July i5, 1988, which was included with a partial variance application .eceivcd on July 26, 1988. Zoning File #1323 September 14, 1988 Page 2 of 3 2. The applicant has failed to provide the required survey, plat map, and certified property owners list, which are requirements noted on the variance application form. Envelopes with address labels were submitted and the neighbors have been notified of the Public Hearing. 3. Per the site plan sketched byIstaff, the following variances are required in order for this deck construction to continue: A) Construction in the 0-73' setback zone where no construction is normally allowed. The proposed deck is approximately 58' from the normal shoreline. B) Hardcover in the 0-75' setback zone, excluding the paved road from the talc .lation is 20.0%, and ..ith t►.e deck would increase to 27.4%. C) Per the average lakeshote setback diagram, the applicant's deck encroaches approximately 10' lakeward of the average lakeshore setback lire, as defined by structure on the neighbc+ring proterties. Discussion - The applicant's only legitimate tie, Aship in staff's opinion is that the existing house is located in the 0-75' setback zone, and was constructed prior to the 75, set` A requirement. The actual house strurture extends towards the lakes► in such a manner that !any deck on that side of they h: - 1! wi 11 require ,. average se, hack variance. hriA a hardcover perspective, the F,operty has v-:cessive hardcover percentages based on code stanaards, but does not contain excessive unracessary herd surface areas that could be removed t-3 mitigate the nardcover addition:. ftaf f casisndation - Given the lack of a sur�,ey which is normally spy ..? 1 +for every variant.:- -if this type, staff finds it diff§cul to recc,wmend approval of the reque+steu variances although the a;-tlicant may have legitimate %�a :dsh,ps fr, req%-eating variances. Zoning File #1323 September 14, 1988 Page 3 of 3 Planning Commission would appear to have a number of options: 1. Table the request until the required survey has been submitted. 2. Take action to recommend either approval or denial based on the information available, subject to providing the required information prior to Council review. 3. Take action to recommend denial or approval without requiring additional information. .'SO V"Tt ON q •1 -11CLO gv,►��D/N V R-�� F��T D F GhGTT of s,,�4v�`f , V 6r7w" S - d DATE TIME CITY OF ORONO INSPECTION NOTICE PERMIT NO._ CALLEC IN SCHEDULED COMPLETED ADDRESS I/STA L B/9�'.: OWNER CONTR _ TELEPHONE NO. w �l Q O 2 Q w y Q =U 2 J Q Z 0 Cr W a cc rc 0 W cc Q z W W Cr d W rc LA I WORK SATISFACTORY PROCEED C P4+0TO TAKEN C) CORRECT WORK • PROCEED v CORRECT WORK CALL FOR REINSPECTiON BEFORE COVERING CORRECT UNSAFE CONDITION WITHIN HOURS !NSPECTOR WILL RETURN STOP 7RDER POSTED CALL INSPECTOR NSPECTION REQUIRED CALL TO ARRANGE AC_ESS O FOOTING O Pt UTABING RI O FRAMING O PLUMBING FINAL „C INSULATION 7 MECHANICAL O WALL BD O WATER HOOKUP O FINAL O METER SET/TURN ON O PROGRESS 7 SEWER HOOKUP O DEMOS O SEPTIC INSTALL G FIRE PREP' - SEPTIC MAINT HELL TEST PUMP COMMENTS: O SITE INSPEC ON 17 O EXCAV/GRADINGiFILLING O LAKE SHOREYWETLANDS O LICENSING O COMPLAINT O FOLLOW-UP O SEPTIC FINAL Ll FIREPLACE'WOOD BURNER O Dc�>r� �.�sr��c .rr o �✓ ec; ie- call for the next Inspection 24 hours in advance. Owner/Contr. 31 Inspector _ Ls--- - --- - 47 tArb ^Dec t u+ ti t o `+n«v 'S t• 'votp CITE' of ORONO Post Of.'ice Box tiFieCrystal Bay. Minnesota 5rN3239Municipal Offices On the North Shore of Lake Minnetonka July 22, 1988 Jon Walter Papas 3369 Crystal Bay Road Wayzata, MN 55391 Re: Deck Construction Without a Permit Dear Mr. Papas: On April 4, 1988, a Stop Work Order was posted on a deck being constructed at the above subject property. As of this date the partially completed deck still remains on the property and a permit has not been issued. This letter is to notify you that Orono Municipal Code does not allow any construction within 75' of the lake and the addition of the deck may exceed the amount of hardcover allowed. You have 2 options: 1) remove the deck and restore the yard to original, or 2) apply for a variance to the required 75' setback from the lake and possibly a variance for excessive hardcover. Enclosed are variance and building permit applications. You must take corrective action before August 1, 1988 or the City may issue citations. If you have any questions or have a problem meeting this deadline feel free to contact me at my office. Sincerely, L e Oman, Field Inspector LO/tln Enclosure - Variance & Building Permit Applications cc: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building 6 Zoning Administrator Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator Thomas - 'icobs, Senior Building Inspector BUILDING & ZONING - 473-7357 • ADMINISTRATION t FINAW-1 - 471.7338 K Pl.BLW WORKS - 473 7150 ASUSSING CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee $150. 00 nr,. ,� ($50.00 per each additional variaice) Renewal Variance Fee $75.00 (no change from original application) After -the -Fact Fees (Double application fee) ------------------------------------------------------------ -- PROPERTr LOCATION '*:nC r-c - .r�•ri+tirr l'a Site Address 3369 Crystal AY Road, Orono. NIIJ ff i.A.W. n^ iKr'Y vv Property Identification t umber ( P. I . D. ):ice __ ley • 61" Please check one - Property abstract or torrens? Attach legal descript.on to application if not included on required survey. ---------------------------------------------------------------- APPLICART Phone ( home ) 471-8690 Name Jon W. Paras Phone (work) 553-7759 Address: 3369 Crystal Bay Road City: Wayzata Zip: 55391 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- OWNER (if different than applicant) Phone (home) Name Same Address: Phone (work) City: Zip: " Date Property Acquired 6/84 (month/year) I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- PRUE" OSE or PROPERTY Present Zo District Present Use of Property Residentail Residential Other -(specify) --------------------------------------------------------------------------- DESCRIPTION OT RRQMT Estimated Construction Cost $ 587.00_ Describe request in detail: Building a slotted wooden deck in w front yard- --------------------------------------------------------------------------- VARIANC8 RRQQIRRD Lot Area Lot Width Hardcover Setback Variances ( X Front Side Rear) Other a"-. Q CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee $150.130 ($50.00 per each additional variayce) Renewal Variance Fee $75.00 " (no change from original application) After -the -Fact Fees (Double application fee) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - PROPERTY ION Site Address 3369 Crystal Bay Road, Orono, NIlV 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) 471-8690 Name Jon W. Panas Phone (work) 553-7759 Address: 3369 Crystal -------------------------------------- Bay Road City: ----------------------- Wayzata Zip: 55391 -------------- OMMER (if different than applicant) Phone (home) Name Same Phone (work) Address: Date Property Acquired 6/84 City: Zip: (month/year) I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ PRESMT 08E OF PROPERTY Present Zonirl--District Present Use of Property Residentail Residential Other (specify) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ----- 028CRIPTION OP REQOEST Estimated Construction Cost $ 587.00 Describe request in detail: Building a slotted Wooden deck in my front yard. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- VARIA r I RIQOIRED Lot Area Lot Width Hardcover Setback Variances (X_ Front Side Rear) Other 14 13" 12 , ` N 17 , �`.+�) wM►:;� , yam, � t I � ., :• 3 ` is If n, If u. a is t�i ., C Y1 . i �i • T . ti tt 2• ti t R j�>, , ?�� ti ti 41 1 a l' ill.• �ti• nOTI OT ,� �• OF WE, THE UNDERSIGNED HOMEOWNERS OF PROPERTIES LOCATED ON CRYSTAL BAY ROAD, DO NOT OBJECT TO THE PROPERTY OWNER OF 3369 CRYSTAL BAY ROAD, JON W. PAPAS, PLANS FOR THE BUILDING OF A 10 BY 20 FOOT WOODEN DECK IN FRONT OF HIS DWELLING: dStlE 99PB9$$ -------------------------- -------------------------------------------------- ow.F JULY ,5, 1'388 CITY OF URONO . O. BOX 66 L;RYS I AL @AY, MN JJ..LcC , 1 16 RE: BUILDING PERMIT VARIANCE APPLICATICN / TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: ENCLOSED THERE IS A BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATION, TWO COPIES OF MY CONSrRUCTION PLANS, 0 VARIANCE APPLICATION AND A SIGNF�,D N014-OBJECTION LETTER FROM MY NEAREST NEIGHBORS REGARDING THE PROPOSED WO::DEN DECK ON THE FRONT OF MY PROPERTY. THE MAJOR REASON I LIVE WHERE I DO :3 THE ENJOYMENT WHICH THE VIEW OF LAKE MINNETONKA PROVIDES ME. THE IDEP T+-AT I HAVE "O JUMP THROUGH ALL OF THESE BU REAUC:RH [ I C yUU DS S i iht- L'Y' rU F'U-r AN 1_1NUB T RUS I VE DECA ON THE FRONT OF MY PREMISE';: I S REPUGNANT TO ME. PER THE I NFOki"A l OVAL PAGE: ON YOUR VARIANCE APPLICATION, 1"HE HARD�aH I P WHICH i 1"LS ►" ENDURE 1' ONE OF LACK OF SIMPLE COMMON SENSE. I HAVE ENCLOSED ZVE,'RAL WHOTOGRAPHS Or OTHER DECKS f=•UILT ON STRUCTURES ON MY IMMEADIATE BLOCK. WHICH DO NOT MEET YOUP ZONING REQUIREMENTS AS TO SETBACK DISTANCES. I AM NOT INCLUDING THESE PHC"OGRAPHS SIMPLY TO SHOW YOU THAT OTHER EXCEPTIONS HAVE BEEN MADE OR HAVE bEEN GiiONUFATHERED INTO PLAC'c; R1•:THER, M`( INTENT 1S SHOW YOU THAT DECK ON THE FRONT Or ONE'S PROPERTY IS MORE OF A MATTER OF S1"ANDORD AND ACCEPTED PRACT:t.:'_ IN OUR LOCALITY. I WOULD COMPARE IT TO THE OWNERSHIP AND MAINTENCE CF DOCK. IT EFFECTS THE "ORDERLY DEVELOPEMENT AND USE OF THE LAND" AND EFFECTS ABOUT AS MUt_,, "HARDL.OVEiR" AS A DOCK. WITH THAT MINI -TIRADE OUT OF THE WA", I WILL ATTEMPT TO EXPLAIN MY CONSTTRUCTION PLANS. AS YOU WILL READILY SEE WHEr, `►]U LOOK OVER THE CONSTRUCTIJN PLANS, i AM NOT AN ARC:AIEC'i BY TRADE. IN AN EFFORT TO CLLAR UP' ANY QUESTIONS WHICH YOU MAY HAVE I WILL IitirJLUDE A BRIEF NARATIVE REGARDING MY CONSTRUCTION PLANS. THERf.' ARE TWO TYPES OF LUMBER WHICH WILL BE USED IN THIS PROJECT. WHEN THIS PROJECT IS COMPLETED, THE NONVISABLE, SUPPORT, FRAMING MATERIAL WILL BE CONSTRUCTION GRADE TREATED PONDEROSA FINE (HEREAFTER RE=ERED TO AS TREATED). THE VISAHLE OUTSIDE CASING AND THE DECKING I-i"SEL WILL 8E CONSTRUCTED OUT OF REDWOOD LUMBER (HEREAFTER REFERED TO AS REDWOOD). THE FOUNDATION OF THIS DECK BUILT NEAREST THE EXSISTING DWELLINb IS BUILT ON 8X1EX18 CONCRETE BLOCKS. THERE ARE TWO EXBXiu TREATED RUNNERS tCUT TO LENGTH), BOLTED WITH METAL BOLTS AND ANCHORS, WHICH FORM THE REAR HEADER. THE FRONT HEADER IS ALSO CONSTRUCTED OUT OF TWO 2X8X1V TREATED RUNNERS, TIED TO A SERIES OF FIVE 4X4 REDWOOD SUPPORT POSTS. THERE ARE 15, 10 FOOT, TREATED, jX8 JOISTS RUNNINGS BETWEEN THESE TWO HEADERS. EACH OF THESE JOISTS ARE CONECTED TO THE HEADERcc ON BOTH ENDS BY JOIST HANGERS. T1iESE JOISTS ARE SErERArED 9Y 16 INCH CENTERS. THE TWO OUTSIDE TREArED JOISTS ARE EACH FURTHER CONECTED ATTACHED TO TWO 4X4 AND ONE 2X4 REDWOOD SUPPORT POSrS. THE REMAINDER OF THE DECK IS VISABLE ANL IS CONSTRUCTED WITH REDWOOD LUMBER. THERE IS ON ._X4 SUPPORT POST UN EITHER SIDE OF THE DECK LOCATED NEXT TO THE DWELLING. ON EACH OF THE 1U FOOr LENGTHS, THERE IS A 4X4 POST SITUATED t;1VE FEET FROM El [HER END AND ANUTHER 4X4 PUSr UN rHE PORTION OF THE DECK LOCATED Gv THE F,iUwT CORNER OF DEC:<j AWAY _RUM THE DWE�_LItiG. CONECTED TO THE OUTSIZE i C,= THESE SIX 4EDWOOD POSTS ARE TWO JA6XiO REDWOOD BOARDS WHIC.1 FIRM THE OUTSIDE PORTION OF THE TWO lV FOOT `TIDES. BUILDING PERMIT PAGE 44L THE FRONT, SECTION CF THIS DECK IS CONSTRUCTED AS FOLLOWS: THERE ARE FIVE 4X4 REDWOOD SUPPORT POSTS. TWO WERE PREVIOUSLY MENTIONED AS THE CORNER POSTS OF THE lu FOOT 51Dt5. UNE F00F i r2Ur1 ri-it WES(ERN SIDE CORNER POST IS ANOTHER 4X4 REDWOOD POST. THIS WILL SUPPORT THE RIGHT HAND RAIL AND STEP/ENTRANCE TO THE DECK. THREE FEET EAST OF THAT YOU WILL FIND ANOTHER 4X4 REDWOOD POST WHICH WILL SUPPORT THE LEFT HAND RAIL .AND STEP. FIVE FEET FROM THAT POST YOU WILL FIND ANOTHER 4X4 SUPPORT POST. THE LAST 4X4 SUPPORT POST FORMS THE EASTER, END OF THE FRONT OF THE DECK. ATTACHED TO THESE SUPPORT POSTS WILL BE ANOTHER 2X6 REDWOOD BEAM WHICH WILL FORM THE FROJ4T OF THE DECK. THE POST AND HEADERS WILL BE CONECTED WITH 5/8 INCH, FOUR INCH LAG SCREWS WHEREVER THEY MEET. THIS DECK WILL BE 15 INCHES ABOVE (TRADE, THEREFORE, THERE WILL BE ONE STEP' BUILT AT THE FRONT ENTRACE CF THE DECK. THE DECKING ITSELF WILL 5E 2X6 RE WOOD DECKING. T;:E DECKING WILL RLN TnE 15+ FEET OF THE DECK. THESE WILL BE TIED TO THE JOISTS BY 16 PENNY GALVANISED NAIL-S. THERE WILL BE A TOP' RAIL SITUATED 36 INCHES ABOVE THE DECKING RUNNING ACROSS THE PERIMETER OF THE DECK. THIS WILL FUTHER ADORNED BY A SERIES OF 2X2 REDWOOD PICKETS, HUNG VERTICALLY, 1RUNNING COMPLETELY AROUND THE OUTSIDE OF THE DECA. THESE WILL BE SEP'ERATED BY 6 INCH CENTERS. AGAIN, I HOPE THAT THIS IS ALL 7HE IrFORMATION WHICH YOU WILL NEED FOR THE RAPT: APPROVAL OF A BUILDING('?) VARIANCE AND CONSTRUCTION PERMIT. IF YCU HAVE ANY OTHER OUESfIONS, PLE-ASE DON'T HESITATE TO GIVE ME A CALL --HOME--+71-869U; WORK-5`.:3-7759. S�VCERELY, JON W. PAPAS 3369 CRYSTAL BAY ROAD ORONO, MN IIAIMCOVER CALCOLAT I tAl 144(hSHL1:'1' Setback Monet (circle one) 0-75' 75-250' 25�1-500' 500-1000, Existing Hardcover in $one a. House D.S x 3 S a'%/Y s.f. length width x ice_ s.f. 6 x r 30 s.f. x - s.f. x s.f. b. Garage 14 x 23 -U Z s.f. c. Driveway 07 x 4V 432-_ s.f. x s.f. d. Sidewalk x s.f. / •� x 7 - 10 s.f. e. Patio/ x s.f. Deck x - s.f. f. Landscape l : s.[. areas underlain x by plastic sheeting x s.f. h.J C. other q x Q • — s.f. x TOTAL EXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZONE Existing Hardcover Total Existing Hardcover x 100 Lot Area Within Zone - s.f. x 100 • s.f. Additional Hardcover to be added in zones Item Length x Width - TOTAL s.f. �<<< G x 2S - tr 1..f. x - s.f. x - s.f. x s.f. TOTAL S.P. TO BE ADDED (2) Existing Hardcover to be Removed, if anyt Itest Length x 1 Width - TOTAL s.f. x - a.f. x - s.f. TOTAL S.P. TO BE REMOVED (3) Final Hardcover Pro�salt [Line (1) , Line (2) -Line (3)) - c I( LJ , II - - I 49.f. (4) Existing To be Added To be Removed Final Proposed Hardcover 1 a Line 4) x 100 - -- s•f• x 100 - S Line (1) s.f. HARDCOVER CAI,t_I►I.A'1' I()N M iNKSI►E E11' Setback Zones (circle one 0-75' 75-250' 250-500' 500-1000, Buis ing Hardcover in Zone a. House Is length width x e.f. — -- x n a.f. IFIA - — x a.f. Garage x • s.[. `fi ? SZ Drivewy x _ is a.f. r� x _ s.f. ..,d. Sidewalk _ x . s.f. 1 Is o.f. !r/ Is • e.t. Patio/ x • I✓M s.f. Deck x s.f. Landscape x areas wWerlain x s.[. by plastic abafting x _ • a.f. s • t. Other x j C, OU x . s.[. TOTAL EXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZONE Existing hardcover • • _Total Existing Hardcover x 100 Lot Area Within Zone a.f. x 100 • s.f. _• Additional Hardcover to be added in zones Item Length x Width • TOTAL s.l. `I x h' )" . l % s.[. x s.f. TOTAL. S.F. TO BE ADDED _ (2) Existing Hardcover to be Removed, if anys Item Length xWidth TOTAL s.f. x • a.f. x • I.f. B TOTAL S.P. TOE REMOVED (3) Final Hardcover Pro�sals [Line (1) ♦ Line (2) -Line (3)) • I ?S ♦ ` )s s.f. (4 Existing To be Added To be Removed Final • Proposed Hardcover • I.inS_ (41 x 100 • a'f• x 100 • •� T Line (1) a.f. f^i REGULATIONS AND MORICSHEET A. RARDCOVER ORDINANCE - In 1975, the Orono City Council adopted an ordinance lir.4'-in 9 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 urbanized 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 !till be cleansed by filtering through grassed or vegetated yard areas before entering the lake. B. HARDCOVER SETBACK ZONES - PERCENTAGE Ar.ZOWRD I. 0-75': fn the area within 75' of the lakeshore, No Hardcover is allowed (01). -- -- II. 75-2501: 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': in the portion of the lot located between 2S0' and 500' feet from the lake 300 of that portion of the lot may be hardcovered. IV, 500-1,000': in the portion 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 re,julations apply even if you have a lot that does not abut the lake but is within a lakeshore zoning district. C. HOw 1*0 DETERMINE LOT AREA WITHIN EACH SETBACK ZONE (To be used as denominatcr in ail hardcover percentage calculations) I. 0-75' Zone Area - 75' x (Average width of lot in 0-75, zone) measure parallel to shoreline , 75' x S ft. 7, %% (Avg width) Area of 0-751 zone II. 75-250' Zone Area - (1751or avg lot depth in zone) x(Avg width of lot in 75-250' zone\ `` measure parallel to shoreline i Joliet'' x ft. - �5 O ..f. (2! (Avg width) Area of 75-250' zone III. 250-500' Zone Area - (250' or avq lot depth in zone) x�Avg width of lot in 250-500' zone\ measure parallel to shoreline 250, x ft. - s.f. (3) (Avg width) Area of 250-500, zone Iv. 500-1,000' Zone Area - (500' or avq lot de(th in zone) x/Avq width of lot in 500-1000' zone' �, measure parallel to shoreline 500 ' x .-- __ f t • - ___ s f . ( 4 ) (Avq width) Area of 500--1,000' zone D. HARDCOVER CALCULATION SUMMARY A. B. Lakeshore Existing Setoack Lot Area Hardcover Zone In Zone Ir Zone i-75' 3 of 1,752of 75-250' 1 O of 1 GL_ Ggsf C. D. E. F. Existing Final Hardcover Proposed Hardcover Allowed Percentage Hardcover Percentage Hardcover (B/A)x100 In Zone (D/A)x100 Percentage t .1 `{ .sf —3�- t 0 t 2� t -'f q` of 2 250-500, —of sf t of t 30 • 500-1C00 of _r____af • sf • 35 t HARDCOVER LIMITATIONS c� rvq �r `^ LASE � •t 0 to /� • /!�� ' ,S , 0 ROA O E. OTHER LAKESHORE REGULATIONS 3ARDCOVER INCLUDES: - Structures with roofs - Decks, e.cn if slattac' - Sidewalks - Driveways (paves or gravel) - Decorative lan0scapina -reas underlain by plastic shooting - Tops of retaining walls, rock walls - Any other surface that does not allow direct absorption of rainfall into the gram-_...: 8BC. 10.22, REGULATIONS FOR OLD-W, 'LR-lA-10, •LR-19', 'LR-IC' AND 'LR-IC-I* OWN FANILT LAXRSg0R= R;SIDENTIAL DISTRICT. Within any *LP -IA', LR-lA-1', 'L.R-190, 'LR-IC', or 'LR-lC-1' One Family Lakeshore Residential District the following requlations shall apply: Subd. 1. Lakr ore Set flack Regulations. The set back from the shoreline for lakeshore lots shall be at :east 75 foot and no building may be locatod .:loser to the shoreiine than the average distance from the shoreline of existinq residence buildings on adjacent and nea,by lots. Subd. 2. Lakeshore Rard Cover Regulations. Within 75 foot of shoreline there shall be no excavating, filling, hard cover, temporary or permanent structures. Within 75 to 250 feet of the shoreline tnero shall be no greater than 250 hard cover. within 250 to 500 feet of the shoreline there shal l be no greater than 301 hard cover. within S00 to 1,000 feet of the ahoreltne there shall be no greater than 351 hard cover. Subd. 3. Tree Rewoval Regulations. go trees within 75 foot of the shoreline rith the Aite+eter of six (4) inches or more shall be removed without first obtaininq a permit from the Council. 66� t 14 = � p O C�OA�t1 5rT-Lr C,A,pp pay I. OEM I ZP04t4jp,,`e'',T r �noo S r _ O �S '+C �yy� jjwrW:387 114 (o/x 2© 1y x (-1647-. or, - W Zoo 47 oLk �" (I ti Av6:, . G 5eet-ga -k-- 9t 4<, 4A-P` t 7 CrA V To: Mayor Grabek & Orono Council Members City Administrator Bernhardson From: Michael P. Gaffrcn, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator Date: October 19, 1988 Subject: #1328 Howard B. Johnson, 1635 & 1675 Concordia Street - Subdivision of a Lot Line Rearrangement - Class I - Application - Request for a lot line rearrangement to place neighboring residence within its own property boundaries. Zoning District - LR-lC List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Letter of Request From Dave Eiss, Purchaser of Johnson Property Exhibit B - Letter From Johnson's Attorney Dated 10/18/88 Exhibit C - Planning Commission Minutes of 10/3/88 Exhibit D - Planning Commission Action Notice of 10/6/88 Exhibit E - Memo & Exhibits of 9/28/88 Exhibit F - Staff Sketch Discussion - Please review the memo and exhibits of September 28, 1988, and review the letters from Mr. Eiss and Mr. Wangensteen. Howard Johnson is selling his 4 acre property at 1635 Concordia Street to Mr. Eiss. During that transaction, it was discovered that a lot line rearrangement agreed upon by the property owners many years ago 1. id never been filed, and the Trainor house at 1675 Concordia Street actually encroaches l' into the Howard Johnson property. The applicant brought forth this application for a 5' setback to clean up this title problem. Planning Commission has reviewed this application at two meetings, and at their October 3rd meeting, recommended on a vote of 6-0 that he new line should be located at least 10' from the Trainor residence, which would make the Trainor residence conforming to the 10' side setback standard for the LR-lC zoning district. Planning Commission felt that this was the only opportunity that they would have to make this non -conforming situation fully conforming. Mr. Eiss and Mr. Wangensteen make a number of significant points, relating back to how this encroachment came about, and that the rearrangement is merely to clear, up an old problem. It also should be noted that the proposed rearrangement will decrease the Johnson/Eiss property by 336 s.f., less than 0.01 acre, hence there is little significant effect on future development of that property. At the Planning Commission meeting, staff suggested the possibility of a rearrangement that would take just a rectangular portion out of the Johnson/Eiss property, s creating"npw line that is 10' from the existing Trainor house. This would comprise about 450 s.f. in area and would accomplish the Planning Commission objective without significantly increasing the area lost by Johnson/Eiss (see Exhibit F). Zoning File #k1328 October 19, 1988 Page 2 of 2 Staff Recommendation - Normally, a metes and bounds lot line rearrangement is not brought to Council until all final survey work is complete, since there normally is not a controversy. However, in this case where the applicants are proposing a different arrangement than that recommended by Planning Commission, it was deemed appropriate that this item be brought before the Council for review, and a final resolution would be drafted when the final survey work is complete. Council is requested to review this application in light of the Planning Commission recommendation, with consideration given to the history of this encroachment and the applicants' plight a.,L, intent. Staff would note that the proposed 5' setback rearrangement would be a positive benefit to both properties, because it would at least place the Trainor house within its own property boundaries. Council is requested to give applicant direction as to what setback will be acceptable to the City for this application. 17 OCT 88 TO: CITY OF ORONO PO BOX 66 CRYSTAL BAY. 1114 55323 r—� � 2 r :J � I ►� � OCT 1 81988 �I SUBJECT: SUDD I V I S I O14-LOT LINE REARRANGEMENT ZON I NU FILL IJI I . JUHNSUM/EISS/TRAINOR PROPERTY 1-311'I3 1675 CONCORDIA STREET FROPI s DAVE E I S5 _ I request that you approve Howard Johnson's proposed lot line '~ rearrangement giving the Trainor property an additional 5 tt _ whe►e the_hoUse encroaches on the Johnson property. 1 am buying the property from Howard and he and firs. Trainor- are -_ trying to- get the lot 1 ine changed to rectify a problem caused many years ago. They agree on the proposed solution. I thing. the planning commission, besides beinu rude and -r.�farrogant. is recommending unwise action. In effect they want to reward undesireable behavior. Someune who added on to their house without regard to any setbacVs. in fart without _ _ rrau�►'d to their lot line. is somNune the planninq commission wants to give 11 f t of property. Neither Mrs. Trainor nor I+ . Johnson want to aet into a lecgat battle regardinq the vaalrre of the property rt1r. Johnson will have to turn over to r•Irs. T►-ainor. The snlutior► they have _ proposed is a definite improvem►tnt on the e;:istinq setback violation and it ratifies both parties. In~case you're wunderinq what m; intentions are, my wife and I plan to build a home for uAlrEzelves and tear down the -�_ ,existingvhotrse. Our hope is to keep the entire piece of property for ourselves. If fin&nces we miuhl_ Asl t.c) sell off a parcel or two. In any case, wN don't intend to asl for any variances. we won_ ' t betryinq to put 8 townhOLISes on the lake or anythinq like that. We intend to improve -_ property values in the neighborhood with w-ha f ever we da. We _ __ __are as concerned as you about the proper use of land in Orono. We are supportive of the set bacr a.id lot size ~_ rOgU i. rernen is . However. we t h 1 r, r the p 1 ann inq commis-41 on 3 s being unreaaunablo and unwise H,4 to the SUblect proper-t;, _ line proposal. the proposal is a reason-4ble solution to r problem the cit;• failed to control in the past. TThank you for your time and contaldera t] on. and thank 1or.i rur puttinc., in your time to protect and improve our city. Sincerel lia•.e C �>s \X'ILLIANt K. WANGENSTEEN ATTORNEY AT LAW 91N1 EAST WAYZATA BOULEVARD WAYZATA. MINNESOTA 11191 16121 471-01 JO In Aswciatwo W,ch Srewsrr R Peru Shawn M Perm October 18, 1988 City Council City of Orono Crystal Bay, MN 55323 „E: 1635 Concordia Street, Wayzata Lot Line Realignment Dear Council Members: As attorney for Howard B. Johnson, I am writing in response to the attached Notice of Planning Commission Action dated October 6, 1988. The purpose of Mr. Johnson's application to the City for a lot realignment is simply to rectify a title problem which arises from a 1-foot en.-:roachment onto his property by a house built by the Trainors, his neighbors to the south, some 37 years ago. I assume that the Trainors must have obtained a building permit from the City of Orono to build their residence, but I understand that there are no preserved City records from the early 1950's to document same. In any event, this encroachment has existed for almost 4 decades. Years ago the Trainors and the Johnsons and the City tried, without success, to resolve the problem. Mr. Trainor has since died, and Mrs. Johnson died last month. Mr. Johnson has now sold to David Eiss who will appear before the Council in support of the Johnson/Eiss lot alignment proposal on October 24th. We feel that the Council should approve the Johnson/Eiss application for a lot realignment with a 5-foot setback, on the grounds that: 1) We are not dealing herewith a pending building permit application for new construction. The Trainor house has existed and encroached 1-foot onto the Johnson property for 37 years; 2) It would be practically and legally difficult at this point to move the Trainor house in order to cure the encroachment cloud on title; City Council October 18, 1988 Page 2 3) Any error in siting and permitting construction of the Trainor house was not the fault of the Johnsons; 4) For the Council now to arbitrarily require a 10-foot setback serves to take property unnecessarily from an innocent landowner, Johnson, who was not responsible for the encroachment; 5) Johnson should not be penalized for an error of the Trainors in building, and of the City in issuing permit for the Trainor residence. For all of the above reasons we feel that the Johnson/Eiss proposal for a lot realignment with a 5-foct setback is both reasonable and appropriate, and we ask the Council to overrule the Planning Commission's conclusions and approve a lot realignment with a 5-foot setback. Respectfully submitted, William K. Wangensteen WKW:kjs cc: Howard Johnson Daivid Eiss Attachment MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBEP 3, 1988 ZONING FILE #1310-BISINGER CONTINUED well as the school bus schedules and routes and rush hour. Motion, Ayes-5, Nays-0, Motion passed. #1328 HOWARD B. JOHNSON 1635 i 1675 CONCORDIA STREET SUBDIVISION OF A LOT LIME REARRANGEMENT -CLASS I SECOND REVIEW The applicant was present, as was the new owner of 1635 Concordia Street, Mr. David Eiss. Chairman Kelley read a letter that had been sent by Mr. Thomas Kelly, an Attorney for Mrs. Trainor. The letter indicated that Mrs. Trainor supported the proposed subdivision applied for by Mr. Johnson. Kelley stated that the main issue now involved with this application was whether the side setback would be 5' or 10'. Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator Gaffron reiterated Mr. Kelley's statement regarding a 5' or 10' setback. He reminded the Planning Commission that the current zoning for this property was LR-1C, half acre district, and that the standard side setback was 10'. The 5' that the applicant is proposing improves the current situation. Kelley surmised that this lot line rearrangement was necessary for Mr. Eiss to obtain title insurance. Planning Commission member Hanson inquired as to how much acreage wes available. Gaffron responded that Tract A was approximately 170,500 s.f., which would be approximately 4 acres. Mr. Eiss stated that he did not understand how the City could "reward" Mrs. Trainor for encroaching on Mr. Johnson's property by giving her an additional 5'. Counci lmember Johnson stated that the City was not giving a reward, it was merely trying to conform to the City's standards. The applicant asked why Mrs. Trainor could not be asked to give up 10' of her house. Hanson replied that the Planning Commission tried 'o look upon all applications with common. sense. Mr. Johnson stated that he was trying to be neighborly by giving Mrs. Trainor 5', but she was to pay for the survey and attorney's fees. Mrs. Trainor has not paid these fees and Mr. Johnson Suggested that she therefore, pay for the additional 5' of land. Hanson stated that those issues were beyond the control of the Planning Commission. Kelley informed Mr. Johnson that going to Court would be another recourse. Plannir• Commission member Hanson stated that he would like to see the setback standard upheld. Mr. Johnson asked what effect the 1V' requirement would have should Mr. Eiss want to subdivide that lot. Hanson stated that he could not address that issue without further information being provided. Planning Commission member Cohen stated that someone applied to the City to have this matter heard by the Planning Commission. He MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 3, 1988 ZONING FILE #1328-JOHNSON CONTINUED informed Mr. Johnson that he chose the Planning Commission as a remedial source, and now he was not happy with the Planning Commission's decision. Planning Commission member Johnson was sympathetic to Mr. Johnson's situation, but felt that conforming with the 10' standard was more important. Planning Commission member Brown concurred. It was moved by Chairman Kelley, seconded by Planning Commission member Cohen, to allow the rearrangement of the lot line 10' from the Trainor residence. Mp. Eiss questioned if the 10' was from the lot line or from the Trainor house. Hanson stated that it was from the house. Mr. Eiss stated that Mrs. Trainor would then be given 11', not 101. Gaffron stated that at one point, the house was one foot over the lot line, rather than being cn the lot line. Gaffron stated that if the iot line were changed so that it was 10' from the house, it would be 11' from the existing line. A way to alleviate that would be to put a jog in the .lot line. Chairman Kelley interjected that the Planning Commission's only duty was to determine whether the lot line be 5' or 10' from the house. Motion, Ayas=6, Nayes=0, Motion passed. #1335 WOODHILL COUNTRY CLUB 200 WOODHILL ROAD CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT/VARIANCE PUBLIC HEARING 8:12 P.M. - 8:30 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were duly noted. The applicant's representative, John Winston, was present for this matter, as was Mr. Rick Sathre and Mr. Michael Wood. The topographical survey prepared by Rick Sathre was given to the Planning Commission members prior to the meeting and showed the proposed maintenance structure. Mr. Winston explained that the applicant was seeking two approvals, one for a conditional use permit, which would allow the constructions of the maintenance facility; the second would be approval of a variance for an accessory structure exceeding 1,000 s.f. maximum floor area. The proposed structure has 10,800 s.f. Mr. Winston stated that they worked closely' -with Mr. Mark Fox, whose residence is adjacent to the golf course. The current proposed site was determined to be one that would least affect Mr. Fox, as well as the existing vegetation. The structure meets all required setbacks. The existing maintenance facility will be removed, which should make the entire area more aesthetically appealing. The residential house structure to the south of the proposed maintenance structure will be vacated prior to construction. The removal of the house will occur at the same time the excavation work is to be done. io ZONING FILE NO. 1328 CITY OF ORONO NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 473-7357 Date of Notice: 10/6/88 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- TO: Howard B. Johnson COPIES TO: 1635 Concordia Street Wayzata, MN 55391 TYPE OF APPLICATION: Subdivision - Lot Line Rearrangement ----------------------------------------------------------- DATE OF MEETING: 10/3/88 VOTE: 6 For 0 Against Planning Commission recos nds the following: Approval subject to conditions noted below NOTES AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS: Planning Commission recommended approval subject to providing a 10' setback for the existing Trainor residence. This item will be scheduled for review by the City Council on Monday, October 24, 1988. Meeting starts at 7:00 p.m. It is the City's impression that Mr. Eiss wishes the Council to approve the proposal leaving only a 5' setback to the Trainor residence. Any written comments by any of the various parties regarding their rositions on the matter should be submitted for inclusion in the Council packet no later than noon, Wednesday, October 19, 1988. Applicant's next scheduled meeting is confirmed as: City Council Monday, October 24, 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. cc: Helen Trainor 1675 Concordia St Wayzata, MN 55391 Thomas R. Kelley Titus Bldg, St 405 6550 York Ave S Minneapolis, MN 55435 Wm Wangensteen, Atty 900 E Wayzata Blvd Wayzata, MN 55391 David Eiss 1790 Shadywood Rd Wayzata, MN 55391 ZONING PILE NO. #1328 CITY OF ORONO NOTICE OF PLANNING COMM.�SSION ACTION P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 473-7357 Date of Notice: 9-21-88 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- TO: Howard B. Johnson COPIES TO: Helen K. Trainor 1635 Concordia Street 1675 Concordia Street Wayzata, MN 55391 Wayzata, MN 55391 TYPE OF APPLICATION: Subdivision ----------------------------------------------------------- DATE OF MEETING: 9-19-88 VOTP: 5 For 0 Against Planning Comission recommends the following: Tabled for reasons noted below NOTES AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS: Planning Commission requested applicant to consider revising proposal to allow for a 10' side setback to the Trainor house, so that house would obtain a conforming side setback. It is our understanding as of this writing that all parties have agreed to such a rev4 Sion, and that you will submit a revised survey for review by the Planning Commission at their October 3, 1988 meeting. That survey should be submitted to staff no later than Wednesday September 28, 1988. Applicant's next scheduled meeting is confirmed as: Planning Commission October 3, 1988; meeting starts at 7:00p.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 Pla ning Commission. If the Planning Commission recommends approval on 10-3-8ck, this item would then be scheduled for Council action on October 24, 1988. TO: Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Planning Commissior Members City Administrator Bernhardson 1RtOM: Michael P. Gaffron, Asst. Planning & Zoning Administrator DATE: September 28, 1988 SUBJECT: i1328 Howard B. Johnson, 1635 & 1675 Concordia Street - - Subdivision of a Lot Line Rearrangement - Class I - Second Review LIST OF MMISITS: Exhibit A - Planning Commission Action Notice Dated 9/21/88 Exhibit B - Memo 6 Exhibits of 9/14/88 DISCUSSION This item was reviewed at your 9/19/88 meeting, and was tabled to allow applicant to consider Planning Commission's request to revise to a 10' side setback to the Trainor house, so that the house would obtain a conforming side setback. Since that meeting, staff was initially advised that Mr. Johnson would have no problem with this request and would submit a revised survey. However, since that initial discussion, staff has been advised by Johnson's attorney that the contract -for -deed purchaser of Johnson's property, Mr. David Eiss, has not consented to granting the additional land for setback purposes. Staff has been advised that all the affected parties will be present at the October 3rd meeting. STA" SSCOII01NDATION Staff recommendation as noted in the September 14 memo still applies. !'fo*'oN ��"-, �„►NC ►•►v:T ?c /OF�aM Ti2a�r�oK �ou.e Vow 6 - O T t O r1.► '..r+ /1N: j.-"Atli #06vt �e""t/�CIc wee A NONCC/�sr�..:`�1,'P.je. c rTe-• r LLY , r CITY OF ORONO - SUBDIVISION APPLICATION -------------------------------------------------- -------- PROPERTr LOCATION Site Address - Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) Please check one - Property abstract or %� torrens? "= Attach legal description to application. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - -- APPLICANT Phone ( home ) Name r - �' r ' Phone (work) �-` Address: (� = City: /j _. - Zip: - -------------- ------------------------------ ----------------- ONNEg (if different than applicant) Phone (home) Name Phone (work) Address: City: Zip: (attach list if more than one -------------------------------------•-------------------------------------- MISTING LAND USE Number of Tax Parcels Development Size — Acres Dry Land Acres Wet Land Acres Total, all parcels Present Use (check) Residential; no. of units Other (specify) Present Zoning District '' -?✓ PROPOILRL Division for Tax Purposes Lot Line Rearrangement Only (no new building sites) Subdivision, for New Building Sites Number. of Building Sites: Existing Units New Units Total Units Proposed Gross Density: (Snits per L.... Acres Minimum Lot Size:Sq Feet Dry Buildable Land Proposed Use: (check) _ / Residential Other (specify) Toy: Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson From: Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator Date: l;tember 14, 1988 Subject: _8 Howard B. Johnson, 1635 & 1675 Concordia Street - b;.bdivision of a Lot Line Rearrangement - Class I - Public Hearing Application - The Trainor House at 1675 Concordia Street encroaches approximately l' over the lot line into the Johnson property at 1635 Concordia Street. The proposed lot line rearrangement maces the Trainor house within its property boundaries. Zoning District - LZ-IC, Single Family 112 Acre Minimum, Sewered List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Exhibit B - Exhibit C - Exhibit D - Discussion - - Application Plat Mal, Property Owners List Proposed Registered Land Survey Howard Johnson of 1635 Concordia Street is in the process of selling his property which consists of approximately 3.9 acres. It came to light as a result of a recent property survey, that the neighboring Trainor residence at 1675 Concordia S'`reet encroaches approximately l' into the Johnson property. This subdivision is merely to provide an additional parcel of 336 s.f. to '_he Trainor property in order that their house at 1675 Concordia Street can be within its property boundaries. Although it is not dimensioned on the survey, tre proposed Tract B to be transferred to Trainor, appears to leave a 5' setback from the Trainor residence to the new property line. In our LR-lC district, normally a 1'J' side setback is required. Staff would suggest that Planning Commission ask applicant to consider granting additional square footage for Tract B so that the normal 10' iide setback can be accomtlished. The current proposal increases the Trainor property to 0.434 acre in area. Staff Rtco endation - Although it would appear that granting of additional area within Tract B to accomplish the 10' side setback standard would be a logical goal in this type of lot line rearrangement, applicant may have specific reasons why such an arrangement is not proposed. Regardless, the proposed lot line rearrangement, which places the Trainor house within its own property boundaries is a positive application and staff would recommend approval. MINIMUM !MATERIAL NECESSARY FOR COMPLETE PRELIMINARY APPLICATION 1. Completed Application Form 2. Preliminary Plat information on Certificate of Survey. 3. Certified Property Owners List of owners within 350' (you must obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Govt Center 348-3271). 4. Stamped, legal sized envelopes (#10) pre -addressed to each of the names on the above list with no return address (use address labels 3btained with property owners list). 5. As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. Certification by Zoning Department that Preliminary Plat Application is complete. Zoning Official's Signature Date ----------------------- ----------- -------------------- ----------------------- 1. Payment of fees (park fees, filing fee, sewer and water asses,-.nents). 2. Signed certificate of survey or mylar copies of formal plat. 3. Title opinion. 4. Easements, Covenants, etc. 5. Developers Agreement and Fetter of Credit. Certification by Zoning Department that Final Plat Application is complete. Zoning Official's Signature -Date -------------------------------------------------- ----- ----------------- FEES Sketch Plan Review (Class I, ZI S IIZ) Preliminary Review (Class I 6 II Subdivision) Preliminary Review (Class III and all non-residential) $150.00 250.00 300.00 + 20.00/Lot Final Plat Review (Class III) 150.00* *(Plus any legal or engineering charges) -------------------------------------------------------------------------- The applicant hereby agrees to provide all ir'_ormation required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, City Engineer, City Attorney, Planning Commission and Council necessary to process this application and further agrees to pay all additional fees established by ordinance. Applicant's Signature -/.y'/ �,c = Date Owner's Signature /-lf1 (\�'`--'� �-'�` __ Date G - — 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 mcnth. 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 ad-iise the Building s Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. ea f1� •►'l' ��. i. s e9 1'1 i! �= r •,: )GHERR`h AVE l : too + r R ►r '� ( )/r ' .i 0 1 • �2�� 9 EA l�Nly (1 s .2 o �+ f �t i ~ al �e p_ li S 4 �1� r 3 ,• /e, ()fl` Nr Rf .4 + fk ]]�('�iti�,'1/ (`y)� (!/1]:1+ o ' ►'�•„'`' /N ► �1 / +.a t N.�XO•ir,'G..n so•';�1t1,,yt f I,/■ti`1 +r'� 1� l�7�1j)+n.I`tS�a1s:t.::•�� )etf ( a S t _fjli : 14') If Itjy)�� i 1p !• 33,' �'•,fi� f._ t- fL �) -,• 9�) 's__J_L ' 41,3i_W i, ` • ` ` +�h , 1+ ]i)l . = u1 �• i I ' �' __ ,- Li4�� Y f i • s • tti, l��►e�� •,-' I , : 11 10 — 14`/e, It 1. H-f:O jY :1,:. !f :. a :y i9 1 ]a g f� •(��,(�) ,�� 1 ,li))`\ i /, - I• �j - .4'' ' as % •k - - -'a �1 �� 4'lil(SO] ✓�5 7�S]11;5�1�56i'r,1'1). •/i y+� ]I,ram j aaa al ZD IL I iM ��_ i ill N '] a ` �. �Q . I Y H Y[ i O '•AMA., a j '� P _ _ a a I /J GICAV, T LOT 5 � l J 1 hl h, �� l l I U) (1) isVu r - - - i — - - - t1 `- - - , = 1 M PLEGAT 00 = ,.y n► a ..� , .:� . # �, ' ills) s 4 t- '� 2 • get 4 I M 1 l., .. �1 r 30 '.: r ',1 CO / , lo 1 p 30-119- -V -pt.Ar�v ) � ;. I a-lEviin MINIMUM MATERIAL NECESSARY FOR COMPLETE PRELIMINARY APPLICATION 1. Completed Application Form 2. Preliminary Plat information on Certificate of Survey. 3. Certified Property Owners List of owners within 350' (you must obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Govt Center 348-3271). 4. 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). 5. As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. Certification by Zoning Department that Preliminary Plat Application is complete. 1. Zoning Official's Signature Date ---------------------- ---------------------------------------------------- 1. Payment of fees (park fees, filing fee, sewer and water assessments). "l. Signed certificate of survey or mylar copies of formal plat. 3. Title opinion. 4. Easements, Covenants, etc. 5. Developers Agreement and Letter of Credit. Certification by Zoning Department that Final Plat Application is complete. Zoning Official's Signature Date --------------------------------------------------------------------------- FEES Sketch Plan Review (Class I, II & III) $150.00 Preliminary Review (Class I & II Subdivision) 250.00 Preliminary Review (Class III and all non-residential) 300.00 + ,7 ccrf .700 fIgo = 4yi + AC4o d600 0 oo "(ra) : 111-90 r6.4L 20.00/Lot Final Plat Review (Class III) 150.00* *(Plus any legal or engineering charges) --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, City Engineer, City Attorney, Planning Commission and Council necessary to process this application and further agrees to pay all additions fees established by ordinance. C. Applicant's Signature Date Y:/ py Owner's Signature '"v Date Applicant must have'a11 submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Mondav tch month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meeti he Planning Commismion and Council. If an applic:an' is unable to at scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized ac -tend in your place and to advise the Building & Zoning Of ice of th is i,ange prior to the meeting. RUN DATE 07/25/86 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPER(I IfNFORMATION SYSTEM REPORT NO. PI435401 PROPERTY OWNERS LIST PAGE 3 BATCH 002 38 30-118-23 31 0003 38 30-118-23 31 0004 38 30-118-23 32 0004 PROP ADDR 04555 WAYZA74 BLVD 04575 WAYZATA BLVD 01040 TOWN LIINE RD OWNER NAME W J SMI1H & H S COLEMAN L G LA BRESH ETAL RICHARD E fNEUMAINN TAXPAYER DICK G ROBINSON L G LA BRESH RICHARD E NEUMAINN NAME/ADDR 4555 WAYZATA BLVD 4575 WAYZATA BLVD 1040 TOWNLIINE RD MAPLE PLAIN fVN 55359 MAPLE PLAIN MIN 55359 MAPLE PLAIN MN 55359 38 30-118-23 32 0005 38 30 118-23 33 0001 38 30-118-23 33 0002 PROP ADOR 01020 TOWN LIINE RD OWNER NAME R E HASH A P R HASH K TURIN11AM ETAL K TURINHAM ETAL TAXPAYER ROBERT E NASH KEN NETH A KATIIRY14 TURfNHAM KENNETH i KATHRYN TURNHAM NAME/ADDR 1020 TOWNLINE RD S 4490 WATERTOWN ROAD 4490 WATERTOWN ROAD MAPLE PLAIN MH 55359 MAPLE PLAIN MN 55359 MAPLE PLAIN 114 55359 38 30-118-23 34 0001 38 31-118-23 21 0002 38 31-118-23 21 0003 PROP ADDR 04580 WATERTOWN RD OWNER (NAME KIP A NELSON RICHARD 0 MILLER KIP A NELSON TAXPAYER KIP NELSON RICHARD 0 MILLER KIP A NELSON (NAME/ADDR 4580 WATERTOWN RD 5580 SHOREWOOD LANE 4580 WATERTOWN ROAD MAPLE PLAIN MN 55359 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 MAPLE PLAINN MN 55359 38 31-118-23 22 0002 38 31-118-23 22 0005 38 31-118-23 22 0006 PROP ADDR 04720 WATERTOWN RD 04660 WATERTOWN RD OWNER NAME D 6 ESTERLY & S KENNNEDY ROBERT L PIERCE ETAL R A HARVEY ETAL TAXPAYER DENNIS ESTERLY L SUE KENNEDY ROBERT L PIERCE ROBERT A HARVEY SR NAME/ADDR 4765 WATERTOWN RD 4720 WATERTOWN RD 4660 WATERTOWN RD OROINO MN 55346 MAPLE PLAIN MH 55359 MAPLE PLAIN MIN 55359 70 25-118-24 it 0008 70 25-118-24 44 0011 70 25-118-24 44 0015 PROP ADDR 00070 ADDRESS UINASSIGINED 00891 TOWN LINE RD OWNER NAME G& L BETTS L A A INC D i L SCALF TAXPAYER JEROME P OR KATHLEEN LIfNDNER EUGENE A CAROL NEYENS DANIEL J & LINDA A SCALF IIAIIE/ADDR 1479 RAINBOW AVE 4912 BROADM" DR 891 TOWNLINE RD MAPLE 'LAIN MN 55359 MAPLE PLAIN MN 55359 MAPLE PLAIN MIN 55359 70 25-118-24 44 0016 70 16-118-24 11 0007 PROP ADDR 00665 TOWN LIINE RD OWNER NAME D& A HAWKINSOfI C F$ B J LEFY.Y TAXPAYER DOUGLAS &ANN HAWKINSOfN TOTAL BATCH 002 00016 NAME/ ADOR 865 TOWN LINE RD CHARLES F $ BARBARA J LE FKY MAPLE PLAIN MH 55359 1338 HAMPSHIRE AVE S ST LOUIS PARK MN 55426 RUN DATE 07/25/88 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNERS LIST BATCH 002 10 36-118-24 11 0008 KB &RENOWAK KARL B & RUTNMARY E NOWAK 4885 CO RD NO 6 INDEPENDENCE MN 55350 9 REPORT NO. PI435401 PAGE 4 I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUS IF Of INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT Of PROPERTY TAXATION, TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF. DATE r� BY 4 ,Soy` S71LA&VCY OVE44AY N� — Name I Kk8 KIC2 - lei WQLMy 1M8-LEaVA4. 6p c 4w 6LAWCOLe P.*^ • fir *r 4 *1«v* ?qft — p4soesN erH. Cvm PLATE III C`FF�/�j I do do P div Sao Tvpical pattern of soils in association S. Free �} �,',� ' Co , s01 ` C1,4 )" In i fa z V p j Cl) J / / \ W 41 cr r / ----_--- I raw . r 5 11.33 D. Intersections shall be designed with a flat stopping area of at least thirty (30) feet in a residential area and sixty (60) fee' in a commercial or industrial area. The stopping area shall be designed to provide a maximum grade of two (2) percent. E. Where any street intersection will involve earth banks or existing vegetation inside any lot cornei that would create a traffic hazard by limiting visibility, the subdivider shall cut such ground and/or vegetation (including trees) in connection with the grading of the right-of-way to the extent deemed necessary by the City to provide an adequate sight distance. F. The crown of all streets, including intersections, shall be three percent (3%) or less. Subd. 4. Typical Section. The typical section indicated herein is as determined for a Clay Subgrade (A-6 Soil Classifica- tion) and may be subject to change. Soil borings may be required to be determined by the City. Private Street - Residential Units R.O.W.* M.P.W.** Section 3-6 50' 24' 3" Class 5 100$ crushed 3" 2341 Bituminous Surface Over 7 50' 28' 8" Class 5 100% crushed 3" 2341 Bituminous Surface Public Street - Residential Units R.O.W.* M.P.W.** Section 3-10 50' 28' 8" Class 5 100% crushed 3" 2341 Bituminous Surface Over 10 50' 32' 8" Class 5 100% crushed 3" 2341 Bituminous Surface Maximum cul-de-sac length - 1,000' Maximum number of units on cul-de-sac - 10 Public Street - Commercial or Industrial Units R.J.W.* M.P.W.** Section 1+ 70' 32' 8" Class 4 8" Class 5 100s crushed 4" 2341 Bituminous surface • Right -of -Way Width �* Minimum Paved Width ORONO CC 462 (4-1-84) ' 11 '�ti,`; `�\\ \8 ��\\ �\ ` •�`\ \\ � \ � � � r +tom• it � I ,� v\` \'1t �F1 t.� ^•eft if tt I 4 1 —�— `-•.w��— " _ � % i � t ,\ � `\I � ` ,1 \ lam`. 10, J � ww� = � _� r� _ ' I 1'. � ' - r 11 1 �,1 1 `�\\ `IL/• 1 �'r 1 ,\� � 1 I rr I rrir �• 1 r �� COFFIN & GRONBERG, INC. SURVEYING. ENGINEERING AND LAND PLANNING 462-A TAMARACK AVENUE LONG LAKE. MINN. 56306 473.4141 10-12-88 City of Orono P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Soil borings were taken on the Painters Woods proposed sub- division on the areas shown on the preliminary plat_. While we did find some Hamel Loam soils in soil horings 1 and 10, these were in existing swales or drainageways. In the borings taken nearby out of the swal:Qs better soils were encountered. Thus, the soils map is correct in showing Hamel soils but it i5 Le'sLLicLej Lo the drainage ways And is not as extensive as shown on the soils map. Although it is very likelv that mound systems will be needed on most lots in tniA subdivi.,ion, there are extensive areas of Adequate soils and slopes Fir the-(- -mound sstems on each of t_ho lots. Sinc,�rely, COFFIN & GRONBERG, INC Mark S. Gronbera , Los;,s of Soil vorinas m B-27 X in I �.:"a'''' e, `..1,, in Surface elevation feet i BG.I�K LOAM. ~ IJL/�CK CORM I 2 GeAr «41M 2 — 3— 3- 4 — i 14 S — S — b - 6 7 — 7 — I -- i 8 --. Stsndint water to;:a: Peasert at feet of dporh Not „rF.1f:nt In and I 0 I-- ,+rY,. ding :;a... L4L1w. I Praann► �,* PZa� ni �.. ��. Observations and COMMUnts: Logs of Soil Borinns Lonation or Project ��'N�r.R f !✓J!�' Boriags made by 1WdOC GROAvdFirC- Data /o-1- Ff Classification System: AASHO USDA-SCS ! Unified other Auger used (check two): Hand �, or Power Plighf _, or Bucket ZC ; other Depth, Boring number / Dcpth, Boring number .G in F e Surface elevation in fet Surface elevation o LI fDeet E-.� o' bo-ing at Standing water tablf P-resent at 1 hours after boring. ;lot present in boring hole >_, Mottled soil: ,1.. th Not present in borin,n hole Qbs�rvations and cor_..ents: /rL i! !Y L e. /" 3 — End of boring at 7. O feet. Standing water table: Present at feet of depth, hours after boring. Not present in boring hole Mottled soil: tint rresent in borinr. hole Gbscrvations and ccsnnants: of Soil P.orinr.: -- 1I-27 Location or Project Borines made by Classification System: A1,SHO USDA-SCS ; Unifi,other •uRC. .:ZQ1J (cheer, two) }}and or Power _; Flight _, or Bucket ; othel Depth, Boring number i __ Depth, 13ori - -�-` in Surface elevation in y Ip feet feet Surface elevation 0 1 ---� 0 dL�1e.r � �Ane 1 -- I End of boring at 5.0 feet. Standing water table: P_esent at _ feet of depth, hours after boring. rot present in boring hole v< :`.ottled soil: Observed at 1. �- feet of depth. Not present in boring, hole Obsetvations and torments: BLAI,r C a.�n, 1 — End of boring at 3. o feet. Standing water table: Present at feet of depth, hours after boring. Not present in borin¢ hole Mottled soil: Observed at feet of depth. Vot present in borinn hziz �! Observations and cotrents: I Lops of Soil ^.orinrs 2-27 Location or Proje:t Borings made by Date Classification System: AAS110 USDA-SCS Unified ; other _ Auger used (cheep two): Hand _, or Power _; Flight or Bucket other Depth, Boring; number ` { -� Depth, Boring nu^her 6 in in Surface elevation Surf iee� ace elevation feet G - 0 i End of boring at Y. O feet. Standing water table: resent at feet of depth, hours after boring. Not present in boring hoie Mottled sail: Observed at feet of depth. t:ot present in boring. hole Ob;ur,-ations and co --mints: End of boring at Y. O feet. Standing water table: Present at feat of depth, hours aft_r boring. Not present in boring hole X Mottled soil: Observed at 1. fact of depth. Not present boring hole Obscr.rations and cc --.en=,-: c Logs of Soil Borings 11-27 Location or Project A,r„- , ," _ten.,,, Savings made by Date Classification System: A SHO ; USDA-SCS ilnified other Auger used (check two) : Band or ?'::•c- x' l_g,IE or Bucket other Depth, Boring nu:^*Der // I (Uep in feet %)ulfn�e elevation I 0 End of boring at I. O _ feet. Standins water table:. Present at fee_ if death, hours after boring. Not present in boring hole _ < _. mottled s:i.. Not present in borin; hole ,-. fee 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 S End of boring at feat. Standing water table: Present at feet of depth, `ours afta. boring, Not pre ent :r. boring kola Notclau soli: f,:at „i a Ptti. :!zt present in bcrin[t hole ()'ucor:z.tion, ant cc:r:-cntc: ,.ohs o_ JOiI BoLintts I %— B-27 Location or Project /.• �, .. ,-;� ; Borings made by Date Classification System! AASHO USD :-SCS Lnified other Auger used (check two): Hand or Power _; F1ighE _, or Bucket ; other Depth, I Boring, number Depth, Boring! number /O in feet Sfeurfisue elevation eet " Surface elevation 01 0 3- 7 — 8 — End of boring at J' . 4 feet. Standing water table. Present at :eet of depth, hours after boring. Not present in boring hole ><_. �r�ttle t sTil : 05scr:•c: a, i fee- of depth. Not present in borin;, hole _ vvout`Ja�.c:�s and co-.nen,s: 1 — 2 '_' jiff,, 3 — 4 End of boring at 7 O feet. Standing water table: ':escr.t Ct feet of depth, _ hours after boxing. ttot prc�-^_nt in borin- hole tC I i Hottled s:-,i1: Ob5c::c.i au feet of depth. ttot present in borinr hole O'isc^.,at_ons and ccM'ncnta: CITY OF ORONO Control No. A. The Subject of this request is: Xy an existing private roadway. �I a proposed public roadway which is to be condition of pending subdivision approval- B. Owner(s) of the subdivision /r:�4lle,0-D*1 '7 9 ,9,.VPR j'�ES , C. The above owner(s) hereby request -that this Roadway be known by the following name: Choice No. 1 �,Q,��FiG.S Choice No. 2✓''eJJ Choice No. 3 �jp��/��/l5 (,-z 4 �5� (List three choices in order of preference. The City Council will approve a name provided no conflict exists with existing names or naming policy. If all names have a conflict, you will be asked to make new choices. The approved name will be used for all mailing address and official identification purposes.) D. The above owner(s) hereby request the City of Orono to install the following standard street and traffic signs and said owner(s) hereby agree to reimburse the City for all costs of said installation. (Such signing may be required as part of d se_earate Developer's Agreement and/or subdivision request.) -_ X standard city street name sign(s) - number required V standard "STOP" sign(s) - number required 1 The above owner(s) do hereby acknowledge the (future) existence of said public road, and that the City of Orono has no obligation to maintain or service said roadway until that roadway has been approved by the City cf Orono as meeting all public road standards specifically the completion of the paving. (sfSignatureow: Date 1,0 / zz lg�sl Date Date Date F">04-1is/ r:5 -$P7 ) 3 3 o r&,e v"MW'7NG or 91-19 -$a -sib r0wnDN pF-- "v►Sty rievur.., mpio-'T r,yOW/N �. ' 2- w 2...i� Z Q �fl SeGtto •r Pat no N p'r New+/ N Ca P" P*set:� , e wrz z vEw,� y s 4'N G'oTs 3- V (wee-vb. 9-/ 9- s s� G Q oN 3 G. NorWS-rl4A-r M cwb PAS AAPR.oV rt.- -Two C Aaa jA_ ryey b Qvo"' "rT Lo— 'JN »'4 • �+ : y. 90 R c NcT /*-J � p _ Tom/ s Lo T N t'EbS Tz ►2E; 1-o�rs 2. 3 .9aSwjt� ON GoT ,L"e4FtL D 4 T-,4.eeA- %KiMl 0P%ot D.-P/NI*10N: IN ZoN)NGs Sr1BD. CODES GW D e5kctlMe!Aj'r MIAJ1r•uv-00102'sy) SiNc4• fT /s Ajar P" � �� c K , o w . � r � / : i^^�♦• I y �.n., A c L�tS !'A� rw eM+♦' . Peve /Lo3, aY� Soso, co�� -r eA&er^vvJ,- cetiNO t� ,A 'cep ,�s r,a.rr- OF Z.O AC . �.cy eC•V/d.Dddt,r w ' TKO K T'- JW DIL`/ CONE/b�l Orl,tr (/�T1 #Qt s o Rco , OF Z.0 C o^+r' b'A4N't / N (pove-P / S 3 A" *`*_� C"C' S P%e ! s ter• ? GP.N S O o ale •� COFFIN & GRONBERG, INC. SURVEYING, ENGINEERING AND LAND PLANNING D 4E!•A TAMARACK AVENUE LONG LAKE, MINN. 59356 -- SR 1 91i� 473•4141 September 19,. 1988 City of Orono P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Attention: Mike Gaffron Dear Mike: Enclosed are revised copies of the preliminary plat and road plan for PAINTERS WOODS. The Minnehaha Watershed District wanted us to show the existing access easement to their weir structure. Also, because of this weir structure and subsequent storage in the wetlands, the culvert sizes are much smaller then those under County Road 6 allowing two driveway entrances for Lots 3 and 4. This has been approved by the watershed district. Sincerely, COFFIN & GRONBERG, INC. Mark S. Gronberg MSG/Ih Enclosures l/ i'�/lam"— I�.or I I ..ni ii:u� ... • i... � / ur / , ♦ \� ^� \ \\ \ \r. ♦ \ l 1It \ It I 0 cr I� (\ i ;• � . � � '\�, \�1�, r •' 1 11 ► i 1 '.—?3.•u,n,-• / ' ,' � I M � �r..� 40 f § 10.55 Subd. 13. City Determination. Based upon the technical evaluation of the designated engineer or expert, and based upon the factors listed above, the City shall determine whether the proposed use is in the floodway or flood fringe and the regulatory flood protection elevation at the site. Subd. 14. Conditions Attached to Conditional Use Permits. Upon consideration of the factors listed above and the purposes of this Section, the City may attach such conditions to the granting of a conditional use permit as it deems necessary to fulfill the purposes of this Section. Such conditions may include, but are not limited to, the following: facilities. A. Modification of waste disposal and water supply B. Limitations on period of use, occupancy and operation. C. Imposition of operational controls, sureties, and deed restrictions. D. Requirements for construction of channel modifications, dikes, levees, and other protective measures. E. Flood proofing measures, in accordance with the State Building Code. The applicant shall submit a plan or document certified by a registered professional engineer or architect that the flood proofing measures are consistent with the regulatory flood protection elevation and associated flood factors for the particular a Subd. 15. L nd Development and Platting. No part of any lot wi n the F lain and Wetlands Conservation Area shall be platted esidential occupancy or for other uses which will increase the danger to health, life, property or the public welfare. All lots containing land within the flood plain districts shall contain a building site above the regulatory flood protection elevation. All subdivisions shall have water and sewage disposal facilities that comply with the provisions of this Section and have road access no lower than two feet below the regulatory flood protection elevation. Whenever a portion of the Flood Plain and Wetlands Conservation Area is located within or adjoins a land area that is being subdivided, the subdivider shall dedicate to the City an adequate perpetual easement over the land within the protected area and along each side of such area for the purpose of improving or protecting the area for drainage or other purposes expressed in this Section and other recreational uses, as determined by the Council. Public or private streets, driveways, drainage openings and culverts shall not be constructed unless the design thereof has been approved by the City, and such structures shall be designed so as not to restrict the flow of water. Subdivision applicants shall provide all certified engineering data, surveys, site plans, flowage calculations and other information as the City may require in order to determine the effects of such development on the affected land and water areas. ORONO CC 370 (4-1-84) § 10.55 -� A. Minimum Lot Atea Requirements. T) minimum lot area requirem 9-of—this-Chaptershall be interpree to mean that all of the required land area for each building site inc,ll be in one contiguous parcel undivided by Floodway or 7lood Fringe and no land within the protecteJ area shall be included in determination of minimum lot area, exceptasgppcifically provided for herein: 1. For properties not served by municipal sanitary sewer, the minimum lot area may be divided by Flood Fringe lands provided at least 2.0 acres of land not within the protected area is included in one contiguous parcel and legal access is available to that building site without encroachment on the protected area. 2. For properties served by municipal sanitary sewer, the minimum lot area may be divided by Flood Fringe lands provided at least one half acre of land not within the protected area is included in one contiguous parcel and both municipal sewer and legal access is available to that building site without encroachment on the protected area. 3. For residential properties served by municipal sanitary sewer, a limited density credit may be allowed for inclusion of Flood Fringe lands as part of the required minimum lot area for purposes of complying with the land use density, open space, building unit to land area ratios or other similar requirements of the land development and zoning provisions. The owner or developer of such property will be credited with an amount of his land within the Flood Fringe equal to, but not exceeding, the amount of his adjacent land which otherwise qualified for development under this Chapter. Such credit shall be conditioned upon dedication of perpetual open space and flowage easements to the City over all protected areas so utilized for density credit. Subd. 16. Special Assessments. The land area in the Flood Plain and Wetlands Conservation Area which is not to be developed and is not used for credit as in Subparagraph A, Item 3 of Subdivision 15, and which is dedicated as an easement shall not be subject to special assessments to defray the cost of other municipal improvement projects, including but not limited to trunk sanitary sewer and water mains and storm sewer improvements. Subd. 17. Nuisance. Any filling, alteration, construction or artificial obstruction of the Flood Plain and Wetlands Conservation Area is declared to be and to constitute a public nuisance unless a permit to construct and maintain the obstruction has been obtained in the manner provided herein. A. Removal of Artificial Obstruction. If an artificial obstruction is found after investigation by the City, an order shall be issued to the owner, following ten days written notice and hearing thereon, for removal within a reasonable time as ORONO CC 371 (4-1-84) 5 10.02 31. "Hotel" - A building containing eight or more guest rooms in which lodging is provided with or without meals for com- pensation and which is open to transient or permanent quests or both, and where no provision is made for cooking in any guest room, and in which ingress and egress to and from all rooms is made through an inside lobby or office supervised y person in charge. 32. "Junk Yard" - An area where aste, discarded or salvaged materials are bought, sold, exc aged, stored, baled, cleaned, packed, disassembled or.handled, including but not limited to scrap iron and other metals, paper, rags, rubber products, bottles and lumber. Storage of such material in conjunction with a permitted manufacturing process when within an enclosed area or building shall not be included. Source: Municipal Code Effective Date: 9-14-67 33. "Lot, Lot of Record" - Any lot for which a deed or registered land survey has been recorded in the office of the Register of Deeds or the Registrar of Titles for Hennepin County, Minnesota, prior to January 1, 1975, and after approval by the Council if required. ��r �, Source: Ordinance No. 172 Effective Date: 1-1-75 34. "Lot Area" - The area of a lot in a horizontal plane bounded by the lot lines, but not including any area occupied by the waters of a duly recorded lake or river or area frequently under water which serves as a watercourse draining higher land on which sustains emergent aquatic growth or area which has been dedicated as public right -of -Nay. 35. 'Lot, Corner" - A lot sit,jated at the junction of, and abutting ci two or more intersecting streets, or a lot at the point of deflection in alignment of a continuous street, the interior angle of which does not excerl 135 degrees. 36. "Lot Depth" - The mean horizontal distance between the front lot line and the rear lot line of a lot. 37. "Lot, Interior" - A lot other than a corner lot. 1 38. "Lot Line" - The property line bounding a lot except that where any portion of a lot extends into the public right-of- way or a proposed public; right-of-way, the line of such public right-of-way shall be the lot line. 39. 'Lot Li.ie-Front" - That boundary of a lot which abuts an existing or dedicated public street, and in the case of a corner lot it sh"ll be the shortest dimension on a public street. If the ORONO CC 1145 r4_1 �4 I § 11.03 21. "Improvements, Private" - Any improvement, required by this Chapter, which improvement the City or subdivider shall construct at subdivider's expense and for which the City will not assume any responsibility for its maintenance and operation and which shall not be dedicated to the City. 22. "Improvements, Public" - Any improvement, required by this Chapter, which improvement the City or subdivider shall construct at subdivider's expense and for which the City gill ultimately assume the responsibility for i*g maintenance and opera- tion upon issuance of the certificate r -7factory completion. 23. "Lot" - A tract, or portion of a subdivision or other parcel of land inLc-i,ded as a unit for the purpose, whether immediate or future, or transfer of ownership or for building development. Every platted lot shall be a buildable lot or an outlot. - - - 24. "Lot Area, Minimum" - Each lot shall contain the minimum area required for each proposed lot as prescribed in the Zoning Chapter of the City Code. In rural zones not served by sanitary sewer, each lot must contain a minimum of two acres of contiguous dry buildable land exclusive of wetlands, publi, and private rights -of -way, vehicular or pedestrian easements, su_�ace areas below the ordinary high water mark of any surface water or areas at or below the flood plain elevation for a specific property. All rural lots must comply with the City's on -site septic system provisions of the City Code. In urban areas served by sanitary sewer, each lot must contain contiguous dry buildable land equal to the minimum areas as prescribed in the Zoning Chapter of the City Code or half -acre, whichever is less, (exclusive of public and private rights -of -way, vehicular or pedestrian ease- ments, surface areas below the ordinary High water mark of any surface water wetlands or areas at or below the flood plain eleva- tion for a specific property) and have legal access to the building site without encroachment of a wetland or flood plain area. 25. "Lot, Buildable" - A lot oz combination of lots or outic;ts which meet all of the requirements of the Zoning Chapter of the City Code and this Chapter for the intended purpose. 26. "Lot, Outlot" - A lot which is intended only for public or private roadways, open space or other use, which use must be restricted by the appropriate easement and which use must be approved by the City at the time of final plat approval. The use of the outlot will thereafter be restricted by the appropriate restrictive covenant or open space easement. 27. "Lot, Corner" - A lot situated d- the intersection of two (2) streets, the interior angle of such intersection not exceeding 135 degrees. ORONo CC 419 (4-1-84) Bones t roo Rosene Anderlik & Associates Engineers i Architects September 9, 1988 City of Orono Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Attn: Mike Gaffron Ono G Bonely PE KeRh A GNOW. PE erne" W Rosene. PE RKtsard W Foster, PE Joseph C Andernt PE Donald C Buryarat. PE Brautora A Lemberg, PE Jerry A Bourdon PE RKhatd E Turner PE FMert A Hanson. PE lames C Olson. PE W K Feld. PF Glenn R 'opt, /E MKhml T RJUtrnJnn PE h.umn E Noyes. PE Robert R ►teNerle PE Ropen G khunKht. PE Dowd O LJstota. PF Aaall,m L Scrwla. PE Re: 139-1330 Fullerton Property 880 Townline Road Lear Mike: rhomas W Peterson, PE Chanel A ErKtsan Wchael C lyntn PE Leo Aa ►aspe/sty Jam-s R k4aland PF Hann M )lion Kennetn P Anderson. PE Susan M Eberhn Kenn A BJrnmann PF 1 r�� VarkAlA le.ppMA , R a is O&n.0 H Jn (I.r' SEP 16 Gffi I We have reviewed the preliminary plan submitted for Fullerton Properties on Town Line Road. We would recommend approval of the plans subject t) the following modifications. 1. Street width should be 28 feet rather than 24 feet. 2. Storm sewer outlet @ 958 rather than 961.0. 3. Provide high water elevation for creep. (Obtain from Minnehaha Creek Watershed). 4. Submit plan to Minnehaha Creek Watershed. 5. Eliminate island at street entrance. 6. Grading along Town Line Road as necessary to provide full ditch section. If have any questions, please contact this office. Glenn R. Cook GRC:ci 01 2335 - Hilghway 36 • St Paul, Minnesota S5115; • 612-6364600 114 �' ► / t Ilo .41 i IR 1 I � I 1 I rEloultvor TO: Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson Froms Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building i Zoning Administrator Dates September 2v, 1988 Subjects #1335 Woodhill Count—,' 'lug, 7J0 Woodhill Road - Conditional Use P*rmlt/Variance - Public Bearing Zoning District - RR-lA Pertinent Ordinaares - NG Section 10.20, Subdivision 3 (C) - Conditional use permit fired for proposed accessary structure for country club use: A) Setbacks: Required for principal structure - 100' Required for accessory structure - 50' Proposed - 165' B) Height of Structure: Allowed 30' Proposed - 18'6" to peak of roof Section 10.03, Subdivision 9 (C) -- Va• - ,r;c.e for area of accessory structure. Allowed = 1,000 s.f. Proposed lu,800 s.f. Variance = 9,800 s.f. or 980 • List of Ezhibits Exhibit A - Application Exhibit s - Property Owners List Exhibit C - Plat Map Exhibit D - Site Plan -xhibit E - Fxi.sting Toro-�,apwy Exhibit F - Site Plan/3r•" ng/Drainage Plan BzMbb a 4 - Varco Prudr,. ' st Zoning File #1335 September 29, 1988 Page 2 of 3 Review of Application - The applicant proposes construction of a 60'xl80' maintenance and st age building. The existing maintenance shed will be removed upon .:c_.,letion of this installation. Review F, the existing house noted on the site plan to the south of the proposed structure will be removed and in fact shoo".d be removed rrior to construction as all access drives will be blocked. ^he adjacent Lana alterations will also necessitate the remc,val of the existing house The maintenance structure meets all required setbacks. In earlier ,l.ns, the proposed structure was located approximately 50' from the «eat property line. The club has worked closely with the owner of the house to the northwest of the property (review Exhibit F), to resolves the �mpact of the major structure. As a rp%ult, the structure has been relocated 165' from the west lot line. The r w location will allow the saving of sp-eral tree, that will continue .:o provide a nature screening barrier to the :surrounding residential zoned properties. The iuilding will be sprinkled as required by Appendix E of the Uniform Building Code. There is adequate water supply and adequate pressure to provide for the sprinkler system within a few hundred feet from the proposed struc° ure. The final grades have been shown and a�;proved by staff. Drainage continues to flow in the same pattern. Elevations have not been included in your packet for the new structure but a rendering of the project will be provided at the meeting. Staff has revieweJ that elevation and Sees no major concern for the City. The maximum height of the peak of the roof will be 18'6". Access will be via the existing road system. A single driveway will be constzucted to serve the proposed maintenance structure. The area variance required for the oversized structure is the only real issue for this review. Sectior 10.03, Subdivision 9 sets no limits on barns, stables, or greenhouses. A commercial greenhouse could be placed on a residential prope without any s4 ze/area limitaticns. The troposed size of thi —.!ct certai -,ly meets the nAeds of this size club. One large stru ov. s less of an inpact than several smaller maintenance sheds spr oughout the propL-ty. The existing maintenance shed exceeds `ham ,red area. Zoning File #1335 September 29, 1988 Page 3 of 3 Staff Recommendation - To approve the conditional use permit and variance application of Woodhill Country Club that would allow the construction of a 60'x180' maintenance storage building on the club property and would approve an area variance for the structure based on the following findings: 1. Proposed structure will have no negative impact on the surrounding residential properties. 2. The single, larger structure would have less of an impact than several maintenance structures with access drives and would also provide tho- means for a more efficient maintenance operation. 3. The location of the structure will mini ... ize tree removal with the construction and grading. 4. The west side setback, topograchy and natural screening lessens the impact of the structure to the residential neighborhoods to the west. This approval is subject to the following conditions: 1. All residential use of the house structure to the south of the proposed maintenance structure must be discontinued prior to preliminary excavation work for new construction. 2. Per Appendix E of the Uniform Building Code, the maintenance structure must be provided with a fire supression system. Additional Comments and Planning Commission Recommendation - October 19, 1988 Additional Rxhibits - Exhibit H - Plat Map Locating Property Owners Present at 10/3/88 Mtg Note - Exhibit G is not included in your Council packets, but will be available at the Council meeting. The visual/noise impact of the structure upon the surrounding residential properties was discussed with the neighbors in attendance. Mr. McDowell & Mr. Fox appeared satisfied because of the elevation of the structure, the location of the plantings and the existing topography would shield the structure from the view of the adjacent properties along the west boundary. Review Exhibit H, Mrs. Pesek advised that she had walked the property and was concerned that the structure at its present location would present a major impact on their view to the south and southeast. The applicant was Asked to provide view elevations for the Council in order to determine the degree of impact on the neighbor to the north. It is my understanding that the applicant will provide photographs of the north elevation at your meeting. There was additional discussion regarding potential of installing berms along the west property line providing further screening to the Fox property. The applicant was advised that phis type of berming would require a separate conditional use permit review by the City. The Planning Commission adopted the staff recommendation and noted the following findings and hardships: 1. Proposed structure is necessary to maintain the golf course. 2. The only other alternative is to construct multiple 1,000 s.f. structures which would create even more of a visual impact for the adjoining neighboring residential properties and require additional tree removal. The enclosed resolution :ias been drafted for your consideration and action. City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. A RESOLUTION GRANTING A VARIANCE TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.03, SUBDIVISION 9 (C) AND PER MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SEk.TION 10.20, SUBDIVISION 3 (C) GRANTS A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FILE #1335 WHEREAS, John B. Winston, an authorized representative of the Woodhill Country Club (hereinafter "the applicant") has an interest in the propertl located at 200 Woodhill Road within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as follows: The West 1/2 of the Northeast Quarter of Section 2, Township 117 North, Range 23 West, Hennepin County, Minnesota, except that part of said Section 2 embraced within Woodhill Ridge, Edgewood Place, RLS #1596, and RLS #1098 (hereinafter "property"); and WHEREAS, the applicant has made application to the City of Orono per Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.20, Subdivision 3 (C) seeking approval of a conditional use permit :or the construction of an accessory structure for the country club use and in addition seeks an area variance for the oversized structure proposed at 10,800 s.f. where only 1,000 s.f. is allowed per Section 10.03, Subdivision 9 (C). Minnesota: NOW, THEREFORE, BE ;T RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #1335. 2. The property is located in the RR-lB Sir_gle Family Rural Residential Zoning District. 3. The property is approximately 70+ acres in area. 4. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on October 3, 1988, and recommended approval of a conditional use permit that would allow the construction of an accessory structure for the country club use per Zoning Code Section 10.03, Subdivision 9 (C) and recommended approval of an area variance for the oversized accessary structure at 10,800 s.f., based or, the following findings: Page 1 of E proposed to have no properties. City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. structure meets all required setbacks and would negative impact on the surrounding residential B) The single, larger structure would have less of an impact than several maintenance structures with access drives, and would also provide the means for a more efficient maintenance operation. C) The location of the structure will minimize tree removal with the construction and grading. D) The generous setback to the west side lot line, existing topography, and natural screening surrounding the location of the proposed structure lessen the impact of the structure to the residential neighborhoods 5. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this pro- perty 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 properties; 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 an.. intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. 6. The City Coun i 1 finds that granting a conditional use permit to allow the construction of a maintenance structure for the use by the Woodhill Country Club 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 values 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 approves an area variance for the oversized, 10,800 s.f. of accessory structure, at 9,800 s.f. where only 1,000 s.f. is allowed anO oer Section 10.20, Subdivision 3 (C) grants a conditional use permit fo .he accessory structure for the use of Woodhi l l Country Club, subject to the following conditions: Page 2 of 4 City of ORO-NO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 1. All residential use of the douse structure to the south of the proposed maintenance structure must be discontinued prior to preliminary excavation work for new construction. 2. Per Appendix E of the Uniform Building Code, the maintenance structure must be provided with a fire suppression system. 3. Authorities granted by this resolution run with the property and not with the owner, but are permissive only and must be excersized 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 (October 24, 1989). 4. Violation of or nor. -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 pu-ishable as a misdemeanor. S. The undersigned applicant has read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of the Woodhill Country Club its successors and assigns, hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. 1988. Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 24th day of October, ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk James R. Grabek, Mayor Mark A. Al.brecht, Chairman of Woodhill Country Club Page 3 of 4 City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NU. STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this day of , 198 before me a Notary Public within and for said county, personally appeared known to me to be the person(s) :described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC MY COMMISSION EXPIRES STATE OF MINNESOTA ) )ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) 01. this day of , 198, before me a Notary Public within and for said County, personally appeared _ known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC MY COMMISSION EXPIRES Page 4 of 4 33s ocr CITY OF ORONO - GENERAL LAND USE APPLI - J - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address Property Identification Number (P.I.D. ) Please check one - Property _ abstract or torrens? (for Conditional Use Applications only) .tY.01F ��it+%'!1 tLL 4'f FILL Please attach legal description to application if not included;"'YVOJ on required survey. VA wlt AVU.VW - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- APPLICANT Phone (home) '1vt,ti�4, A11� �.14- 7 Tr rL c:vv.vv Name . _. �• ��. �.\ L,_ w. L\mil, Phone (work) Address City --------- ------ �1__l\-Q-.-----------------. _c OWNER (if different than applicant) Phone (home) Name Phone Address City Zip Date Property Acquired (month/year) I (do) (do not) alFo own the adjacent parcels of land. --------------------------------•.------------------------------------------- FEES - CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS - Renewal Fee - 1/2 Current Fee After-t1he-Fact Fee - Double Current Application Fee $100.00 a) Residential accessory Use $150.00_,b) Institutional (church, school, etc.) $150.00 c) Duplex Credit/Bldg $250.00 d) Commercial/Industrial Use $200.00 f) Land Alteration Grading and filling - designated wetland or ISa�$''s- Fv-,-,- f loodplain 4- ,o ew- CAC-*4 �,yE ,y,�� Grading and filling - 101 cu. yd. or more ram„ 2 Ep Grading, seawall, retaining walls within 75' --- of lakeshore PRD/PID - see fee schedule OTKER APPLICATIONS $150.00 Commercial Site Plan Revie'.-i (+ consultant fees) $250.00 Vacation $150.00 Easement Vacation $ 50.00 Easement Vacation With Subdivision $250.00 Rezoning $10r,.00 Appeals Other - see fee schedule PRESENT USE OF PROPERTY Present Zoning District Present Use of Property , " - �S�Res 1. a n t i a 1 Other (specify) -------------------------------------I-------------------------------------- DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Describe request in detail: z.x_.. _a _ 1 g. ,w --------------------------------------------------------------------------- JMUIRED SUBMITTALS 1. Completed Application Form. 2. Certified 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-f legal sized envelopes (#10) pre -addressed to each of the naxies on the above list with no return address. 4 Certificate of survey. 5. Topographic survey (existing and proposed contours) it laid alterations involve changes in elevation (grades). Construction plan, if 4pplicable (see staff for requirements). ' 7.1 Plat Map. 8. :As an addendum to this application, please attach a sepa•ate 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 Pxpenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. lam; �: c��- • �� ti, w �,+„ L1 ti,� Applicant's signature-YyL-_.j_ pd.Date `f= 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 verification of this request. �..%ceai�. i` Vie, ti► 1.�� Owner's signature-11�pF)�_ � r „�, h! Date --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Applicant must have all submittals into the ....ty offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and advise the Building & Zonin; Office of this change prior to the meeting. RUN DATE 08/10/88 HFIINEPIIN COUIIf- PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM REPORT NO. PI4S5401 PROPERTY OWNERS LIST PAGE 2 BATCH 002 38 02-117-23 11 0003 38 02-117 23 12 0001 38 02-117-23 13 0003 PROP ADOR 00200 WOODHILL RD 01050 EDGEW000 HILLS RD OWNER NAME BURLINGTON NORTHERN RY WOOOHILL COUNTRY CLUB VAR"ES H EHRAMJIAN TAXPAYER BURLINGTON NORTHERN RY WOOOHILL CNTRY CLUB VARTKES H EHRAMJIAN NAME/ADDR 200 WOOOHILL RD 1050 EDGEW000 HILL RD WAYZATA MN 553`1 WAYZATA MH 55391 38 02-117-23 l3 0004 38 02-117-23 13 0005 38 02-117-23 13 0006 PROP ADDR 00320 WOOOHILL RD 00315 WOOOHILL RD ' OWNER NAME J BARTELS A R BAR,'I% J BARTELS A R BARTELS JOHN D A STEPHANIE PRUODEN TAXPAYER JUERGEN A RACWEL BARTELS JUERGEN A RACHEL BARTELS JOHN D A STEPHANIE PRUDOEN NAME/ADDR 320 W000HILL ROAD 320 WOOOHILL ROAD 315 WOOOHILL RD WAYZATA MN 55391 WAYZATA MN 55391 WAYZATA MN 55391 38 02-117-23 14 0001 38 02-117-23 21 6005 38 02-117-23 21 0006 r� sip PROP ADOR 00% 5 E06EWDOO HILLS RD OWNER NAME 6 A CARLSON HOMES INC C P PESEK A R H PESEK C P PESEK A R H PESEK TAXPAYER 6 A CARSON HOMES INC C PAUL A RAE H PESEK C PAUL A RAE H PESEK NAME/ADDR PO BOX 1422 1235 LYMAN AVE S 1235 LYMAN AVE S MINNETONKA MN 55345 WAYZATA MN 55391 WAYZATA MN 55391, s 38 02-117-23 21 0007 38 02-117-23 21 0009 38 02-117-23 21/0010 r PROP ADDR 01230 WOOOHIIL AVE 00190 ORONNO ORCHARD RD S 00180 ORONO ORCHARD RD 5 i OWNER NAME M 6 FOX A M S FOX JANE MC CLAREN JOSEPH M ROKKE ETAL TAXPAYER MARK 6 FOX JANE MC CLAREN JOSEPh M ROKKE NAME/ADDR 1230 WOOOHILI AVE 5 190 ORONO ORCHARD RD S 180 ORONO ORCHARD RD WAYZATA MH SS391 WAYZATA MH 553!'l WAYZATA MN S5391 38 02-117-13 21 0027 38 02-117-23 21 0028 38 02-117-23 21 0029 PROP ADDR 01275 LYMAN AVE 00140 SMITH AVE 00160 SMITH AVE OWNER NAME E C NERNESS A J L NERNESS THOMAS C HUNT H A I BEAN TAXPAYER ELROY A JIANE NERNESS THOMAS C HU14T MR A MRS N MICHAEL BEAN NAME/ADDR 1275 LYMAN AVE 140 SMITH AV 160 SMITH AVE WAYZATA MN 55391 WAYZATA MN 55391 WAYZATA MN SS391 38 02-117-23 21 OOAO 38 02-117-23 24 0008 38 02-1..-23 24 0009 PROH ADDR 012SO WOODHILL AVE 01260 WOOOHILL AVE OWNER NAME M 6 FOX A M S FOX 0 D A C J DIETZ MSM ASSOCIATES TAXPAYER MARK 6 FOX DENNIS D DIETZ MSM ASSOCIATES NAME/ADDR 1230 WOOOHILL AVE S 1314 MARQUETTE AVE UNIT 703 315 E LAKE ST WAYZATA MH 55391 MPLS MH 55403 WAYZATA MH 55391 RUN DATE 08/10/88 BATCH 002 38 02-117-23 24 0012 PQOP ADDR 01245 WOOOHILL AVE OWIER NAME MSM ASSOCIATES TAXPAYER MSM ASSOCIATES NAME/ADDR 315 E LAKE ST WAYZATA MN 55391 38 02-117-23 41 0003 PROP ADDR 01045 EDGEWOOD HILLS RD OWNER NAME FREDA C KEITH TAXPAYER FREDA C KEITH NAME/ADDR P 0 BOX 246 WAYZATA MN 55391 38 02-117-23 '. 0004 PROP ADOt. 0106% EDGEWODU nILLS RD OW1ER NAME ANNE L RITZ TAXPAYER ANNE LARSEN SIMONSON NAME/ADDR 106 EDGEWOOD HILLS RD WAYZATA MN 55391 36 02-117-23 42 0008 PROP AUOR OWNER NAME WOOOHILL COURTRY CILAB TAXPAYER WOOOHILL CNTRY CLUB NAME/ADDR 200 WOOOHILL RD WAYZATA MN 55391 38 35-118-23 34 00n1 PROP ADOR O144ER NAME G MARC WHITEHEAD ETAL TAXPAYER G MARC WHITEHEAD NAME/ADDR 1220 LYMAN AVE WAYZATA MN 55391 18 35-116-23 43 0028 PROP ADDR 01170 LYMAN AVE OWI.ER NAME BRUCE A "CFADDEN TAXPAYER BRUCE A MCFADDEN NAME/ADDR 1170 LYMAN AVE WAYZATA MH 55391 HENNEPIN COUINTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OW►IERS LIST 38 02-117-23 24 0013 MSM ASSOCIATES MSM ASSOCIATES 315 E LAKE ST WAYZATA MH 55391 38 02-117-23 42 0002 01055 EOGEWOOO HILLS RD D ELDREDGF JACKSON III ET AL D E A K K JACKSON III 1055 EOGEWO00 HILL RD WAYZATA MH 55391 38 02-117-23 42 0005 00325 WOOOHILL RD J BARTELS A R BARTELS JUERGEN A RACHEL BARTELS 320 WOOOHILL ROAD WAYZATA MN 55391 38 02-117-23 42 0009 THE NATURE CONSERVANCY NATURE CONSERVANCY 1311 5TH ST S E SUITE 314 MPLS MN 55414 It, 35-118-23 31, 0004 01220 LYMAN AVE 6 MARC WHITEHEAD ETAL 6 MAPC WHITEHEAD 1220 LYMAN AVE WAYZATA MN 55391 38 35-116-23 43 0029 D C A E D MOGEN DONALD C A ELEANOR 0 MOGEN 7450 BELLAIRE AVE DUBLIN OH 43017 REPORT NO. PI435401 PAGE 3 38 02-117-23 41 0002 00985 EDGEWOOO HILLS RD P B HARRIS ETAL MR PHILLIP B HARRIS 985 EDGEW000 HILLS ROAD WAYZATA MN 55391 38 02-117-23 42 0003 00450 WOODHILL RD K 0 LEVINE A O A R' •AD DONALD RISTAU A KE LEVINE 450 WODOHILL RD WAYZATA MN 55191 38 02-117-23 42 0006 THE NATURE CONSERVANCY NATURE CONSERVANCY 1313 5TH ST 3 E SUITE 314 MPLS MN 55414 1 38 02-117-23 42 0010 WOOOH I L L COUTTR Y CLUB WOOOHILL CO01NTRY CLUB 200 WOOOHILL RD WAYZATA MN SS391 38 35-118-23 43 0024 01200 LYMAN AVE R S A N N CORNWALL RICMARU 5 COR►WALL 1200 LYMAN j./F WAYZATA MH 55391 38 35-118-23 44 0006 STATE LAND DvPT STATE LAND DEPT FOR SALE TO ADJACENT PR')PERTY OWNER ONLY RIAI DATE 0E/10/EE HENNEPIN COLRITY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM REPORT NO. PI435401 PROPERTY OWIERS LIST PAGE 4 BATCH 002 99 01-117-23 21 0001 PROP ADDR 00099 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED OWNER NAME WAYZATA COUNTRY CLUB TAXPAYER WAYZATA COUNTRY CLUB NAME/ADDR P 0 BOX 15l WAYZATA MN 55391 99 01-117-23 32 0001 PROP ADDR 00099 ADDRESS U:ASSIGIIEO OWNER NAME WOODHILI CNTRY CLUB TAXPAYER WOOOHILL CNTRY CLUB NAME/ADDR ?00 WOODHILL RD WAYZATA MINN 55391 99 01-117-21 32 0020 PROP ADDR 0070. HILLSIDE DR W OWNER NAME R A E SMITH TAXPAYER ROSS C SMITH NAME/ADDR 700 HILLSIDE C' W WAYZATA MN SS391 99 02-117-23 41 0007 Fl!�OP ADDR 00099 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED 1W14ER NAME HE NATtmE CONSERVANCr TAXPAYER NATURE CONSERVANCY NAME ADDR 1311 STM ST S E SUITE 314 MPLS MN SS414 99 01-117-23 23 6"1 00099 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED WOODHILL CNTRY CLUB iJOODHILL C14TRY CLUB 200 WOOOHILL RD WAYZATA MN 55341 99 01-117-23 32 0002 00099 ADDRESS UTASSIGNED WOODHILL CNTRY CLUB WOOOHILL CNTRY CLUB 200 WOOOHILL RD WAYZATA MINN 55391 99 02-117-23 11 0001 WOOOHILL CNTRY CLUB WOOOHILL CNTRY CLUB 200 WDOOHI' RD WAYZATA MN 15391 99 02-117-23 41 000E 00670 HILLSIDE OR W R A E SMITH ROSS C SMITH 700 HILLSIDE OR W WAYZATA MN 55391 99 01-117-21 [3 0002 00099 ADDRESS UNASSIGNNED WOOOHIL CNNTRY CLUB WOODHILL COUNTRY CLUB 200 WOOOHILL RD WAYZATA MINN 55391 99 01-117-23 32 000E CORIr4NE G PILLSBURY CORINNE G PILLSBURY 1200 BRACKETTS POINT RD WAYZATA MH 55391 99 02 •1, 41 0001 0070t L:_,' Iow m M R A F a ROS`. C .:AL IH 700 HILT vIDE DR W WAYZATA MH 55391 n TOTAL BATCH 002 00047 I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPWESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE RFPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE rECORDS OF THE HENNEPIN COU.ITY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION. TO IHE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE 4140 BELIEF. - JAY®Q BY . 0 NO 4b To: Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson From: Date: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator f ;j;''! September 27, 1988 Subject: 11339 David Lee, 2695 Casca Point Road After -the -fact Conditional UFe Permit/W riance - Public Hearing Zoning District - LR-IC Pertinent Ordinances - Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 - Lakeshore hardcover and land alterations. Applicant constructed retaining walls within 75' of the lake and conducted grading and filling activities within 75' of the lake without the necessary permits and approval by the City. A Stop Work Order was issued on August 1-5, 1988. Citation wes issued on August 26, 1988 because resident failed to abide by the Stop Work Order issued and exceedee the directions of staff for temporary remedial land alterations until permit was approved. Since citation was issued, applicant continued to fi'_1 retaining wall areas with fill that was delivered to the property after the citation was issued. List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Application Exhibit B - Property Owners List Exhibit r - Plat Map Exhibit D - Landscape Architect's Addendum Exhibit E - Site Plan Exhibit F - Section/Existing Wall Exhibit G - Planting Plan Exhibit H - Proposed Plan Exhibit I - Engineer's Report Exhibit J - Staff's Sketch Zoning File #1339 September 27, 1988 Page 2 of 5 Review of Application - Mr. Lee's landscape architect, James Robbin, has attempted to respond to the City's concerns regarding the walls constructed by the applicant without the benefit or guidance of a professional/contractor. Staff has reviewed with Mr. Robbin the major concerns of the City with such applications. The tact that we are dealing with an after -the -fact application makes this review even more difficult. In light of previous reviews by the City, retaining wall construction within lakeshore yards has been very limited opting for fill with graduated slopes allowing plantings and seeding and encouraging rip -rap along the shoreline. Review of the Construction - Mr. Lee has: constructed three tiers of retaining walls. The lower sections ranging from 5' above the lakeshore level to a maximum of 12�' above lake level. Review Exhibit F. the sketch designating the 7-12�' elevations along the north cide of the property and the walls on the south side that range from 5' to 12'. The proposed contours match with the contours of the existing el"vations along the property lines at the north and south property lines. The stairs have been constructed at an 6' width, exceeding the normally allowe(: 4' width within lakeshore yards, resulting in 112 s.f. of overall hardcover where only 56 s.f. would have beer. allowed if the 4' standard had been m.tintained (note these are not spaced). The existing dock has not been permanently attached to the lower retaining wall. major sections of the retaining walls would require railings because they exceed 30" in height above existing grade. Railings have not been provided the access staircase. Fill in excess of 100 cubic yards has been installed behind the terrace walls. Review of Mr. Robbin's Review Cosments - Mr. Robbins confirms that the proposed retaining wall structure will hilt all erosion and should provide a stabilizes hank, doting that yard drainage will still continue to be handled by the underground drainti le that drains to a location somewhere under the old access stairs to the lower dock. This drainage tile carries the majority of the drainage that dr,.ins into the east yard area. Drainage to the lakeshore banks for the property comes from a breaking point within the lakeshore yard slightly to the Oast of the front line cf the house and with additiona 1 drainage front the , roperty to the north because of the slightly lower elevation of the suc,ject yard. The City Engineer would reaffirm Mr. Robbin's comments on the structural stability of the wall. Mr. Robbin's recommendation covers the following points: Zoning File #1339 September 27, 1988 Page 3 of 5 1. Immediate planting program to cover the walls and minimize the visual impact. 2. Raise the bed levels at the base of the walls to visually decrease the size of the walls as viewed -from the lake and remove the need for railings. 3. Rip -rap at the base of the lower wall to provide adequate protection of the Lower wall from high-level wave and water action. 4. Install drain holes at the base of each wall, 18" on center. 5. Remove, re -install, and compact clay backfill to 12" from top of the walls. 6. To reduce impact of the width cf stairs and provide plant material to grow over stairs. 7. Install temporary rails at the top of walls until re -grading and planting have been completed. 8. Install a rail along stairway. Q. Grade terrace areas to allow 12" depth of planting soil for future plantings. 10. Plantings proposed per sketch by landscape architect referenced as Exhibit E in the Planning Commission packets for the October 3rd meeting, consisting of evergreens, shrubs, organic mulch to be installed in all plant beds plus planting schedule to be implemented for the appropriate seasons with a watering program for such shrubs. Zoning File #1339 September 27, 1988 Page 4 of 5 Engineer/Staff Coeeents - Review Exhibits I and J, staff's proposal for minimizing the visual impact of the retaininq wall structure. The north section of the retaining wall (to the immediate north of the stairs leading to the dock), we would ask that three timbers along the lower wall be removed, one timber section from the second level and three from the upper 12' high elevated wall and to place fill over the retaining wall structure providing enough coverage for the planting of grass and appropriate landscape plantings to stabilize the bank. On the south section, we would ask that the lower retaining wa Ll stay at the same elevation and allow the deck stair to be attached in front of the existing staircase approach, remove four timbers from the middle terrace wall, and five from the upper and once again fill covering over the upper retaining walls providing the same planting of seed and appropriate landscape shrubs. The fill 1,lacement would match tha ?ls:? slope elevations of the existing staircase. The only visual impact would be thQ lower wall elevations. Staff would also recommend rip -rap to protect the lower walls from the wave action and the water action. The newly constructed staircase must be reduced to a 4' wic:th. Apl:licant may plant planters within the additional 4' width. A rai ling should be provided on one side. Appropriate erosion control should be maintained throughout the entire time the earth remainG in a distur"ned state. Silt screen fencing should be placed along the 2�-:1 sloped .,.auks above the altered lower retaining wall sections. The Engineer's last alternative was to remove the walls entirely and restore bank to its original condition. It should be noted for the record that the lakeshore banks did have at least 2 tiered stone walls alonq the lower elevations. The original elevations were steep and would require ground cover mats to hold the new vegetation in place. Options of Action Available to Planning Commission - 1 . Accept the Robbin's p rod osa l that would require re-f i l ling and re- gradinq of the terraced areas with appropriate filling for plantings per the specific directives outlined in his letter dated August 31, 1988. Members may wise to ask for the reduction in size of the access stairs finding the lessening of the visual impact by plantings that would be seasonal and ask for the reduction of the stair structure with planters beinq provided within the 4' remaining width. To remove this portion of the stairs may reduce the structural support of the bank; Zoning Pile #1339 September 27, 1988 Page 5 of 5 W, 2. Staff recommendation requiring the removal of specific timbers and the filling to a 2h:1 grade slope that would allow seeding and appropriate plantings, reduction in the width of the access stairs, rip -rapping to protect the lower lakeshore level wall; 040 3. Restore banks to original condition and require removal of retaining walls. The following appropriate hardships and findings, depending on your choice of action, may be considered with your recommendation: 1. To prevent continued erosion of the lakeshore bank and stabilize the lakeshore bank. 2. Based on recent inspections of the lakeshore yard, the existing retaining walls and access stairs were in a deteriorating and unsafe condition. 3. The proposal as amended by staff will still retain the substructure of the retaining walls and provide the needed stability of the distrubed bank area and with finished grades at 2h:1 will allow vegetation to return. 4. The proposed improvement is in comp lete conflict with the intent of the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Code of the City. Zoning File #1339 Additional Coi nts and Planning Coamission Recos endation - October 19, 1988 Additional Exhibits - Exhib�t K - Planning Commission Minutes of 10/3/88 Note - Letters from neighbors, noted in the minutes and presented by applicant's attorney, were not submitted to the Planning Commission as part of the official record. The majority of the Planning Commission members approved the option that would allow the applicant to retain the retaining walls in the lakeshore yard provided that the planting schedule suggested by applicant's landscape architect were closely followed. In addition, they asked that the City Engineer review in depth the Robin's proposal to insure that all structural considerations had been made prior to the refilling, regrading, and planting of the retaining wall structure. The minority opinion felt that option 2 of the staff's suggested options, listed on page 4 and 5 of the staff iuer«o would more clearly follow the more recent guidelines established by the Council in dealing with similar after -the -fact applications. Council Action - To consider the Planning Commission recommendation and the options presented by staff and to give staff conceptual direction to draft the appropriate resolution for formal action at their November 14, 1988 meeting. 14 CITY OF OPONO - GENERAL LAND USE APPLIC --------------------- PROPERTY LOCATION ... Site Address 2695 Casco Pt Road Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) T cF f>lSairii Please check one - Property abstract or torrens?- ;:y �.1 t ACE (for Conditional Use Applications only) - +�.r V Vvv V♦ Vcl l.VV•VV Please attach legal description to application if not included. -r �_�.tlr47 On file at city hall Iabr VV on required survey. ______ ------ ,_ _'JU14' APPLICANT Phone (home) 4 7 i -7 6 0 ` Name David E.F. Lee Phone (work) 473 5577 Address 2695 Casco Pt Road City Orono Zip55391 -------------------- OWNER (if different than applicant) Phone (home) Name �6 Phone . dr City Zip Date Property Acquired Sept 1987 (month/year) -----I (ift )-(do-:iot)-also-own-the-adjacent-parcels-of-land_----------`--- M FEES - CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS - Renewal Fee - 1/2 Current Fee After -the -Fact Fee - Double Current Application Fee $100.00 a) Residential accessory Use $150.00 b) Institutional (church, school, etc.) $150.00 c) Duplex Credit/*3ldg $250.00 d) Commercial/Industrial Use VJ $200.00 f) Land Alteration Grading and filling - designated wetland or floodplain !� Grading and filling - 101 cu. yd. or more _ X Grading, sal, retaining walls within 75' of lakeshore PRD/PID - see fee schedule OTHER AP P 7 .I CATIONS $150.00 Commercial Site Plan Review (+ consultant fees) $250.00 Vacation $150.JO Easement Vacation $ 50.00 Easement Vacation With Subdivision $250-00 Reaoninq $100%00 Appeals Other - sere fee schedule PRESENT USE OF PROPERTY Present Zoning District Present Use of Property Residential Other (specify) --------------------------------------------------------------------------- DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Describe request in detail: Qg AV �( S �,a 6 , � 12 4 1/ o A/ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- REQUIRED SUBMITTALS 1. Completed Application Form. , 2.1 mortified Prrty owners Limit of owners within 350' (you can obtai this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Governmen- Center 348-3271) 3. Stamped, legal sized envelopes (410) pre -addressed to each of the name. on the above list with no return address. 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. 8. As an addendum.. to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this applicaLiuzl. -----------------------------------•---------------------------------------- The applca.t and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember teat 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 al-_ information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay all `ees and/or unusual expenses incurred in -eview of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. Applicant's signature \ �+� �c Date P /f P, OWN = SIGNATURE The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorized reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents, commission members, and Council members for purposes of investigation and verification of thin request. Owner's signature Date 1'// f ),rr --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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 if the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to atteni a scheduled meeting, please make arrincements to have an authorizers aqeni, attend in your place and advise _, Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. RUN DATE 08/26/88 BATCH 003 38 20-117-23 23 0001 PROP ADDR 00038 ADDRESS U►NASSIGNID OWNER NAME BEVERLY SMERtING TAXPAYER BEVERLY SMERLItNG NAME/ADDR 2552 W LAKE OF ISLES PKW( MPLS MH 55405 38 20-117-23 23 0004 PROP ADOR 02697 CASCO POINT RD OWNER NAME A A C KANE TAXPAYER A LLARENCE KANE NAME/ADDR 2697 CASCO POINT RD WAYZATA MN 55391 38 20-117-23 23 0007 PROP ADDR 02755 CASCO POINT RD 0614ER NAME CLARENCE W PETERSON ET AL TAXPAYER CLARE14CE W PETERSON NAME/ADDR 2950 JOPPA AVw MPLS MN 55426 38 20-117-23 23 0020 PROP ADDR 02677 CASCO POINT PD OWNER NAME ALEXANDER HOLIER ETAL TAXPAYER A HOLZER NAME/ADDR 2677 CASCO PT Pr) WAYZATA MN 55391 38 20-117-23 24 0001 PROP ADDR 02684 CASCO POINT RD OWNER NAME THEODORE C DANTIS TAXPAYER DAVID RUN(LE NAME/ADDR 2684 CASCO POINT RD WAYZATA MN 55391 38 20-117-2I 24 0004 PROP ADDR 02686 CASCO POINT PO OWNER NAME THEODORE C DANTIS TAXPAYER DAVID RUN(LE NAME/ADDR 2684 CASCO POINT RD WAYZATA MN 55391 HE►ONEPIN C MITY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNERS LIST 38 20-117-23 23 0002 02691 CASCO POINT RD ROBERT K HU►NT ETAL ROBERT K HLJ14T 2691 CASCO PT RD WAYZATA MH 55391 38 20-117-23 23 u005 02715 CASCO POI►IT WO T A D ERWIN TERRY A A DOROTHY L ERWIN 2715 CASCO POINT RD WAYZATA MIN 55391 38 20-117-23 23 00le 02773 CASCO POItNT RD ELAINE E OLSON ELAI14E ELLEIN ERICKSON 2773 CASCO PT RD WAYZATA MN 55391 36 20-117-23 23 0021 02665 CASCO POINT RD BENNETT C DOWNEY A WIFE BENNETT C DOWNEY 2665 CASCO POINT RD WAYZATA MN 55391 38 20-117-25 24 0002 02660 CASCO POINT RD V A G BOILER VERNON J BULLER 2660 CASCO POINT RD WAYZATA MN 55391 38 20 117-23 24 0014 02705 ETHEL AVE IAWRtN(.E D PILLAR iAWRENCE D PILLAR o s; 7 CARDINAL COVE DR MOONO HN g5364 REPORT NO. P1435401 PAGE 6 38 20-117-23 23 0003 026S5 CASCO POINT dD D A P LEE D E F A P R LEE 269E CASCO POINT RD WAYZATA MN 55391 38 20-117-23 23 0006 02745 CASCO POINT RD S R PETERSON A K A PETERSON STEVEN R PETERSON 2745 CASCO POINT RD WAYZATA MN 55391 38 20-117-23 23 0019 027CS CASCO POINT RD R A J PUTNAM RICHARD A PUTNAM 2765 CASCO POINT RD WAYZATA MN 55391 38 ZO-I17-23 23 0022 02659 CASCO POINT RD S S STANDA A I S STANDA S S STANDA A I S STAIAA 2659 CASCO POINT RD WAYZATA MN 55391 38 20-0 7-23 24 0003 02684 CASCO POINT RD THEODORE C DANTIS DAVID RUNKLE 2684 CASCO PT RD SO WAYZATA MN 55391 38 20-117-23 24 0015 0272S ETHEL AVE JAMES A WILLIAMS JAMES A WILLIAMS 2725 ETHEL AVE WAYZATA MN S5391 ve , 4 RtRI DATE 08:26/88 "fNNFPIN COL44TY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM REPORT NO. P1435401 PROPERTY OWt1FR5 LIST PAGE 7 BATH 003 38 20-117-23 24 2016 38 20-117-23 24 0017 38 20-117-23 24 0018 PROP ADDR 02745 tTHEL AVE 02755 ETHEL AVE 027o5 ETHEL AVE OWNER NAME KIM D KASTER GOLDA MARIA SCHNEIDER SUSAtNE K DRAPER TAXPAYER KIM D KASTER SON CDR INVESTMENTS DOUGLAS C i NEVA L WILLIAMS NAME/ADDR 2675 FOX ST 3435 THERESE ST 2765 ETHEL AVE WAYZATA MN 55591 WAYZATA MN 55391 WAYZATA MN 55391 38 20-117-23 24 9919 38 20-117-23 ?4 0020 38 20-117-23 24 0021 PROP ADOR 027SO CASCO POINT RD 02750 CASCO POINT RD 02710 CASCO POINT RD OWNER t1AME DALE A CHRISTENSEN { WIFE DALE A CHRISTENSEN A WIFE HOWARD T MARTIN ! �� TAXPAYER DALE A CHRISTENSEN DALE A CHRISTENSEN HOWARD T MARTIN b 4j HAnE/ADDR 2750 CASCO POINT RD 27SO CASCO POINT RD RT t BOX 101E WAYZATA 111 SS391 W!.YZATA MH 55391 EAU GALIE WI 54737 38 20-117-23 24 0022 38 2n-117-23 24 0029 38 20-117-23 24 0039 PROP ADDR 02700 CASCO POINT RD 02649 CASCO P0114T RD 02648 CASCO POINT RD OWNER NAME K t T ROLF J L J SCHERVEN J W t B J ESSEN j TAXPAYER KEVIN E ROLF JON SCHERVEN JEFIREY L BARBARA L,jEN NAME/AOOR 2700 CASCO PT RD 2649 CASCO POINT RO 2640 CASCO PT RD ! WAYZATA 1*4 55391 BOX 120 WAYZATA MH 55391 ' NAVARRE MN 55392 38 20-117-23 24 0045 38 20-117-23 24 0046 PROP ADDR 02697 ETHEL AVE 02691 ETHEL AVE OIRIER NAME C GORDON AMUNDSON ET Al- UOROThY l KEARNS TAXPAYER C GORDON AMUNDSON DOROTHY L KEARNS TOTI.L 13ATCH 003 00029 NAME'ADDfk 2697 ETHEL AVE 2691 ETHEL AVE WAYZATA MN 55391 WAYZATA tRl 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 HEtNEPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT Of PROPER T AXAT TO THE MST Of MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF._ s" I DATE I Y Si u fames robin �- - la_ndscape J 6 a 3 h4 t8 0 r 7 •c. r park � �"3T Aug $8'��Y �v... . k street excelsior, minnesota 8 8 3 3 1 Mr. David Lee 2695 Casco Point Road Orono, Minnesota 55391 Dear Mr. Lee: At. your request, I visited your home site on Casco Point Ro.rd and viewed the timber retaining walls which you have installed along the lake shore edge of your property., The accompanying sketch plans and sections illustrate this work as I encountered it and also show my recommedations. My understanding, based on our conversation, is that the condition of the lake shoe embankment prior to construction was poor because of persistent erosion and the failure of the original stone wall at the base of the slope. Apparently, the stone wall was constructed of Minnesota limestone, similar to the adjacent wall to the south. I suggest that you provide photographic documentation as to this condition. At the point. when you began construction, two permits were required for the proposed work. The criteria for issuance of each are given based on my conversation with the City staff. first, a permit for construction within the 75' setback from Lake Minnetonka, is gra<<ted by the Orono City Council following review by the Planning Commision. My understanding is that this process would focus on the need for the work relative to erosion control any± bank stabilization, visual impact on the lake and neighbors, the engineering merits of the proposal, hard cover ordinances, restoration of vegetation and -ompliance with building codes. The second permit for this work, a building pt•rmit, requires the lakeshore permit as well as compliance with building codes and orlinanco . My recommendations which follow, are based on the criteria for the permits as listed above and assume that the walls as built constitutes the basis of your proposal. tp wnsite of 70 Ir 'A "v 5F4 � e 9UACU'o. 3 COVE 'KASTE_ C15C0 ICIMT 40•, 5!'1 ) •7 � � � J .,,-may tp 1 •? �► = I ��y} to )S ° f •� � r 3' Q : l►1 ' . .. i _ z .?ate ` • 1 wafw r *. we � .•,o � � Qtoy �� i.. • ,. /.• , .. �'a ; biv n 33 ol y 1 • ^ t tv ASCO At .10 .. 23 - for( Iml. i' _ • � James robin 2 Irlhislat 4laf4?4 3944 e f{ f' w- James robin landscape archttect 2 J 4 2 0 park street excelsior, minnesota 5 5 3 3 1 A 1 A 474 3940 0 Zdo s !.cf FCD- o�► 4 Oho r40 1" 1,4 - 546^6"4f400NIPe4z- 31 ON GiPVIA- 11 Li y1.ofv. 5*4>147 WHO-*- Poe* le c a Hf#tu* f 4I-, James robin landscape architect 2 3 4 2 0 �I0+-4 2 - park street excelsior, m i nn e s o t a y(O°j°I G PO I NCi 9060 B 8 3 3 1 DirOaO r'lr1- CMo G Boresuoo. PE Bonestroo Joseph rt W Andefhk. PE BraRosene 010 aldd A Le,E Turner. rner 9. PE P Anderiik & E ji"'es 1: Olson PE Glenn R Cook. PE Glenn I Associates Thomas E Noyes, PF Robert hPEPE L Sohvala Engineers & Architects September 27, 1988 City of OronoBox 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Attn: Ms. Jeanne Mabusth Re: File No. 139-1339 David Lee Dear Jeanne, Ke.th A Gordon. PE r",ras W Peterson, PE RKhard W Foster. PE MKnall C Lynch. PE Donald C Bur94rdt. PE 1Jmes R Maland. PE !erry A Bourdon, PE Kenneth P Anderson, PE Nark A Hanson, PE Keith 4 Bacnmann, PE 'ed K Field, PE Mart R Rolh. PF Nt(hJel T RautmanM PE Robert C Russet, A I A Robert R PfOterle.: E ThomaS E Angus. PE David O '...%Kota. PE Howard A Sanford. PE Charles A ffKkSOn Leo M Pawettky Harlan M Olson Susan M Ebentn Mark A Sap We inspected the David Lee property at 2695 Casco Point Road. The lake shore has been altered by the construction of several retaining walls. We do not know wnat condition the lake shore bank was in prior to construc- tion. We did review the sire several years ago with the previous owner and the lake shore bank appeared stable. The retaining wall construction will stabilize the bank and minimize the po- tential for future slope failure. The construction, however, is not consist- ent with City approvals on other applications. There are three basic options for addressing the problem with many variations of each option. The first wculd be to leave the walls in place and camouflage them with bushes and shrubs as proposed by Janes Robin. The second would be to modify the walls E.vi^g sections in place to stabilize the bank. The area would then be graded r 3 cover established to restore the bank. The third would be to he walls entirely and restore the bank to its original condition. Option one is not cousisteat with previous city approvals. The proposal is structurally sound but does not provide the lake shore continuity desired by the City. Option two would leave the lower lake shore wall exposed and the upper two walls would be buried. The wall sections would continue co provide stability for the bank but wall exposure would be reduced by 60 percent. We have indi- cated the amount of wall to be removed on the attached drawing. Page 1. 24 233S West Highway 36 • St. Paul, Minnesota S5113 9 612-636-4600 City of Orono Orono, MN Re: File No. 139 September 27, 1988 Option three would not have any wall exposed and the bank should be reinforced with fabric or buried cribbing for stability. It may be possible to leave small sections of the upper wall in place for stability. The bank would be steep and spec' ground cover mats would be required to hold the new grass or plantings inplace. We would recommend that the City follow option two or three questions, please contact this office. Yours very truly, BONESTR00, ROSENE, ANDERLIK 6 ASSOCIATES, INC. Glenn R. Cook GRC:li Encl. Page Z. 24 If you have any A Mr. Lee Page Two LAKESHORE CONSTRUCTION PERMIT. 31 Aug 88 1. The proposal certainly halts continued erosion and therefore has stabilized the bank for the forseeable future. The existing yard drain should handle yard surface runoff and prevent excess water from running over the walls. 2. The walls are visually unacceptable in their current state with no planting and are not compatible with the banks on adjacent properties. RECOMMENDATION: A planting program as a means to cover the walls; I also recommend the raising of the bed levels at the base of the walls to_ visually decrease the size of the walls as viewed from the lake. 3. I am not willing to certify the stability of i iall proposal but offer the following observations: a. The design of the walls appear to be stable with sufficient deadmen or earth anchors to capture the adjacent mass of Parth. b. There appears to be sufficient plan irregularities to offer some stability. The stair also acts as a buttress which will increase the stability. c. I feel there is inadequate protection of the base of the lower wall from high level wave and water action. RECOMMENDATION: The installation of a soil separator blanket and stone rip -rap at the vase of the lower wall as shown on the accompanying drawings. d. The backfill is reprted to be masonry debris covered by clay fill. This should allow drainage from the earth mass behind the wall. RECOMMENDATION: Drain holes should be installed 18" on center near the base of each wall. e. The backfill should be compacted. RECOMMENDATION: Remove, reinstall and compact clay backfill to 12" from top of the walls. f. The base of the walls is 12" or less into the grade which increases the opportuni'=y for frost action and eventual heaving of the walls. RECOMMENDATION: Raise the grade at the base of the walls. 4. The stair is twice the allowable width of 48" under Orono ordinances. RECOMMENDATION: Plant materials should be allowed to grow over the stair. 5. The proposal does not meet the Uniform Building Code in at least 2 areas: a. There is no rail protection from vertical changes over 30" height. RECOMMENDATION: Raise the grade at the base of _ e walls where possible; install plantings as shorn; install a temporary rail at the top wall. b. There is no rail on the stairwway. RECOMMENDATION: Install a steel piperail, paint. gray to match House. v Mr. Lee Page Three 31 Aug 88 6. The proposal does not provide sufficient planting soil to allow a successful establishment of plantings. RECOMMENDATION: Regrade terraces so as to allow 12" depth of planting soil as shown in the Sections. 7. Restoration: RECOMMENDATION: The proposal should be planted with evergreen shrubs as shown on the accompanying sketch. An organic mulch material, such as shredded hardwood bark should be installed in all plant beds. All planting operations should be conducted "in season". I also recommend the preparation of a watering program for this plant material. The shrubs should be allowed to grow together to form a continuous cover on the soil areas and in front of the walls. Following successful completion of the Lakeshore Permit based on the recommendations listed above, I feel that a Building Permit would be issued. If you have any questions regarding this report, please don't hesitate to call. Sincerely, James Robin MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 3, 1988 ZONING FILE t1338-SCHIBILLA CONTINUED available. Zoning Administrator Mabusth stated that the City would not want people parking on Crystal Bay Road. Gaffron added that there was limited parking area located in the rear access. Planning Commission member Cohen asked for clarification about the 33' easement for public"highways at the rear of the property. Gaffron explained the history of the easement and added that there remains a question as to whether the easement was ever actually created or not. A Proceeding Subsequent may be necessary to clear this flaw in the Schibilla's title. Mr. Schibilla stated that he had been in touch with Minnesota Title to attempt to remedy this problem. They indicated that this easement does not show on either of the adjacent properties. The easement is not continuous and only pertains to the Schibilla property. There were no comments from the public regarding this matter and the public hearing was closed. It was moved by Planning Commission member Cohen, seconded by Planning Commission member Hanson, to recommend approval of the proposed garage location, and hardcover variance, subject to the easement issue being resolved before the building permit for the garage is issued. Mr. Schi lbi l l.a asked if Cohen could re- word his motion. He was not certain as to the time frame involved with resolving the easement issue. He was granted federal funds because of the storm damage for rebuilding the garage. There was a time limit involved with the availability of those funds. Gaffron and Cohen concurred that the status of the easement would have to be determined before a building permit could be issued. Gaffron inquired as to what structural area the motion recommended. Kelley stated that the motion recommended approving structural area of 1264'. The hardship in this matter is the fact that the applicants' previous garage was destroyed in a storm. Planning Commission member Brown added that the motion should also include language prohibiting the conversion of the extra level of the garage, into a dwelling. leyade that tthe /17 ditional hardcover could be placedon the property ture. Motion, Ayes=6, Nays=0, Motion passed. 339 DAVID LEE 95 CASCO POINT ROAD AFTER -THE -FACT VARIANCES CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PUBLIC SEARING 9:10 P.M. - 9:37 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certifivate of Mailing were duly noted. The applicant was present for this matter, as was Mr. James Robin, the applicant's Landscape Architect, and Louis Cberhauser, Mr. Lee's Attorney. � 5v 12�,`►� RAM I --fin Wes•-1 __ i�ti 5 ► .. D 0�Vvrlwe - hdarloN 1. %-RQMOJG r r -1 r -+ J r 1 �V'vev Pj(p 7i James obin landsca • ark 4 `s �o MC a = 1� l tD t-* 1 ,ems >� �! 1,5 6,A64::0 fel ►�'r �,�i.� i p 3 = c 00416 /W* MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 3, 1988 ZONING FILE #1339-LEE CONTINUED and paid for by Mr. Lee, he would have no problem with the application. Planning Commission member Hanson asked about the need to place 12" of clay fill. Mr. Robin stated that 12" of existing soil would be removed and modified so it would better support plant growth. Mr. Robin addressed the issue of the stair width. He stated that the plant materials that he recommended are very dense and will eventually cause the stair to be unusable for the bulk of that 8'. The 8' stair structure would continue to support steep lakeshore bank. There were no comments from the public regarding this matter and the public hearing was closed. It was moved by Planning Commission member Cohen, seconded by Planning Commission member Moos, to recommend approval of this after -the -fact application, subject to the applicant working with the City to implement the ten steps recommended by Mr. Robin. Hardship in this matter would be the necessity to rebuild the stairs and wall for safety purposes. Planning Commission member Johnson asked if any trees were removed to accomplish this project. Mr. Lee stated that only two dead trees were removed. Johnson asked if Mr. Lee understood the ramifications of the 0- 75' zone ordinance. Johnson explained that looking from the lake, one would see a 12' wall, which in his opinion, was not aesthetically pleasing. Mr. Lee agreed that presently the wall looked horrible. Mr. Lee stated that within a few years, the wall would be virtually invisible. Planning Commission member Brown stated that there were recommendations of the City Engineer that did not concur with Mr. Robin's recommendations. Mabusth responded that the City Engineer's recommendations were based mcre on the final actions of Council on similar applications. Planning Commission member Hanson stated that he was trying to envision this matter as though Mr. Lee had come in with this application prior to any work being done. Re questioned whether the City Engineer's option 2 would be a more appropriate direction to take. Redu-ing the stairs from 8' to 4' would be a step toward the City's standards that would not require tearing down the wall. Mr. Robin stated that it would have been possible to conform with that recommendation at the beginning of the project, now, however, it would be very difficult to do. He believed that plant materials would be a much more effective way to deal with the visual aspect of the wail. Brown mentioned that the City's normal recommendations for erosion control is a gradual sloping of the bank. Mabusth stated that normally that would be true if the existing soils had not been altered, as was the case now with the Lee property. Mr. Robin stated that the level terraces offer more stability at th+.s port than a sloped bank. Re l ley stated that the planning Commiss :on should grant the vat lances and allow the City Engineer and Mr. Robin to work out the best method of accomplishing stability. Motion, Ayes-5, Hanson- Nay, Motion passed. MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 3, 1988 ZONING FILE #1339-IZE CONTINUED Zoning Administrator Mabusth explained that this matter involved 3 tiers of retaining walls. The lake level tier begins at a 5' elevation and continues to a 7' elevation on the north side and goes all the way up on the north side to ar, elevation of 1216" above lakeshore elevation. On the south side it extends up to a 12' elevation. There is an 8' w.ide section of non -spaced wooden stairs. There is a dock that has not yet been connected to the lower level, but will be connected if approval is granted. Chairman Kelley stated that a chronological accounting of this application would be very helpful. Mr. Lee stated that he started removing the old rock back in June. He also started moving dirt at that time. In July he started installing the timbers. On August 15, a stop work order was issued by the City of Orono. Kelley asked Mr. Lee as to the progress of the project at that time. The only thing left to be done was installing approximately 20 timbers to tie into the steps. After August 15th, the City directed Mr. Lee to perform some remedial land alterations until the permit for the project could be approved. This included filling in some of the sand that had been stored along the shoreline because it was being washed back into the lake. However, Mr. Lee exceeded that direction and was issued a citation on August 26th. Mr. Lee performed more work after the citation was issued. Mr. Lee stated that all that involved was a truck load of dirt being dumped where he needed fill. Kelley stated that regardless of the facts involved with this, the project is now done and there is now a 12' wall on the lakeshore. Planning Commission member Johnson asked who performed the work. Mr. Lee stated that he and several high school aged kids did the job. Mr. Lee stated that he was not aware of the fact that he needed a permit to construct the wall. The previous wall tell apart due to erosion. Mr. Oberhauser read several le-ters that had been written by Mr. Lee's neighbors indicating their support for Mr. Lee's efforts. Planning Commission member Cohen asked Mr. Oberhauser if Mr. Lee had read the memo from Mr. Robin setting forth his ten recommendations. Zoning Administrator !Aabusth stated that Mr. Robin was Mr. Lee's landscaper. Cohen then asked if the City Engineer concurred with Mr. Robin's recommendations. Mabusth stated that many of the recommended improvements were confirmed ty the City Engineer. Mr. Robin's stated that the intention of provi.3inq the recommendations was to allow staff to see what would be necessary to maximize the impact of such a restoration project. Chairman Kelley stated that he would have a difficult time requesting Mr. Lee to tear down the wall. Cohen concurred with this and added that as long as the ten recommendations were met To: Mayor Grabek & Orono Council Members Ciiv Administrator Bernhardson From: Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrato-r Date: October 21, 1988 Subject: #1345 John Theobald, 4017 North Shore Drive - Variances - Resolution Application - Request for variances to construct a detached garage. Zoning District - LR-1B, 1 Acre Minimum - Sewered List if Exhibits Exhibit A - Applicants Revised Plan Showing Hardcover Decrease, 10/21/88 Exhibit B - Notice of Planning Comt,iission Action of 10/21/88 Exhibit C - Applicant's Submittal at 10/17/88 Planning Commission Mtg Exhibit D - Memo & Exhibits of 10/13/88 Exhibit E - Proposed Resolution Discussion - Please review the memo and exhibits of October 13, 1988 and the applicant's proposal presented to the Planning Commission. Note that applicant's initial plan (Exhibit E of the .:tober 13th memo) proposed a new detached garage 2' away from the existing detached garage, which would have required structure -to -structure setback variances and hardcover variance in addition to needing a 24 s.f. accessory building variance. Prior to --he Planning Commission meeting, the applicant prepared a revised proposal which was presented to the Planning Commission. This would result in a 960 s.f. garage attachment to the existing 363 s.f. garage wits► a 4' overlap for a doorway between the 2 structures. This would actually result in a single detached garage structure of 1,323 s.f., requiring an accessory structure variance. Applicant proposed to remove substantial portions of his existing driveway parking area in order to decrease hardcover in the 75-250' zone to 25.5%. At. their October 17th meeting, Planning Commission reviewed the original proposal and the applicant's revised proposal, and found no adequate hardship to justify the oversized accessory structure variance, nor did they feel comfortable recommending approval for a minimal setback between the 2 structures. The Planning Commission's final recommendation on a vote of 5-0 was that the property be allowed to have 1 accessor; structure not to exceed 1,000 s.f. in area, that would meet the required 10' street setback and the required side setbacks, and not exceeding the existing 30.3% hardcover in the 75-250' zone. Planning Commission left it up to applicant to determine how he would accomplish this, either by adding to the existing garage or replacing it with a totally new one. Applican* has submited a new E lan (Exhibit A) indicating how he wi 11 rebuild, with a net hardcover decrease of 135 s.f. Staff Recosssendation - Staff concurs with the Planning Commission recommendation. The applicant indicates he will build a new garage in the originally proposed location, remove the existing garage, and remove enough existing other hardcover so that there is no net increase in 75-250' hardcover. A resolution to that effect is attached for Council revie%. r � " (&) S►A0 of-,1 tA:k- 5) () vi QlNi 18 90 s r ,330 S r (OF New rop�f lla9' 3 2-x 30 loC. ru jy/w ; r »lI 1 A a r . ZONING FILE NO. 1345 CITY OF ORONO NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION P.U. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 473-7357 Date of Notice: 10/21/88 ------------------------------------------------------------------------- - TO: John Theobald COPIES TO: 4i17 North Shore Drive Mound, MN 55364 TYPE OF AFPLTCATION: Va,ianc2 ----------------------------------------------------------- DATE OF MEETING: 10/17/88 VOTE: 5 For 0 Against Planning Cos ission recoass:nds the following: Approval subject to conditions noted below MOTES AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS: 1. Applicant shall be allowed one accessory structure in the 75-250' zone, such structure not. to exceed 1,000 s.f. of floor area. 2. This structure shall meet the required 10' side setbacks and 10' street setbacks with doors facing to t'ie side. :3. Hardcover resulting from such construction shall not exceed the existing 30.34 hardcover in the 75-250' zone, hence some hardcover removals may be ne_essary in conjunction with the construction of the new structure. Applicant's next scheduled meeting is confirmed as: City Council Monday, ectcher 24, 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. �{✓�- +� C`� �rti �, � � Vim% �a vl' � '..n : 7--s 1 j v /1(-Scn� 1, /e4 l i n e./ c)� x' 01J-/ J (�- t 1I.V- �� ram . i i , ; l i �` ��r r �� /•1' C4, ,,,� t::. (�. r`.1� � � � i i r tom' /�q :rf �' J c.�•_-:`r � r-� �,1 �- (.Y� ..�'�'��..� V //M i. ✓�i., C;i �/. •/N•✓/'� 1 %�-I �.: �.`� �j J . rp��•'_'r r�►i% �`'�J'.. �.: i'- / �✓ ' d v} A 77 a r-- W a U U, I I -� 17XXice.32.9 d % J�/iJ ��f.�- �-G� �;✓ r/` �'� p'�-r � � iG�'� a.: • %✓ram"�} � !�%Z� t�f cf 3 `? , j 70 ill . c; '>�C�, J ,`„� �� `� •-' . � a r� � �:.. Al r `1� 40 r , AMEW � t / .. � �' :s' .,, 1, ,'.err, _ ! .Ac of �.�-! +► 1, rh� /vex^ Snectc7u2e f S 0 TO: Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson From: Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator Dates October 13, 1988 Subjects #1345 John Theobald, 4017 North Shore Drive - Variance - Public Hearing Application - The site plan proposed requires the following variances: 1. 75-250' hardcover. 2. Accessory structure floor area in excess of 1000 a.f. 3. Structure to structure setback less than 10'. 4. Possible street setback variance. Zoning District - LR-lB, 1 Acre Minimum - Sewered List of axhibits Exhibit A - Application Exhibit B - Plat Map Exhibit C - Property Owners List Exhibit D - Letters From Neighboring Property Owners Exhibit E - Survey With Site Plan Exhibit F - Staff Review of Hardcover Calculations Exhibit G - Garage Floor Plan Exhibit H - Various Optional Plans By Staff Pert{nent Facts 1. The applicant wishes to construct a 3-stall garage on the property. He would prefer to also keep the existing garage, although he is aware of the City's concerns regarding hardcover, structural setback, anO accessory structure size. 2. Existing hardcover in the 75-250' zone is 30.3%. If the applicant constructs the new 1024 square foot garage located as proposed, and does not remove the existing garage, hardcover will increase to 34.8%. If the existing garage is removed, final hardcover will be 33%. 3. Topography on this property is such that any new garage would have to be located in the area within 50' to 60' of the right-of-way of County Road 19. Note that the existing well serving the property somewhat limits the westward movement of the proposed garage. 4. The garage doors are proposed to face to the side, and a backup apron is adequately provided, hence if the 10' setback can be maintained from the street right-of-way no variance 'or that setback would be required. n f C Zoning File # 1345 October 13, 1988 Page 2 of 2 5. The proposed garage is intended by the applicant to be set :pack approximately 2' from the existing garage. This does not meet 'he minimum 10' separation requirement for accessory structures. From a fire safety standpoint, any separation distance less than 10' will require specific fire wall treatments in both structures. A separation distance less than 5' should not be considered. 6. The applicant has not attempted to present hardships for the accessory structure size variance, since he apparently wasn't aware of the need for that variance at the time the application was made. He notes that he would like to maintain the existing garage for use as a shop and or storage space. 7. Note that a portion of the proposed garage is over an existing parking area. There seems to be an abundance of paved parking area on the property, and from a hardcover standpoint it might be more appropriate to merely construct an addition to the existing garage. This would result in less hardcover increase and eliminate the need for structural setback variances, and would hopefully be of a size so that no accessory structure floor area variance is needed. Discussion - The applicant has noted that he is somewhat flexible in his request, and he would remove the existing garage if absolutely necessary. In Exhibit H, staff has presented a few optional layouts for the applicant and Planning Commission to consider, each option noting the variances that would be needed. Staff would not recommend approval of the proposed structure to structure setback variance to allow a 2' separation. Likewise, unless applicant can present hardships that justify the square footage, staff would not recommend approval of the garage floor area variance. From a hardcover standpoint, it would seem reasonable to expect that the existing garage be removed and revert back to grassed area, in exchange for approval of the hardcover for the new garage. Staff Recos ndation - Please review the various options and Exhibit H. Staff would recommend approval of Option A, which moves the proposed garage eastward to result in no net increase in hardcover, cuts down the size of the garage to under 1000 square feet so no variance is necessary, and includes removal of the existing garage upon completion of the new garage. CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATI Initial Application Fee $150.00 ( $50. 00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $75.00 (no change from original application) _ •:'L �'`'iN= After -the -Fact Fees (Double application Fee) _%VV 'YV --------- I ..•. -_ ---- i v., ut:VV PROPERTY LOCATION IL��jj�� r7 1i �`/^ �^ LS' V • YV Site Address •r Property Identification Number (P.I.D. ) Please check one - Property abstract or torrens? Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. _ __ _ _Q_ �% APPLICANTPhone (home)--------------------------------7'CJ �]'' ---- Name =i �� N / %��/�J� [� Phone (work) Address �� /�� CLdZ�City_rI%GY.�/�U ----Zip- s-- 6----- ------------------------------- - OWNER (if different than applicant) Phone (home) Name Address: City: Phone (work) Zip: Date Property Acquired (month/year) I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. ------------------------------------------------------- PRESENT USE OF PROPERTY lresent Zoning Cistrict PLesenL Use of Property �T� _ �p!'�L_� Residential Other -(Specify) _------------ ----- -----------� DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $ 0 Describe request in detail: 3o�-X'3.,Z 6'i�2ot IE7- 5C VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area Lot Width Hardcover Setback Variances ( Front Side Rear) Other :w,HARDSH I P Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty resulting from strict enforcement of zoning regulations: '%O�a/`A�Qhi --------------------------------------------------------------------------- DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code Requirements: $ D - r✓ri r REQUIRED 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 3•18-3271) . 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 propos-3 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 ate 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 verificat* this re uest. q -�T owner's Signature �..-`` Date ` [�!_ Applicant must have al ittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetinas 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 Build:.ng & zoning office of this change prior to the meetinq. RUN DATE 09/16/88 HEIAIEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM REPORT NG. PI435401 BATCH 006 PROPERTY OWNERS LIST PAGE 13 38 07-117-23 44 0003 PROP ADDR 04005 NORTH SHORE OR OWI.-R HAME SUSAN H WALKER TAXPAYER SUSAN BILGER NAME/ADDR 4005 H SHORE DRIVE MODUO MN 55364 38 07-117-23 44 0063 PROP ADDR 04044 NORTH SHORE DR OWNER NAME MAYBELLE S BOXRUD TAXPAYER MRS ARNOLD R BOXRUD NAME/AODR 4040 IIORTH SHORE DR MOUND MI 55364 38 07-117-23 44 0066 PROP ADDR 04000 NORTH SHORE OR OWfIER NAMF MARY C GALLAGHER TAXPAYER MARY C GALLAGHER NAME/ADDR 4000 110RIH SHORE OR MOU11D MN 55364 38 08-117-23 33 0074 PROP ADOR 01550 NORTH ARM OR OWNER IiAME MARGARET PELTOLA TAXPAYER MARGARET PELTOLA NAME/ADDR 1550 NORTH ARM OR MOULD MN 55364 38 07-117-23 44 0004 04009 tMTH SHORE OR R J SEGNER ETAL RICHARD J SEGNER 4009 NORTH SHORE DR MOUt4O MN 55364 38 07-117-23 44 0064 04040 NORTH SHORE OR MAYBELLE S BOXRUO MRS ARNOLD R BOXRUO 4040 NORTH SHORE DR MOLAID 1*1 55364 38 07-117-23 44 0076 04051 HIGHWOOD RD A A E VONGRIES ALEXANDER A EDITH VOfIGRIES 4051 HIGHWO00 RO MOUIID M1 55364 TOTAL BATCH 006 00010 38 07-117-23 44 0005 04017 NORTH SHORE DR JOHN F THEOBALO ETAL JOHN F THEOBALO 4017 NORTH SHORE DR MMID MI 55364 38 07-117-23 44 0065 04044 NORTH SHORE DR MAYBELLE S BOXRUO MRS ARNOLD R BOXRUO 4040 tlORTH SHORE DR MOUND MI 55364 38 07-117-23 44 0077 04041 NORTH SHORE DR 0 1 S MCCURDY DALE J MCCURDY 4041 IIORTH SHORE OR MOUND M1I 55364 I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE All ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE 91COROS OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION, TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE ANO BELIEF. �Y DATE I Il )' )sy ft( ( _/ wall 11- s' _ �� - --=L. = r• � 1^ sip I AZ Jam. n dop few— AFM •i 1 J� •,I I ozl� ZI aY o C C v✓1c.f�- ..�7�Gl�C a/L,oll - it aiit �f 1 y U: C; Aa6 ool ce6,0MO (Yi92Gt-c) C5- 3 a- n 3 ;?- 3;z io�l OwT— p S—p 40 - S ---• -Oze s— / to —_Ipl r Jee-4,6 - jlap %t F4',q/19z= .- ,P je X:57�A hW � o//k b Goa K-ad 6-�S-3 c, ge, A02 4 cavo2 /?.*view r-9t1341s — 7%000 *i-L 00 /Jo.. -* S•�w D,L.,vor : ,albs A- - 7,1 (. 0 3. . 67--sr7oiv ; SMVro G.2 x 8.3 • s/. S . �. * o.�s ; e"Opoats t NO C04ma4 Ga '7S-250 Oil. s /')//70 -*. �„isfNv: M sE to. raay. • -7 3t•y,rtY.y �4l Is73 z,i Arr,j IL A DsT. 6AA*60 /`. i r Q,4j 3/.3 363 t'Derwc / y r . 3 3�• 15)el Z 9 ` N 60 p z X/y t� F /jMLK.S L1�10 Yo F Z ,,frZB ? 0 G 3 /n2. 32b N, 7"y I1 r •• 4 R u � o'l T sc•�es yX �/ ! yo k G ry pKiVeq*Jk`f 3(. xss— !9$D too& 3oLZ jy fi4/oil " oftD bFr. 44A 21!r i Z O? i2e"oV E Der. Giro /G . t r i:. Y- �• 3t x3't % /Ozy s;4. CVO. aEob.) /s /bD s,;. ) No-r ,ma-',. 4 $(.Y a + HA�Gcaes Nrr �r�c�e sze 5B/(,p +- S-01 .(o31"I si, L- 3 t1 -7- 1 9 , i l o- 33.0y. ?r. LrD' P#..#. A RESOLUTION GRANTING A VARIANCE TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.22, SUBDIVISION 2 FILE #1345 WHEREAS, John Theoba16 (hereinafter "the applicant") is the ownf.r of the property located at 4017 North Shore Drive within the City of :,Pone (hereinafter "City") and legally described as follows: That part of Lot 4 lying Westerly of a line running from a point or, the Northerly line of Lot 4, distant 30.5 feet Westerly from the Northeast corner thereof to the Southwest corner of Lot 4, and all of Lots 5 and 6. Highwood Lake Minnetonka, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City for a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 to permit the construction of a detached garage which will result in hardcover in the 75- 250' lakeshore setback zone in excess of the 25% hardcover normally allowed. Minnesota: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File 0134�. 2. The pi:eperty is located in the LR-lB Single Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District. 3. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on October 17, 1988 and recommended approval of the proposed variarcp based upon the following findings: A) The applican'_ has revised his request from an original rf-quest for additional variances for accessory structure floor area and structure -to -structure setback. The current proposal agreed to by the applicant will need no s•ructure-to-structure setback variance and no accessory struc floor area variance. The Planning Commission found no adequa•.e hardships to justify c;ranting of variances for the structure -to -structure setback of accessory structure floor area variances. Paqe 1 cif 4 OPTIo� /� Cel.,:rwc� �� tw C.ARltis! AS -0--A l r `�E OLD 6AAAAIrI i TS I►r1 No Nei �.C'�!' N�ytpt bV ►Z O CNe�CASE . AZD 0 �'tP - a�' '`t g ' PDD to %a Allwca� - O / . #P4 D Co v eq2 \ •r...♦ C ± lDO INc,Z�►Lf v*toN mum - NO 1&0 1; 6AG . Apo .1 Nam.. Adam SWOR&A arc' B) Existing hardcover in the 75-250' zone is 30.3% where 25% is normally allowed. Planning Commission finds that there is adequate existing hardcover that can be removed or constructed above that no increase in hardcover above the existing 30.3% is appropriate. C) The applicant proposes 'to face the garage doers to the side, hence the 10' street setback for that structure is allowable. 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 Coun�:il 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 Flan of the City. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the findings noted above, the Orono City Council hereby grants a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 to permit the construction of a detached garage which will result in hardcover in excess of the 25% hardcover normally allowed in the 75-250' lakeshore setback zone, subject to the following conditions: 1. Only one accessory garage structure shall be allowed in the 75- 250' zone. Such structure shall not exceed 1,000 s.f. in total floor area. 2. In the event that the property owner constructs a new garage in a location that does not conflict with the existing garage structure, the existing garage structure shall be removed immediately upon final inspection of the new garage, or six months from the date of building permit issuance for the new structure, whichever is sooner. 3. Final hardcc !r in the 75-250' zone shall not exceed the existing 5,816 s.f. or 30.3%. Page 2 of 4 4. The property owner is advised that the existing shed structure in the 0-75' lakeshore zone is considered a non -conforming structure and is subject to the pertinent ordinances governing such structures. 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 (October 24, 1989). 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 has, 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 24th day of October, 1988. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk James R. Grabek, Mayor Property Owner(s) rage 3 of 4 To: Mayor Grabek & Orono Council Members City Administrator Bernhardson From: Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator Date: October 20, 1988 Subject: #1346 Einar Hagberg, 740 North Arm Drive - Variance - Resolution Application - Hardcover variance to construct a detached storage garage. Zoning District - LP-lB List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Staff Drawing on Survey Indicating Sewer Line Location & Proposed Garage Location Revision Exhibit B - Planning Commission Action Notice of 10/10/88 Exhibit C - Memo & Exhibit of 10/13/88 Discussion - Please review the memo and exhibits of October 13, 1988. The applicant proposes to construct a detached storage garage of 576 s.f. floor area near the northwest corner of his property. Hardcover in the 0-75' zone is 2,070 s.f. or 18.6%, with no change proposed. Hardcover in the 75-250' zone is 7,148 s.f. or 32.9% which would be increased by 480 s.f. or up to 35.6%. In the 250-500' zone existing hardcover is 900 s.f. or 30% and will increase to 996 s.f. or 33.2%. In reviewing this, Planning Commission felt that the gravel driveway above the municipal sewer line, which provides access should the City need to maintain that line, is not a fully gravelled surface and is not driven on extensively, but serves a public purpose, so that it should be excluded from both sides of the hardcover calculation. While this may be an unusual approach, making those calculations results in 0-75' hardcover of 11.5% and 75-250' hardcover of 29.5%, before the new garage is included. Planning Commission did not feel that it was necessary to remove any existing hardcover on the property to accommodate this hardcover increase. The Planning Commission, at their October 17th meeting, recommended on a 5-0 vote to approve the subject garage addition without any hardcover removals. Sewer Location Issue - Since the Planning Commission review, staff has discovered that an additional sewer line exists along the north line of the property near the storage garage. This line apparently serves no houses, but is used as a cyst n flushing point. Because that pipe is only 5' from the proposed garage, and the standard easement for sewer purposes wou'. I be 10' either side of the pipe, it is appropriate to require that the property owner relocate that proposed garage to be at least 10' from the sewer line. This should cause no apparent problems for the property owner. Zoning File #1346 October 20, 1.988 Page 2 of 2 This also brings up the questions of whether sewer easements have been granted on this property since they did not show up on the survey. The City Attorney has been requested to verify whether a sewer easement was ever granted for this property, and if not (which would not be unusual for this 1973 sewer project for which permanent easements were only sporadically obtained) this might be an appropriate time to ask the property owner to grant such an easement. The City would take care of all of the paper work and create an appropriate legal description. Staff Recommendation - Based on the Planning Commission recommendation, staff would recommend approval of the hardcover *variance for the storage garage subject to the conditions: 1. Storage garage shall be moved approximately 5' further south to maintain a 10' setback from the existing sewer line near the north line of the property. 2. The property owner is advised that the existing boat house and shed within the 0-75' setback zone are considered non -conforming structures per the current zoning code, and are subject to the pertinent codes governing such structures. 3. If it is determined by the City Attorney that a permanent easement for the existing sewer lines has never been granted, the property owner shall grant such an easement, the paperwork and legal description to be provided by the City. A resolution for approval based on the above conditions is attached for Council review. AlAvez Co vele- &EV IOV." * /3 yeo ) y o N OAX-* AW-0. Drel vF - /qie & eL-OLG 0 7r ' C kt-tAr,4 " exemm , : 8a&t- 40 u Sc sMOM b a GK PATto IAu,e-t. KS m 4>.,y./x2Z,i -S-13 s;. /o.YAr /o 1G w 2( /z n l RZ Y-?x3. S !05- 3S 3 x�� ya Cam . De v�' AV& 12- )f "7S ?oo Zoo - -/Nc CHANGES PtiP01Wt� `?6-z°r o�A"Atswal)l I L.) 6WJ r7fJ G h�fr, 2s,f x�{a,l 2,Y.o x Z1.i CoN LAJkUr.S -2t �.S- U /p X/Y 5�x Z-9 L 1-61 w A, /J/ X . S* '�!/) .s t sX 2 s ! 3 03 ? x , 63 Ue ge, /QS� I.x X/7 Zia leo�k- P"sri c ? X 33 (a lax -7Lo /? r YO Aso GXzo 1 Zo 2 fOFOSI� /-,an 1"o0 ; Al tO s�, Po41711a of 5 76,- s J . GAX- . YSt �1` = 2- : 2l -?Qo = �l�iU� air A RESOLUTION GRANTING A VARIANCE TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.22, SUBDIVISION 2 FILE #1346 WHEREAS, Einar Hagberg (hereinafter "the applicant") is the owner of the property located at 740 North Arm Drive within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as follows: Lot 4, Auditor's Subdivision No. 362, Nennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City for a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 to permit the construction of a detached storage garage which will increase the hardcover in the 75-250' lakeshore setback zone in excess of the 25% hardcover normally allowed in that zone. Minnesota: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #1346. 2. The property is located in the LR-lB Single Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District. 3. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this applicaticn on October 17, 1988 and recommended approval of the proposed variance based upon the following findings: A) A significant percentage of the existing hardcover in the 0- 75' zone and a small percentage of the hardcover in the 75-250' zone is due to an existing gravel driveway providing access from the higher rear of the property to the lower lakeshore, and from which the City derives some benefit by its existence due to the ability of the City to use that driveway for maintaining the existing sewer line, hence the area of that gravel driveway should be excluded from hoth numerator and denominator of the hardcover calculation, thereby reducing the hardcover percentages on the property. B) Planning Commission finds no need to request a hardcover trade-off. Page 1 of 4 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. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the findings noted above, the Orono City Council hereby grants a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 to permit the construction of a detached storage garage which will increase hardcover in the 75-250' setback zone in excess of the 25% hardcover normally allowed in that zone, subject to the following conditions: 1. The storage garage shall be moved so that it is at least 10' from the existing sewer line near the north line of the property. 2. Hardcover on the property shall be limited to the following in the 75-250' zone: House Concrete Walks Retaining Walls Decks Bituminous Driveway Rock 6 Plastic Portion of Detached Garage TOTAL 1,659 s.f. 567 s.f. 103 s.f. 636 s.f. 1,428 s.f. 1,699 s.f. Storaqe 480 s.f. 6,572 s.f. or 31.8% Hardcover in the 250-500' zone shall be limited as follows: Existing Driveway 900 s.f. Portion of Proposed Garage 96 s.f. TOTAh 996 s.f. or 33.2% Page 2 of 4 3. The property owner is advised that no additional hardcover will be allowed on the property, and that any future proposals to add hardcover on the property will not be approved, but might be approved only in conjunction with concurrent removals of existing hardcover, resulting in no net increase in hardcover on the property. 4. The property owner is advised that the existing boat house and shed structure near the lakeshore on the property are considered non- conforming structureF and are subject to the pertinent ordinances pertaining to such structures. 5. If the City Attorney determines that there is no permanent easement for the existing sewer lines on the property, applicant shall grant such an easement, the paperwork and legal description to be provided by the City. 6. 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 (October 24, 1989). 7. 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. 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 24th day of October, 1988. ATTEST`: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk James R. Grabek, Mayor Property Owner(s) Page 3 of 4 r1388.4 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark Bernhardson, City Administrato r1lb DATE: October 13, 1988 SUBJECT: Recycling Proposal Attachments: A. Recycling Proposals Dated 10/4/88 B. Recycling Proforma -,Polka Dot & Super Cycle ISSUE 1. Determination as to whether the Council wants to undertake "curbside recycling". 2. Development of process to implement. 3. —e rmination of funding for recycling. INTRODUCTION - At the Council's October 10, 1988 Council meeting they reviewed the initial information on the recycling proposals and costs. Based on this it %as tabled to the October 24th meeting for a further presentation of costs. DISCUSSION 1. Curbside Recycling - Council reviewea the cost for "curbside" recycling together with the costs from the vendors to pick it up at the normal garbage location, which in many cases is not curbside. Should the City go with Super Cycle now this would presently be the same cost but as it requires more service, a higher cost in the future once introduced at the normal garbage pickup place, the City will find it difficult to move it back to curbside. On the other hand with Minnetonka Beach receiving that at the garbage pickup location now other people in Orono will be familiar with the level of service and cost that they are getting (Minnetonka Beach cost 1.�,C per month per household). Additionally, it should be noted that although the efforts of West Hennepin drop-off sites have been excellent that the City will not be able to reach its goals for recycling without curbside or a substantial on -going educational effort. If the City does not meet the goal, it would risk having the County take over the program and putting in a program of their choice at costs that they would determine. 2. Process for Implementation - The following are issues that need to be address in the process: Recycliny Proposal October 13, 1988 Page 2 of 3 .a. The City of Orono or West Hennepin Recycling - The City could undertake the process of recycling on its own but would necessarily need to go out for bids on its own. The concern at this point is however, that because of the total cost to the City of recycling or not regardless of whether the City stayed with recycling Commission. The proposal would have to be bid as it exceeds the parameters for bidding. The initial reaction is tlat the "RFP" is questionable as to being a legal bid. Should the City desire to go on its own and bid its own ser,• * it would not however loose the drop-off sites that currently would any educational programs that would be a joint eft ie commission. The cost of this for 1989 is estimated to ,275.00, net cost may only be $3,500.00. It is not anticipated that the City's contractors cost would be any different if the City went on its own, but the administrative responsibility would be bourne by staff. B. Once or Twice a Month - The proposals have it at twice a mont pickup and this is what most of the suburban areas are doing. C. Start Date and Education - It is anticipated that once a start date is established, brochures be prepared to be dropped off with containers. D. Container Delivery - The cost of actual delivery is included in t:h container cost and would not be an additional cost. E. Number of Containers - While any nu::iber of containers can delivered to the residents typically the suburban areas have be - delivering between two and three, one for glass, one '.,:: metals and o- for page. Often the paper issue is handled using 41 cery bags for t communities that have only delivered two. In the nex _ few months, it expected that there will he a divided container coming o- the market f a similar cost. 3. Funding - Attachment 13 outlines the costs for meeting the minim.: recycling goals. These figures do not include :he cost of West Hennepin recycling. Ps this should be a budgeted item, inclusion of these costs can be mad Crom undesignated reserve in 1988 to be reimbursed by charges in future years. she City could charge the resident the cost of this service on their utility/septic bills, either for the full cost or d portion of the cost. An additional alternative may be to charge it through the garbage haulers contracts. ALTERNATIVES - A. "Curbside" Issues: 1. Undertake; 2. Continue with drop-off sites only; 3. Curbside only; 4. Place of normal garbage pick-_ip. Recycling Proposil October 13, 1988 Page 3 of 3 B. Process to implement: 1. Entity to operate* a) West Hennepin b) City of Orono 2. Once or Twice a Month: a) Continue with the proposed twice per month pick-up b) Seek prices for once a month 3. Start Date: a) January, 1989 b) March, 1989 c) Other 4. Container Acquisition: a) 1 container b) 2 containers c) Delay until divided container on market C. Budgeting: 1. 1988 budget reserve 2. 1989 budget reserve 3. Charge on utility/septic a) Different price if urban/clustered b) Same price for all residents 4. Assess waste haulers RECOMMENDATION - It is recommended that the City undertake curbside recycl in__ in all areas of the community and that this be done curbside in order tc forasta11 future cost increases. It is additiinally recommended that the City target J nuary as a start date for start-up and that the City undertake it througn r 3t Hennepin recycling Commission at this point leaving its options :> n for inde, _,,dently proceeding later. The staff recommends delay on cc inter selection for a month. It is further recommended that an actual bik.,jing process be under- taken. It is recommended that this be funded from an annual a charge on the City's utility or septic billings of about S8.40.1year. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by _, seconded by _, that the Council direct staf` to undertake through the West Hennepin Recycling Commission curbside recycling c-)mmencing cn or about .January, 1989 with the operation's costs to be handled on a charge basis and the initial container and delivery charges to be funded out of the 1988 budget reserve to be r4iinbur3ed out of this charge. Ayes ,, Mays _ cc: John Gernardson, "ublics Works Director Carolyn Smith, West Hennepin. Recycling a88.3HD To: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator From: John R. Gerhardson, Public Works Director Date: October 4, 1988 Subject: Recycling - Curb -Side Pick Up As everyone is well aware, recyclin3 has become a major issue in the past few years. Hennepin County has mandated, by the passage of Ordinance #13, that all municipalities shall have a recycling ;rogram in effect by 1990. The ordinance mandates that if a municipality does not have a recycling program, they have the authority to set up a program in the City ind assess the costs for dcing so. The main reasons for recycling is to reduce the garbage being dum, in landfills, in addition to the cons ruction of the garbage burn plant Minneapolis. For the above reasons, the City of Orono became a member in the West Hennepin Recycling Commission in 1987. The participating communities are Orono, Long Lake, Independence, Loretto, Maple Plain, Medina, Greenfield, and Minnetonka Beach. The goals of the Commission was to develop a recycling program for all participating communties that would satisfy the intent of Ordinance 411, to recycle 16% of the residential waste stream by 1990. The Commission developed and maintained drop -off sites in all communities to accep-: recyclables such as aluminum, tin, glass and newspaper. Most re-ently, the Commission contracted with Polka Dot recycling from Buffalo, Minnesota, to operate the drop-off sites on a once a month schedule at each site. The Commission has been very active in education about recycling and has sent out several mailings to all residents in the eight communities participating in the Commission. However, it has become very obvious thac productive as the drop -of¢ sites have been, we wil l not meet the 16% gc 1�90 unless a curb -side recycling progrma is 'implemented. In Au .:f 1989, arolyn Smith, Coordinator of the West Hennepin County Recy--- ng Commission, and myself met with four companies and conducted a tour of the areas t be considered for curb -side recycling. we submitted Requesc For Proposals to the four companies and received those RFP's on August 30, 1988 from only two of the comlanies. Suler Cycle of Minneapolis and Polka Dot Recycling of Buffalo, Minnesota. Waste Management did not submit a resl;onsive proposal and Btowning Ferris Inc. (BFI) did not submit a proposal. at all. Recycling - Curb-sicij Pick Up October 4, 1988 Page 2 of 3 The cost breakdowt, ?:F a.., ..slows for curb -side pick up: Super Cycle of * Twice monthly pick up - cost per month $2,225.00 .84 per home per month * Plus 55.00 per ton for each additioril ton in excess of 24.3 tons which is the rase tonnage per month Container cost each 7.00 - Fennepin County pays _ 5.00 Polka Dot Recycling of Buffalo, Minnesota: * Twice monthly pick up: Urban or cluster areas 2,032 homes .50 per home per month Rural area 606 homes 1.50 per home per month * Container costs each 7.00 - Hennepin County pays 2.00 = 5.00 If we decided not to distir.;ieist between urban/cluster and rural homes, the cost *:er t,cme per month is .73 The above costs do not reflect administrative/billing costs or Orono 4osts to remain in the west Hennepin Recycling Commission. Because a neighboring community has been provided, a recycling cur`�- side program by Super Cycle that picks up the recyclables at the point where refuse service is provided, I have asked for the costs of a similar program for the City of Orono from both companies as fc' ' ws: cSuter C cle of Minneapolis: No change * Pleas container , ( .is no-_.(4 .,..)ove Polka Dot Recyrli_ ..i - luffaio, M t,riesota: an or cluster 2,032 homes = * Rural area 606 hua._a * plus container costs (as noL c° If we d ".` tr Anguish between ur I/ omen .84 per home rer month 1.00 per home per month 1.50 per home per month 1.11. per home per month Recycling - Curb -side '_-ick Up October 4, 19Z Page 3 of 3 In reviewing the proposals, it should ne noted that Super Cycle does not require label to be removed but Polka Dot does. Polka Dot wi 11 pick tip all aluminum plus cardboard, batteries and used mc;tor oil, super Cycle does not. Discussion - It is very obvious that we must begin at least a curb -side service as it is evident that it works. The City of Male Plain started a curb -side program recent], and is recycling 20% of thei- total solid waste. Attach -d for review only is a sample ordinance mandating recycling. We are revicii.ng the ordinance for changes that may be more appropriate for Orono. This irformation is being submitted at this; time for review and comment only. Recommendation -o accept. the information as 1.-esented and to direct staff to submit for Council action at the October 24th Council meeting a recommendation as the type of recycling program and a draft ordinance for review. Proposed Motion: Moved by , seconded by , To accept t::e information as presented and to direct staff to submit for Council action at the Octuber 24th Council meeting a recommendation 3s the type of recycling program and a draft ordinance for review. Ayes , nays '"o: Mayor Grabek 6 Orono Council Members From: Mark E. Bernnardsor. City Administ.rato r,j'�_l Forwarded recommending accc_tance of the information presented. The County will re-rnburse betheer 50% and 80% of the cost of operat= depending on the percentage of total that was collected. MODEL CITY ORDINANCES ORDINANCE NUMBER AN ORDINANCE REGULATING THE SEPARATION OF RECYCLABLE MATERIALS AND YARD WASTE FROG! MIXED MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE BY GENERATORS, BEFORE COLLECTION OF SUCH MATERIALS WITHIN THE CITY OF AND REGULATING THE COLLECTION OF SUCH MATERIALS, ESTABLISHING PROCEDURES, PROVIDING FOR ENFORCFMENT. SECTION I DEFINITIONS The following words and phrases, when used in this ordinance, unless the context clearly indicates otherwise, shall have the meanings ascribed to them in this section. Subsection 1 "Aluminum Recycl `.yes" shall be deemed to include all dispos- able containers fabricated primarily of aluminum and commonly used for soda, beer, or other beverages. Subsection 2 "Collection" means the aggregation of waste from the place at which it is generated and includes ill activities up to the time when the waste is delivered to a "waste facility". Subsection 3 "Collector(s)" means any person(s) who awns, operates or leases vehicles for the purposes of collection and transportation of any type of mixed municipal solid waste, recyclables and/or yard waste. Subsection 4 "Compostible Material" means a hitmus (organic portion of soil) made from yard waste and used as a soil conditioner. Subsection 5 "Department" means the City of Depart- ment of (insert city departmer. Vre ate an enforce such programs . Subsection o "Facility" nears any resource recTvery facility or related transfer station or similar facility to which waste is required to be delivered. Subsection 7 "Garbage" means animal and vegetable wastes resulting from the handling, preparation, cooking and consumption of food. Subsection 8 "Generatic,i" means the act or process of producing waste (as defined in 41.inn. Stat. Sec. 1ISA.03, Subd. 11). 1 Subsection 9 "Generator" means any person who generates waste (as defined in Minn. Stat. Sec. 115A.03, Subd. 12). Subsection 10 "Glass Recyclables" shall be deemed to include jars, bottles and containers which are transparent or translucent and primarily used for pack- aging and bot:ling of various matter. Subsection 11 "Hauler" means a collector or transporter of mixed municipal soli(f waste, recyclable materials, &1d/or yard waste. Subsection 12 "Metal Recyclables" shall be deemed to include all disposable containers fabricated primarily of metal or tin. ; Subsection 13 "Mixed Municipal Solid Waste" means garbage, refuse and other solid waste from residential, commercial, industrial and community activities which is generated and collected in aggregate, but does not include auto hulks, street sweepings, ash, construction debris, mining waste, sludges, tree and agri- cultural wastes, tires and other materials collected, processed and disposed of as separate waste streams. Subsection 14 "Paper Recyclables" sh 11 be deemed to include paper of the type commonly referred to as newsprint. Expressly excluded, however, are all magazines or similar periodicals. Subsection 15 "Person" means any human being, any municipality or other public agency, any public or private corporation, any partnership, any firm, association, or other organization, any receiver, trustee, assignee, agent or other legal representative of any of the foregcing or any other legal entity. Subsection 16 "Recyclable Material.;" means materials that are separate` from «Axed mmicipal solid waste by the generator and include all items of refuse designated by the Hennepi% county Department of Environment and Energy to be part of an authorized recycling program and which are intended for transportation, processing ano remanufacturing or reuse. Subsection 17 "Recycling" means the process of collecting and preparing recv-:lable materials and reusing the materials in their original form or using them in manufacturing processes. Subsection 18 "Source Separation" means the separation of recyclable mater- ials and yard waste from mixed municip.l solid waste at the source of generation. Subsection 19 "Solid Waste' has the meani,1y giVell it in Minn. Stat. Section 116.06, Subdivision 10. Subsection 20 "Recyclable Materials Processing Facility" means a facility established and used for the receiving, storage, preparing and/or processing of recyclable materials for sale or reuse. Subsection 21 "Waste Tire" means a pneumatic tire of solid tire for motor vehicles as defined in Minn. Stat. 169.01. and included in tha Solid Waste Management Plan pursuant tc Minn. Stat. 115A.46. Subsection 22 "Yard wry*-" means organic material consisting of grass clip- pings, leaves, and trUier forms of organic garden waste. SECTICN II. PRE -COLLECTION AND COLLECTION Subsection 1 Pre -Collection. All persons who are owners, lessees, and occupants of any building, commercial or residential, within the City of , which generates mixed municipal solid waste, shall separate from all solid waste the designated recyclable materials and yard waste before disposal, removal or collection: a) Paper rec-yclables, which shall be bundled separately nd/or secured in such a manner as to prevent them from bei•, blown or scattered, and shall be maintained in a dry condition free of any other substance and shall not be placed in plastic bags. b) Aluminum recyclables shall be clean of all contents and such recyclables shall not be placed in plastic bags. c) Glass recyclables shall be clean of all contents and such recyclables shall not be placed J n plastic tags. d) Metal recyclables shall be clean of all contents and such recyclables shall not be placed in plastic bags. e) Yard waste compostibles shall be placed in separate containers. All aluminum, glass, metal and yard waste shall be placed in separate containers and not mixed with other forms of solid waste or mixed municipal solid waste in a manner consistent with the rules, regulations and procedures adopted by the city. Subsection 2 Container Rec�irements. Containers shall be provided by all persons who are owners, lessees, or occupants of any building, commercial or residential, and shall be: a) maintained in a clean and sanitary condition in accordance with all pertinent health statutes, ordinances, rules and regulations; b) located in such a manner so as to prevent them from bein-I overturned or :-bstructing pedestrian or motor vehicle traffic or being in violation of any statute, ordinance, rule or regulation; and c) adequate and substantial enough to contain the recyclabes or yard waste therein. (Such further specifications relating tc containers may be adopted by the city.) 3 Subsection 3 Collection. The collection, removal and disposal of recycla- bles and yard waste shall be Eupervised by the city, which shall have the power to establish the time, method and routes of service. Special times for large item pick-up may also be established. Collection provisions shall include but not be limited to the following: I a) Notice of dates and times of collection will be published or otherwise made available to persons affected herein. b) The Department may establish drop-off or collection sites where any person may deposit recyclables and/or yard waste at such times and locations as determined. c) It shall be unlawful for any person other than employees of the Department, or authorized persons. collectors or haulers to distribute, collect, remove or dispose of recyclable materials after said materials and/or yard waste have been placed or deposited for collection. d) Nothing in this Ordinance shall abridge the right of any person to give or sell their recyclable materials and/or yard waste to any recycling and composting program lc.•4fi1 ly operated for profit, non-profit or charitable purposes. e) Nothing in this Ordinance shall abridge the right of any authorized recycling or composting program to lawfully operate within Hennepin County, subject to such other licenses or other regulations as may be required by law. f) It shall be unlawful for a person to collect, remove or dispose of mixed municipal solid waste which consists of recyclables and/or yard waste combined with other forms of mixed municipal solid waste. SECTION III. VIOLATION AND PENALTY (**This sect'..Dn shall be drafted by each city individually to reflect the respective municipal enforcement provisions.) iECTION IV ENFORCEMENT t**'?'his section shall be drafted by each city individually to reflect the respective municipal enforcement provisions.] SECTION V SEPARABILITY It is hereby declared to be the intention of the city that the severa� pro- visions of this ordinance are separable in ac::ordance with the following: 4 Subsection 1 If any court of corq)etent jurisdiction shall adjudge any provision of this ordinance to be invalid, such judgment shall not affect any other provision of this ordinance not specifically included in said judgment. SECTIM VI PR(MSICNS ARE ACCJMULATIVE The provisions of this ordinance are accumulative to all other laws, ordi- nances and regulations heretofore passed, or which may be passed hereafter, covering any subject matter in this ordinance. ( BRAN T j MMCITIES 5 Attachment B Page 1 Polka Dot (curb side) - Low apparent quote curbside Container Cost $7.00 x 2.638 $ 18,466 Countiy Rebate $2.00 x 2,638 - 5,276 Net Cost - 1 Container $ 13,190 2 Containers 26,380 Urban/Clustered 2,032 x .50 x 12 12,192 Rural 606 x 1.50 x 12 10,908 $ 23,100 County Share (50%-80%) $11,550 $18,489 (If City does not reach 10% by May 1989, currently we're at about 7% with drop off. Maple Plain has 20% with curbside, the County pays nothing) $11,550 $18,480 Revenue (assumes 501 rebate from County) OPS Container Total Charge ($2 per yr contaTner) Urban/Cluster $3 $2-4 $5 $1.25/qtr 5/year Rural 9 2-4 11 11-13/yr OR One Price 4.40 2-4 6.40 1.60-2.10/qtr 6.40-8.40/yr Attachment B Page 2 Super Cycle - (If normal garbage pickup/other than curbside - apparaent low quote) Container Cost $7.00 x 2.638 $18,466 County Rebate 2.00 x 2,638 - 5,276 Net Cost - 1 Container $ 13,190 2 Containers 26,380 Urban/Clustered 2,032 x .84 x 12 20,482 Rural 606 x .84 x 12 6,108 $ 26,590 Plus $55/Ton for each over 24.3 (At 16% goal, City would recycle 41.60 Tons/Month 17.36 x 55 x 12 11,460 $ 38,050 County Share Base (50%-80%) 13,295 21,272 County Share Extra Tonnage (16%) 5,730 9,168 (If City does not reach 10%, by May 1989 the County pays nothing) --------------- $19,025 $7,610 Revenue (assumes 50% rebate from County) Excess OPS Tons Container Total Charge (2 containers) (2 per yr/container) Urban/Cluster $5 $2.20 $2-4 $9-11.20 2.25-2.86 9-11.20/yr Rural 3 2.20 2-4 9-11.20 9-11.20/yr 101488.4 s" TO: Mayor and City Council f r FROM: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrate � DATE: October 14, 1988 0 SUBJECT: 1989 Budget Adoption Attachement: A. 1989 Budget Memo Dated October 3, 1988 ISSUE - Establishment of the 1989 budget. INTRODUCTION - At the Council's October 10, 1988 Council meeting they established the tax levy for 1989 and tabled b:idget adoption until October 24th pending review of further information. DISCUSSION - In addition to review of information the item was tabled for consideration of recycling ccsts. At this time it is recommended that the container and their delivery be funded out of 1988 funds for eventual reimbursement. It is recommended the Council authorize that the operation of the program be funded by about an $8.40 charge on the residents through their sewer and septic bills. Should the Council desire to fund it in a different manner using other budgets this would be an appropriate amendment to the budget besides the initiation of a recycling fund to the City's chart of accounts. ALTERNATIVES - 1. Adopt. 2. Amend and adopt. 3. Table 4. Request additional information. RECOMMENDATION - It is recommended that the Council adopt the budeget wit— h the two amendments proposed on Attachment A and that the funding for recycling in the establishment of recycling fund as proposed under the discussion. PROPOSED MOTION - "loved by _, seconded by , that the Counci. adopt Resolution N_ establishing the 1989 Budget and in addition establish a re-ycling budget to be funded primarily out of user charges through the utility oilling system. Ayes _, Nays — 92688.2HD To: Mayor Grabe'c 6 Orono Council Members From: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrato!/ Date: October 3, "198 Subject: 1989 Budget Adoption/1989 Tax Levy ATTACHMENT - Resoluton, Adopting 1989 Tax Levy ISSUE - 1. Establishment of a tax levy for 1989. 2. Adoption of a General Fund Budget for 1969. INTRODUCTION - At the Council's Budget meeting on SeEt.ember 20, 1988, staff reviewed the significant revenue and expenditures for 1989 together with possible changes. DISCUSSION - At the meeting, staff suggested the following changes made to tie proposed 1989 Budget: 1. Inclusion of $100,000 in the budget from the General Fund undesignated fund balance in order to create the possibility for increasing the Ci`y's levy limit to recoup part of the reduction from 2987. This could be designated to a capital budget fund such as equipment outlay or building. Ncne of this money could be spent without specific Council apprc.ral. 2. Conversion of the recorder from a part-time to a fall -time position using funds presently budgeted in the contingency under personnel. The staff continues to work on a break down regarding citation and gross misdemeanor activity over the past 3 years and hopes to send it out either Friday or present it Monday. ALTERNATIVES - I. ISSUE 1. 1. Set the tax levy. Table for October 24th, 1988 meeting. 1. Reduce the 1,vy indicating other sources of revenue for increase if budget not decreased. ISSUE 2. 1. Adopt as Eregenteri. 2. Incorporate proposed changes for recorder position and levy i imit. adjustment. i. Further amend. 4. `"at, l e to October 24th, 1988 meet in(,. k7q OAYV\� A RESOLU?ION APPROVING THE 1988 TAX LEVY COLLECTIBLE IN 1989 BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Orono, County of Hennepin, Minnesota, that the following sums of money be levied for the current year, collectible in 1989 upon the taxable property in the City of Orono, for the following purposes: For the General Fund $1,352,690 BE IT FUI PHER RESOLVED, that the Improvement Bonds of 1985 Debt Redemption Fund Levy of $30,000 for 1989 adopted September 28, 1988 by Resolution #2507 is necessary and is hereby ordered collected. BE I? FUR?NI;R RESOLVED, that the Improvement Bonds of 1989 Debt Redemption Fund Levy of $18,190 for 1989 adopted November 20, 1989 by Resolution #1228 is unnecessary and is hereby ordered cancelled. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held Octoer 19, 1988. James R. Grabek, Mayor ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk 1989 Budget Adoption/1989 Tax Levy October 3, 1988 Page 2 of 2 RECOMMENDATION - It is recommended that the Council adopt a Lax levy for 1.989 a,: $1,352,690 plus $30,000 for t' Crystal Bay Sewer Project Bond Levy together with adopting the budget vended with the two proposed changes. PROPOSED MOTION: Moved by , st .,,-led by , that the Council adopt a tax levy of $1,352,690 togeth�-r with $30,000 for the deficit for the Crystal B,, , Sewer together with ad.•rting the 1989 Budae+- as amended. Ayes ' nays cc: Tom Kuehn, Finance Director A 92387.1 d Fj TOt Mayor and City Council e IrROMr Mark Becnhoedson, City Adatinistcat4A "TO.# OAM September 22, 1967 SUSJBCTs 1988 Budget Approval and establiahment of Tax Levy Attachment: A. Departmental Revenues and 7xpendit.-vs .iumary B. Revised 1988 Suv.mary of Revenues and Expenditures C. Proposed Tax 'evy Resolution issue - 1. Adoption of i 988 Budget. 2. Adoption of a resolution es,�ablishiny the tax levy for 1988. INTRODUCTION - During the special budget meeting held on !T,ipiZm'Wr T1, 1987, tle.Staff ocesxnted the 1938 budget to the Council together with anwrering ques►...riri thaw they may have nod. Based nn direction given by the Council at that taeet:ng, staff prepared Attachments A andtogether with preparing this memo fo: budget adoption at the r-rj,.,lac S,,)tember 28, 19P7 meeting. Subsequent to the budget meeting Staff is meeti-g with the one Councilmember whe3 waf enable to attend the buds -et neeting on the 17th. DISCUSSION - 0- the same evening that the Orono Ccuncii was suing tcs bur' testing, the Long Lake Council was conducting anothe• budge +ion. During this budget session it wee determined beca. if their 549,V3 snort fall lr, revenues •.hat one of the act.ons they would coed to take ,3 reJ4et1, A of Officers apecttics11y assigned to Long Laoe as part of the r'(-ntriet from the Cvr:9nt turtle, down to twc: )ffLcers. (Ihia reduces their specifically assigned weekly coverage from '54 of the time down to approximately So* of the time.) The im;44:t of this reduction reduces the ore -no e: pend►tuces bud,at by approximately $40,100 and like, .ue reduces the revenues br a subst,satial s►m.lar amount, as ►-.'tested i'' Attachment B. While Long Lake may subF.equently ecc»,�, t recision in rdvance of 1989. it lc felt that any suan .dget stment fbac4 to 'he original 1988 proposeo 4udgetf eoulw be u .t t'at time. In cesponss to the CJunuil's req,or►t o• •hq 1'•tn the staff has prepared a departmental cosptr►uen of revenues and expendittitee fot thud'. lepartments .tiat am a sunstant►al am ourt from speCittwd non -tax tev It should be noted however, O%at Certain of therw deVart-e,,.a are not charged .itrectly % their budget for certain overnead items for them be►nc. Bets 01 Viv organisation includii i ity Council expendittiree, n+�rsintsttbt►e1R. Plnanc. and Government .u► Id►rig s. the romper 160n tlowewmt Ga."ld be helpful in understanding the revenues generated versus the expenditures in those departments., BBCDNN NDAT__I;OQN - As noted in the budget message the budget so estai 11 J aQ subsequently revised to reflect the potential change in Long Lake be adopted and that the Council adopt the attached resolution, which levies the Maximum tax increase allowed by the current law in order to preserve the City's tax options in the future. POOMSBD MOTION - Moved by , seconded by , that the Council adopt the slam Budget as ia, ised togethei with adoption of Resolution 1_ setting the tax levy for ISBB. Ayes _, Mays _ ammuL . �m wws. 1 / rm No Hf1 m/OY1 � r. low N11AAR d t d IN IN IN IN IN /`d1.1 1rt>�a0 1 O"? IrtW1 t1➢C11L n•o . &-l"'t !� wdwt � � lop »n .d.l Im /tdR1 mCityC11r LWcll f t t N,w / ndis 11.IH s41.Medis H1.11S IH.1M 7.R5 ,.)H $.11 S., Cwtiona1ltn Unatlti I.OS 1JH II,1M 1./H Ml./ ••••WA sl./n M./n 51.100 1.141 ri�L"a kll.M III.N 117.1M 1.1N S.1 S., 1//•1 N.1A //,11 IO.M Lus L., CY`nlll WN1A• Y./If UU% ..w N •. ILA Mnlu• 1.9IS 11.tts 11./Y 7.HS 1.115 11.) f1w / n /.N •11f./1/ 1S,IM S.• /i MASS 1S11H1 IN.1M 1/.1H1 I.9 /W1n1A 11st1A AN MAN 1 .11/ 31S.SM Isom1t.1 r1r•tL1 I.N I,SN 1,6Y IIISI 114.11 MWI /./ls /1719 / 1 ` IIHI 14.t1 1.1N 111N 1,1: 114.11 Nlrl rldt•rtu Ittint i 1".No •St.IH UI.1A .NS L.1 r11111 rc,•111r ss.w SLSN U.bl 1.MS I./Y 1./ /p•1.1 rlb /I.w /I.SM 11. II1.NI I11.51 il "peI" 111 hd N,tN 11,111 N,1w iM 1.1Y l./ w RW o1•�1.1 htf �, U],N 2,322,511 7 ll_i.lN M•ty �.H AC11L IM:fE Sim It I,N I. nl 11.7101 IIM./14 k/14 Qt1 NS N. H/ t_.,i 15.IM Ot. NI I11./1 Yt Y1A ORI.1 tool fpnl•1 ft ,,, rnl• _ /1.IM /1.1N 1S,Ni 11 s,SNI IH.UL VOM,IIO 11/Ot 1 L19- I11./1/ 111.81/ -/- 11111/9I IIN./IUpa tpinlr Ilnrilltr/ SAVO rut 143.11S 141.17% Ut.•N 113.I15l 9.11 l F,f1 371.4411 371,w IM.w u1.w1 14.01 l wt IU,N MA" MASS )1 IAM1 u. Rol q.In1A 1Vd 1M.MS MISS 1017,11" 1I0.6751 J{LM sslwL _L. /R'1Y I 1 NO t1w1"=Hc /lo 51.I44.41's 0.141.111, U,KS,N /M.BSI 11.01 _ • N)rtrd Iv 1q la1• rdift dike, 1• 1. 11 _._ - .. _ _- _._._.._�•w•w ...�-�-r mac..-__... r.. __-..��.. ♦. ..d.... .. ..-.•M.M Ol)ReaL fq Rff W III? SSTIMTS K. Its* Y IM" 1 111Y1M19 NTINAW I988 nT OS'SV �O rrl Ip{/ Set 1_f�1_ Igo Na•nt huu N Tota,ee - "IF 1I.1% Saw 11.INi.IS7iS SI.1U.Qs {s1T1➢{S..fgiNfI 11.11{ Cllt : I ! 14� 1p1.175 -T1s • IF.Me:rhp Ad WI N..1/lee a lice ... I a pllnpunt Tun 21,560 16,064 I1,416) Ill. 11 Memel aaf recall. e4.199 19.3e0 S.Nf 5.1 f alagw•..Ma.l Ount..M hid. wee�/aneT NawrNnu S.N0 •.See SO 4.1 Lerag 6a•e Meet al{ 1SS.l Ie 1s{,Ne fill) 1.11 ra lee Tan ale l).Sof SolSN 7.e06 1{.l sa Steen MIM... M. 11.078 11.111 — -- Poll<. Tra lnlnp R.I.. Slide Lies — -- chilies to In•Iw. "..eel aen/ce. Feea I.N@ I'M - elaa checssis/te pee. r.a. "40 11.SSS I.SN ell teat as.. Fee:.... Su4Elvl.lw. p,1N 10.00e 1.000 11.1 Seµlc pf"Fa. Fee, tf. of 21.008 1.111 5.0 f.nteect.{ Pulse. 2... I..• Ue.15f •e11.SU 9.296 1.7 eatucte{ Inspectla ee..len 10.400 1694e •• NI.. ab.0 N.s I,041 I,eN - afate. ehseg.. to Othel FuM. {,Ise s.{le I2.3491 114.11 a... l..nt turcan $.Nf 6.699 I.044 261 Special ser.lce./sepotts - police 1.946 1400 1.990 lee.• rine. aM Fartalts Cart ?i.e. SS.ere {S.11e 10.008 14.2 ' ea IapeuM Fees See /N I240I 149.e1 speebl aI.uu.nu Site" Lighting 1.SU -1- 11.Nl) life.n .ucel le..aa IIs.Ne 4 Il Aef9.2 Meat U.S. ?".t attic. S.ne SIG" - -- .µa Is eIw I Tu.ee S,Ne — -- We. 1SNe -- -- Tunabu In - / ruM eJanav beu..N ffa lees i ST-.33i%q! 1 L ( .......... .......... ........ ...• • I'dwthe.t tee. L.M Iote Palle. .tf lcu fNuctles ` III ( 101488.5 i TO: FROM: DATE: I Mayor and City Council Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administratora' October 13, 1988 SUBJECT: Ordinance Amendment - Dangerous Weapons and Articles Attachments: A. Revised Draft Ordinance B. Ordinance 9.10 and Subsequent Amendments ISSUE 1. Consideration of a recodified revision of the existing ordinance plus subsequent amendments to place in more readable form the City's ordinance related to dangerous weapons. 2. Addition of a section to allow the use of B-B guns for the control of pests when they become a demonstrated nuisance in an area of the City for up to 120 days. INTRODUCTION - Because of the numerous amendments that have been madehe codification of this section of the ordinance it was felt appropriate that the ordinance be revised to make a more readable version of it. DISCUSSION - The only substantive changes are: a.) Permitting the use of B-B gun for pest control. There are times when pests in residential areas can cause problems to a person's gardens and use of the B-B gun under controlled circumstances could be a way of alleviating the problem when other ways of elimination have been exhausted. b.) Permit requirement for starting guns. c.) Incoprorating in ordinance the approval authority as presently processed. Presently track and field people together with golf courses use starting guns on occasion and it is felt appropriate that this be an item covered under the permit process. Additionally it adds a requirement that all permit holders must notify all abutting property owners prior to the initial use. ALTERNATIVES - 1. Adopt. 2. Amend and adopt. 3. Table for further discussion. RECOMMENDATION - It is recommended that Council express their Ti one—rscodif ied version together with the proposed I changes in the areas B-B gun permit, starting gun permit and process requirements be incorporated In the ordinance. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by _, seconded by r to table Attachment A to November 14, 198F Ayes _, Nays cc: Chief Kilbo 4 rrAc "C -, 4 SEC. 9.10. DANGEROUS WEAPONS AND ARTICLES. Subd. 1. Acts Prohibited. It is unlawful for any person to: A. Recklessly handle, throw, or use a firearm, bow and arrow, or other dangerous weapon or explosive so as to endanger the safety of another; or, B. Intentionally point a firearm of any kind, whether loaded or unloaded, bow and arrow, explosive or other dangerous weapon, capable of injuring or killing a human being, at or toward another; or, C. Manufacture or sell for any unlawful purpose any weapon known as a slung -shot or sand club; or, D. Manufacture, transfer or possess metal knuckles or a switch blade knife opeing automatically; or, E. Possess any other dangerous article or substance for the purpose of being used unlawfully as a weapon against another; or, F. Sell or have in his possession any device designed to silence or muffle the discharge of a firearm; or, G. Permit, as a parent or guardian, any child under fourteen years of age to handle or use, outside of the parent's or guardian's presence, a firearm or air gun of any kind, or any ammunition or explosive; or, H. Furnish a minor under eighteen years of age with a firearm, air gun, ammunition, or explosive without the written consent of his parent or guardian or the Chief of the Police Department. I Possess, carry, transport, or control any knife or bladed instrument capable of cutting, stabbing or injuring while on school property, in a school bus, or on public streets or sidewalks adjacent thetato except where such knives and bladed instruments are used in or as part of any instructional activity carried on in the school, used in the preparation or consumption of food in a lunchroom, or other place where food is customarily prepared or served, or when used as a tool by a person authorized to perform construction, repair or maintenance services on school property. Subd. 2. Dischar a of Firearms and 11 loslves. It is unlawful for any person to re or sc ergs, any form or type of explosive or explosive device, any cannon, gun, pistol, or other firearm, firecracker, sky rocket or other fireworks, bcw and arrow, air gun, air rifle, or other similar device commonly referred to as a B-B gun. Subd, 3. Exception. Nothing in Subdivision. 1 or 2 of this Section shall apply: A. To persons who obtain the appropriate permit as set forth in the following paragraphs. B. To a peace officer in the discharge of his duty, or C. To a person in the lawful defense of his person or family. D. To a display of fireworks by an organization or group of organizations authorized in writing by the Chief of Police, application for permit being made at least fifteen (15) days prior to the even::, or E. To shoot a bow and arrow in the Physical Education Program in a school supervised by a member of its faculty, as community -wide supervised class or event specifically authorized by the Chief of Police, or a bow and arrow range authorized by the Council. Subd. 4. Activities Allowed With Permits. A. Permits Occasional U to 15 Days. Occasional permits valid for a per io of i teen (15) days or less may be granted to clubs or persons as follows: 1. Occasional target shooting or trap and skeet shooting; 2. Field trials, commercial or professional exhibitions or displays, or other similar lawful purpose as determined by the City Police. 3. For training of dogs for clubs or individuals, which permit is valid only on land described in the permit by persons with the consent of the owner or lessee thereof. B. Permits Occasional_Up U o__1Y 2g Rays. For o_ t___— control of pests in commercial or agricultural situations, permits may be granted up to a maximum of 12e days as established by the Administrator to persons or clubs meeting all the the following criteria: 1. For control of pests, vermin, rodents, or then animal nuisances, such as deer hunting by bow and arrow during appropriate season, or other animals that are a demonstrated nuisance. 2. Where there are no other appropriate methods available. 3. Demonstrated need for a longer duration of time such as 2 length of game season or protection of crops during the growing season. The use of bow and arrow under this section will be allowed on an occasional basis to remove problematic animals including game animals is subject to the following circumstances: A. There is a demonstrated nuisance of that animal to that property owner. B. Property owner has' specifically given written permission to a hunter and that hunter has the appropriate State hunting permit. C. That no discharging be done within 100 feet of any property line, within 100 feet of any buildings and 200 feet of any livestock. D. Discharge for purposes of this section shall only be done from an elevated stand that is a minimum 0� four (4) feet off the ground. E. Can only be done during the appropriate season. F. The hunter receives no compensation for the removal service apart for the retention of animals killed. C. Permit - Baker Park. An occasional permit valid for a period not to exce- e& atotal of 3 days in my one year shall be issued to Hennepin Parks for the discharge cf shod gumis in hunting of game animals in Baker Park. in addition to other applicable conditions outlined in this Subdivision other applicable conditions outlined In the Subdivision 7(A) through 7(C) the Park District must notify all abutting property owners by letter 10 days in advance of the proposed hunt and that appropriate signage be posted around the Park Reserve District boundaries to limit unauthorized access during the hunt. D. Parmlta Occasional. Occasional permits valid for a period under A or B as eemed appropriate by the City may be granted to clubs or persons for: Sub. 1. B-B Gun. The use of a B B gun or air rifle subject to the following Tcumstances: A. There is a demonstrated nuisance of the animal to the property owner. B. The permittee has the property owners permission. C. There are no other appropriate means available. D. Seasonal restrictions of game animals apply. E. The gun may only be discharged in a manner that does not direct it towards other buildings or persons. F. The permittee must notify all abutting owners. Sub. 2. Startin Guns - Permits may be granted for use of devices such a start ng guns when no projectiles are used but only blank ammunition. E. Annual Permits. 'To clubs only for: Trap and skeet shooting for clubs. 2. For training of dogs for clubs or individuals. which permit is valid only on land described in the permit by persons with the consent of the owner or lessee thereof. 3. To clubs and individuals for the operatton of a game and fur farm pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 99.27, or Minnesota Statutes Sections 106.32 to 106.37; 4. Occasional target shooting. 5. Field trials, commercial or professional exhibitions or displays, or any similar or lawful purpose as determined by the Police Chief. 6. Any person, group, organization that wishes to use an established range/or trap, skeet facility for any field trial comercal or professional exhibition or display or any similar or lawful purpose shall apply for their own use permit. The existing permit for gun club shall not cover the special event. This would not preclude that the gun club cannot have its own special events such as annual shoots, turkey shootoff, etc., as long as it is the gun club that is responsible permit holder. Subd. 6. Permit Classification Peas' Permit Revocation. The feeor annua permit (c u on yl ) oc occas ona permit shall be charged according to the City fee schedule. A violation of any of the conditions of a permit shall result in revocation of the permit am no permit shall be issued to any club or person for one year after the date of such revocation. Permits are issued to the pe:son to be actually using the firearm or weapon. Subd. 7. Permit Procedure. When a person or club applies for a permit, the City Administrator may require certain information to be on the application and permit form: 1. Location of event. 2. Site visit to be required. 3. Intended use of permit. 4. Certificate of Insurance S. Hours of shooting 6. Number of participants 7. Notice to police prior to shooting. This notice to be within one hour of commencement of event. B. Annual permit to require notice to be given to surrounding property owners and an opportunity for them to object prior to issuance of a permit under this section, but such objections shall not require the permit to be withheld. Any person may appeal the denial of a permit to the Council. 9. All permit holders must inform all abutting property owners prior to initial use of the permit. 10. All permits are subject to the approval of the City Administrator upon recommendation of the ^hief of Police. Appeals of denials of permits are subject to Council review. Subd. B. Confiscation. The firearms, bow and arrow, explosives or Cher ang-[ous weapons of the alleged violator of this Section may be confiscated at the time of arrest, and returned only if the violator is adjudged not guilty of the offense charged and no liability of damages shall result therefrom. Confiscated firearms may be disposed of as provided by law. Subd 9. Possession and Sale of Fireworks. It is unlawful for any peruon to sell, pos sees o[ ave n possession for the purpose of sale, distribution, use or explosion, except as allowed in Subdivision 3 of this Section, any firecrackers, sky rockets or other fireworks. Subd. 10. Ex osura of Dan Brous Container. It is unlawful for any person, be ng the owns[ or n possession or control thereof, to permit an unlocked refrigerator, ice box, or other contains[, sufficiently large to retain any child and with doors which fasten automatically when closed, to expose the same out-of-doors, or in an unlocked accessory building, accessible to children, without locking the aoors, or removing the lids, hinges or latches. ��O_"CLIT SEC. 9.10. DANGEROUS WEAPONS AND ARTICLES. Subd. 1. Acts Prohibited. It is unlawful for any person to: A. Recklessly handle or use a firearm, bow and arrow, or other dangerous weapon or explosive so as to endanger the safety of another; or, B. Intentionally point a firearm of any kind, whether loaded or unloaded, bow and arrow, explosive or other dangerous weapon, capable of injuring or killing a human being, at or toward another; or, C. Manufacture or sell for any unlawful purpose any weapon known as a slung -shot or sand club; or, 0. Manufacture, transfer or possess metal knuckles or a switch blade knife opening automatically; or, E. Possess any other dangerous article or substance for the purpose of being used unlawfully as a weapon against another; or, F. Sell or have in his possession any device designed to silence or muffle the discharge of a firearm; or, G. Permit, as a par,,- or guardian, any child under fourteen years of age to handle or use, outside of the parent's or guardian's presence, a firearm or air gun of any kind, or any ammunition or explosive; or, R. Furnish a minor under eighteen years of age with a firearm, air gun, ammunition, or explosive without the written consent of his parent or guardian or the Chief of the Police Department. u- _ : Subd. 2. Exception. Nothing in Subdivision 1 of this Section shall prohibit the possession of the articles therein mentioned if the purpose of such possession is for public exhibition by museums or collectors of art. Subd. 3. Discharge of Firearms and Explosives. It is unlawful for any person to fire or discharge any cannon, gun, pistol or other firearm, firecracker, sky rocket or other f irvworks, bow and arrow, air gun, air ri , or other similar device commonly referred to as a B-B gun. Subd. d. Exception. Nothing in Subdivision 3 of this Section shall apply to a display of fireworks by an organization or group of organizations authorized in writing by the Chief of Police, application for permit being made at least fifteen (15) days prior to the event, or to a peace officer in the discharge of his duty, or to a person in the lawful defense of his person or family. This Section shall not apply to the discharge of firearms in a range authorized in writing by the Council. ORONO CC 203 (1-1-44) 5 9.10 Subd. 5. Permits, Procedure. The City Clerk may require that notice be given to surrounding landowners and as opportunity for them to object prior to the issuance of a permit under this Section, but such objections shall not require the permit to be withheld. Any person may appeal the denial of a permit to the Council. .L-Z =15, a" Subd. 6. Permits, Annual. Annual permits may be acanted as follows: A. For target shooting or trap and skeet shooting to clubs; B. For target shooting or trap and skeet shooting to individuals if used at least on a monthy basis; C. For the training of dogs for cluhs or individuals, which permit is va'.id only on land described in the permit by persons with consent of the owner or lessee ti,ereof; D. To clubs and individuals for the operation of a game and fur farm pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 99.27, or for the operation of a private shooting preserve pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Sections 100.32 to 100.37; E. For control of pests, vermin, rodents, or other animal nuisances, except that no hunting of game animals or game birds shall be allowed. Subd. 7. Permits, Occasional. Occasional permits valid for a period of fifteen (15) days or less may be granted to clubs or persons a: follows: A. Occasional target shooting or trap and skeet shooting; B. Field trials, commercial or professional exhibitions or displays, or any similar or Lawful purpose as determined by the City '.leek. Subd. B. Permit Fees, Permit Revocation. The fee for annual or occasional permits shall be charged according to the City fee schedule. A violation of any conditions of a permit shall result in revocation of the permit and no permit shall be issued to any club or person for one year after the date of the violation. Subd. 9. Confiscation. The firearms, bow and arrow, explosives or other dangerous weapons of the alleged violator of this Section may be confiscated at the time of arrest, and retained only if the violator is adjudged n.t guilty of the offense charged and no liability of damages shall result therefrom. Confiscated firearms may be disposed of as provided by law. ORONO CC 204 5 9.10 Subd. 10. Possession and Sale of Fireworks. It is unlawful for any person to sell, possess or have in possession for the purpose of sale, distribution, use or explosion, except as allowed in Subdivision 4 of this Section, any firecrackers, sky rockets or other fireworks. Subd. 11. Exposure of Dangerous Container. It is unlawful for any person, being the owner or in possession or control thereof, to permit an unlocked re Frigerator, ice bus, or other container, sufficiently large to retain any child and with doors which fasten automatically when closed, to expose the same out-of-doors, or in an unlocked accessory building, a,cesstble to children, without locking the doors, or removing the lids, hinges or latches. Subd. 12. Use of Bow and Arrow. it is unlawful for anv person to shoot a bow and arrow except in the Physical Educatio., Program in a school supervised by a member of i!s faculty, a community -wide supervised class or event specifically authorized bf the Chief of Police, or a bow and arrow range authorized by the Council. SEC. 9.11. ANIMAL TRAPPING. Subd. 1. Purpose. It is the purpose of this Section to preclude the potential harm that may be infli;ted :Pon peoFle, particularly children, and to prevent the crippling, unselective catching, and destruction of wildlife and domestic animals that may come into contact with traps. Subd. 2. Definitions. As used in this Sect' , the tollowing terms shall have the following meanings: A. 'Leghold Trap' - Any device consisting o two metal jaws which lay horizontally to form a circle, square or similar shape when the trap is set, or a trap which is similar to the above in design and which is intended to catch ono secure an animal by the leg, toes or paw. Such a device may be known as a "steel', 'jaw(ed) leg', 'long -spring', 'coil -spring', 'flat -under spring', 'foot", 'front -hold', 'game' or similar named trap. B. -Trapping' - The setting or laying, or other use of a trap with the intent of capturing or killing an animal. Subd. 3. Leghold Traps Prohibited. It is unlawful for any person to set, place or use any Leghold animal trap. Subd. 4. Limited Permits. In extraordinary cases, the Council may grant a limited permit for the abatement of a specific animal nuisance, but only when the proposed use is determined to be in the public interest and will not cause any hazard to children, other wildlife or domestic animals. Permits shall specify tin* ORONO CC 205 '4-1-04• ORDINANCE NUMBER 15, SECOND SERIES AN ORDINANCE ADDING TO THE DANGEROUS WEAPONS AND ARTICLES SECTIONS OF THE ORONO MUNICIPAL CODE The City Council of Orono Ordains As Follows: Chapter 9 of the Muni Oipal Code of Orono is hereby amended by adding to Section 9.19, Subd 5, A, B, C, D, E, F. G, H, Subd 6, Subd 7 and Subd 9 to read as follows: Subd. 5. Permits. Permits may be granted as follows: A. Trap and Skeet shooting for clubs. B. Trap and Skeet shooting for individuals. For training of dogs for clubs or individuals, wh.ch permit is valid ly on land decr!bed in the permit by persons v_th the consent of the cwne- -r lessee thereof. ' D. To clubs and individuals for the operation of a game and fur farm pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 99.27, or Minnesota Statutes Sections 100.32 to 100.37; E. Foi control of pests, vermin, rodents, or other animal nuisances, except that no hurting of ga•O animals or game birds shall be allowed. F. Occasional target shooting. G. Field trials, commercial or professional exhibitions or displays, or any similar or lawful purpose u determined by the City Clerk. H. Any person., group, organization that wishes to use an established range.'or trap, skeet facility for any field trial commercial or professional exhibiticr or display or any similar or lawful purpose shall apply for their own use permit. The existing Pe: -it for gun club shall not cover the special event. This would not preclude that the gun club cannot have its own special a onto such as annual shoots. turkey shootoff, etc.. as long as it is the gun club that is responsible permit `older. Subd. 6. Permit classification, fees, permit revocation.. The foe for annual permit (club only) or occaaioral permit (indlvfdual, commorcial, professional exhibitions` shall be charged accord.nq to the City too schedule. A violation of any of the onditi,ns of a pormlt shall result in revocation of the pa rmit and no permit shall be lee ued to any club or person for one year after the date of such revocation, ORDINANCE NO. !_, 2ND SERIES AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA, AMENDING ORONO CITY CODE CHAPTER 9 ENTITLED, "PUBLIC PROTECTION, CRIMES AND OFFENSES" BY ADDING A PROVISION AS TO INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS; AND, BY ADOPTING BY REFERENCE, CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION 9.99 WHICH, AMONG OTHER THINGS, CONTAIN PENALTY PROVISIONS. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ORONO ORDAINS: Section 1. Orono City Code Chapter 9 is hereby amended by adding a Section to read: SEC. 9.10 Subd. SA. Insurance Rea uiments. A policy or ce:tifi care of insurance, on which the City, its agents and employees are additional Insureds, providing public liability insurance in the amount of at least $100,000 for the injury of one person, $300,000 for the injury of two or more persons in the same accident, and $10,000 for property damages. Before permit shall be issued, the applicant shall file with the City Clerk the above policy or certificate showing (1) that the limits are at least as high as required, (2) that the coverage is effective for at least the license term approved, and (3) that such insurance will not be terminated without thirty days written notice served upon the City Clerc. Cancellation or termination of such coverage shall be grounds for permit revocation. Passed by the City Council this 13 day of August 1984, by a vote of 3 ayes and 0 nays. Mary C. Bu ,MaYor - ATTE Clerk City T, /Vreothy Hal Published: -,.Week of September 3 , 1984 ORDINANCE NUMBER 16, SECOND SERIES AN ORDINANCE ADDING TO THE DANGEROUS WEAPONS AND ARTICLES SECTIONS OF THE ORONO MUNICIPAL CODE The City Council of Orono Ordains As Follows: Chapter 9 of the Municipal Code of Orono is hereby amended by adding to Section 9.10, Subd 1, (I) to read as follows: Sec.9.10. DANGEROUS WEAPONS AND ARTICLES I. Possess, carry, transport, or control any knife or bladed instrument capable of cutting, stabbing or injuring while or. school property, in a school bus, or on public streets or sidewalks adjacent thereto except where such knives and bladed instruments are used in or as part of any instructional activity carried on in the school, used in the preparation or consumption of food in a lunchroom, or other place where food is custom- arily prepared or served, or when used as a tool by a person authorized to perform construction, repair or maintenance services on school property. This ordinance shall be effective upon adoption and publication. Adopted by the City Council of Orono oa this 28th day of October, 1985, by a vote of 4 ayes and 0 nays. JLue_�-� %a '\'c /'Dt$othy M. a in, City C eck Maly �. 7 •r, Mayor Subd. 7. Permit procedure. when a person or club applies for a permit, the city administrator may require certain information to be on the application and permit form. 1. Location of event 2. Site visit to be required. 3. Intended use of permit. 4. Certificate of Insurance 5. Hours of shooting 6. Number of participants 7. Notice to police prior to shooting. This notice to be within one hour of commencement of event. 8. Annual permit to require notice to be given to surrounding property owners and an opportunity for them to object prior to issuance of a permit under this section, but such objections shall not require the permit to be withheld. Any person may appeal the denial of a permit to the Council. Subd. 9. Confiscation. The firearms, bow and arrow, explosives or other dangerous weapons of the alleged violator of this Section may be confiscated at the time of arrest, and returned only if the violator is adjudged not guilty of the offense charged and no liability of dar.ages shall result therefrom. Confiscated firearms may be disposed of as provided by law. Violation of an annual permit by club would not result in confiscation as listed in Subd. 9. This ordinance shall be effective upon adoption and publication. Adopted by the City Council of Orono on this 28th day of Oct bar, 1985, by a vote of 4 ayes and 0 nays. do [hy M Ha lrn, City Clerk Macy C. er, Mayor 41&1*- -1 ORDINAVCE NUMBER 25, SECOND SERIES AN ORDINANCE AMENDIYG ORDINANCE NUMBER. 9.10 AND ENTITLED 'DANGEROUS WEAPONS AND ARTICLES' The City Council of the City of Orono ordains: Ordinance Number 9.10 and entitled "Dangerous Weapons and Articles" is amended to read. Subdivision 7. Permits .3ccasional. Occasional permits valid for a period of fifteen (15) days or less may be granted to clubs or persons as follows: C. The discharge of bow and arrow will be allowed on an occasional basis to remove problematic animals including game animals when an individual hunter has obtained a permit issued by the Chief of Police subject to the following circumstances: 1. There is a demonstrated nuisance of that animal to that property owner. 2. Property owner has specifically given written permission to a hunter and that hunter has the appropriate state hunting permit. 3. That no discharging be done within 188 feet of any property l:.ne, within log feet of any buildings and 280 feet of s 7.: 'stock. 4. Dischr--- r purposes of this section shall only be done from -r evated stand that is a minimum of four (4) feet of, one ground. 5. Can only be done during the appropriate season. 6. The hunter receives no compensation for the removal service apart from retention of animals killed. This ordinance becomes effective on October 21, 1986. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held this 13th day of October, 1986. MaryC. 4Z� er, Mayor A L • /' Doro[hv M. Re ice. f'i •v ark Publish in the Laker and Pioneer newspapers the week of October 28, 1986. 33188.3 ORDINANCE NUMBER 4g_, SECOND SERIES AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 9.10, SUBDIVISION 3 ADOPTED APRIL 1, 1984, AND ENTITLED -AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO DANGEROUS WEAPONS AND ARTICLES' The City Council of Orono ordains: Ordinance No. 9.18, Subdivision 3 adopted April 1, 1984, and entitled "An Ordinance Relating to Dangerous weapons and Articles" is amended to read: Subd. 3. Discharge of Firearm- .nd Explosives. It is unlawful for any person to fire or discharge, any form or type of explosive or explosive device, any cannon, gun, pistol, or other firearm, firecracker, sky rocket or other fireworks, bow and arrow, air gun, air rifle, or other similar device commonly referred to as a S-B gun. This ordinance becomes effective from and after its passage and publication on ....... _i_,__3�............. Passed by the Council this llth day of April, 1988. _ __ __�Wyj6F ___--- TES o tKy M._Fj1ihnd 4i��er�W Publish the week of April 18 �_1988 --- _----- in the Laker and Pioneer newspaper. ORDINANCE NUMBER 42, SECOND SERIES AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NUMBER 25, SECOND SERIES, ADOPTED OCTOBER 13,1986, AND ENTITLED 'AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NUMBER 9.19 AND ENTITLED DANGEROUS WEAPONS AND ARTICLES' The City Council of the City of Orono ordains: Ordinance Number 25, Second Series adopted October 13, 1986, and entitled "An Ordinance amending Ordinance Number 9.10 and entitled Dangerous Weapons and Articles" is amended to read: D. An occasional permit valid for a period not to exceed a total of 3 days in any one year shall be issued to Hennepin Parks for the discharge of shot guns in hunting of game aminals in Baker Park. In addition to other applicable conditions outlined in this Subdivision 7(A) through 7(C) the Park District must notify all abutting property owners by letter 10 days in advance of the proposed hunt and that appropriate signage be posted around the Park Reserve District boundaries to limit unauthorized access during the hunt. This ordinance becomes effective upon publication. Passed by the Council this 12th day of October, 1987./ Ja s R. r , yorr_!./__\_____ ATT T: t y M allln, At Pubished in the Laker and Pioneer newspaper the week October 19, 1987. ORDINANCE NUMBER 36 , SECOND SERIES AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE 9.10 AND ENTITLED 'DANGEROUS WEAPONS AND ARTICLES'. The City Council of the City of Orono ordains: Ordinance Number 9.10 and entitled "Dangerous Weapons and Articles" is amended to read: Subdivision 7.A. Permits, Occasional. Occasional permits valid for a period of fifteen (15) days or less may be granted to clubs or persons as foYlows: 1. Occasional target shooting or trap and skeet shooting; 2. Field trials, commercial or professional exhibitions or displays, or any similar or lawful purpose as determined by the City Clerk. Subdivision 7.B. Permits, Commercial or Agricultural. Commercial or agricultural permits may be granted up to a maximum of 120 days as established by the Administrator to persons or clubs meeting all the following criteria: A. For control of pests, vermin, rodents, or other animal nuisances, such as deer hunting by bow and arrow during appropriate season, or other animals that are a demonstrated nuisance. B. where there are no other appropriate methods available. C. Where there is a demonstrated need for a longer duration of time for predator control such as a bow and arrow deer season or growing season in agricultural situations. Subdivision 7.C. Occasional permits valid for a period under 7A or 7B as deemed appropriate may be granted to clubs or persons as follows: A. The discharge of bow and arrow will be allowed on an occasional basis to remove problematic animals including game animals when an individual hunter has obtained a permit issued by the Chief of Police subject to the following circumstances: 1. There is a demonstrated nuisance of that animal to that property owner. 2. Property owner has specifically given written permission to a hunter and that hunter has the appropriate state hunting permit. 3. That no discharging be done within 106 feet of any property line, within 199 feet of any buildings and 200 feet of any livestock. 4. Discharge for purposes of this section shall only be done from an elevated stand that is a minimum of four (4) feet off the ground. 5. Can only be done during the appropriate season. 6. The hunter receives no compensation for the removal service apart for the retention of animals killed. This ordinance shall be effective upon adoption and publication. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held the 26th day of May, 1987. Jamet R. Grab", Mayor ATT ST: , othy Mq. llin, City Clark 1o218B.2 TO: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator FROM: Thomas J. Jacobs, Building 6 Fire Inspector - DATE: October 21, 1988 SUBJECT: 4545 Watertown Road - Hazardous Building Proceedings 4545 Watertown Road was placed on the agenda in the hope the City would be able to move rapidly on it. (The problems on the property were brought to the City's attention on Friday, October 14, 1988.) At this time, I request that it be removed as we are having difficulties in contacting the owner. cc: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building s Zoning Administrator TO: Mayor and City Council ,11 FROM: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administratot Forwarded recommending approval. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by _, seconded by _, the Orono Council tables consideration of the proceedings until November 14, 1988. Ayes _, Nays _ 102188.4 TO: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator FROM: John R. Gerhardaon, Public Works Director DATE: October 29, 1988 SUBJECT: Emergency Standby Agreement - Spring Park The City of Spring Park has requested assistance from the City of Orono for emergency standby personnel regarding Spring Park utilities. The City of Spring Park has only one person employed in their public works department. I have drafted an agreement for review and comment by the Orono Council and Orono City Attorney. The agreement basically states the services provided to Spring Park by Orono and the proposed costs for every other weekend standby. The City of Spring Park has not reviewed this agreement. RECOMMENDATION - To approve entering into an agreement with the City oof Sp�ng Park for utility standby services as outlined in the attached agreement. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by seconded by to approve entering into an agreement with the City of Spring Park for utility standby services as outlined in the attached agreement. Ayes _, Mays TO: Mayor and City Council I,I FROM: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Adminlstratov Forwarded recommending approval. AGREEMENT FOR STANDBY SERVICE OP LIFT STATION AND WATER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM This agreement made and entered into this day of 19 by and between the City of Orono, Minnesota and the City of Spring Park, Minnesota is made and-r and by virtue of Minnesota statutes 471.59. Whereas the City of Spring Park is desirous of contracting with the City of Orono for the performance of the hereinafter specified lift station maintenance and inspection services within the City of Spring Park and; Whereas the City of Orono is agreeable to render such services on the terms and conditions hereinafter set forth; Now therefore, the City of Orono agrees that it will provide standby lift station and water distribution maintenance and inspection services (hereinafter "services") for the City of Spring Park and the City of Spring Park agrees to pay for those services on the following terms and conditions: 1. The level of services rendered to the City of Sprin^ Park by the City of Orono shall be essentially the same as the service rendered in the City of Orono, except as hereinafter stated. The basic services shall include the inspection of the existing lift stations and water distribution system and when there is an immediate necessity the maintenance and repair of those lift stations and water distribution system. The services shall be performed by the City of Orono's Public Works Personnel. 2. Administration Procedures - This section is set forth to clarify the re3ponsibilities of each participant and to establish procedures for performing the services. A.Responsibility of the City of Spring Park i. Maintain and make available to the City of Orono all material necessary to perform service. 2. Pay to the City of Orono all amounts due hereunder in a timely fashion, plus payment for repair parts and material supplied by Orono. 3. Provide and pay for all contractual work on lift stations and water distribution system which the City of Orono does not provide but for which is authorized to provide by itself and or have contracted. B. Fes I O Per om a routrnerono. inspections and maintenance of lift stations and water distribution system as necessary and is authorized to do routine repairs and can contract for repairs up to $_ without additional specific authority of Spring Park. 2. Provide inspection reports and other infortlation for the permanent records kept by the City of Spring Park . Page 1 of 4 3. At the request of Spring Paik inspect all work done on lift stations and water distribution system by others. 4. The above services will be provided by the City of Orono to the City of Spring Park on an every other weekend emergency call out basis, and during va,tlon time or illness of City of Spring Park personnel as needed. 3. Administration Res onsibi lit - Services rendered to the City of Spring Par sha a under the direction of the City of Orono. The degree of services rendered, the standards of performance and other matters relating to services shall remain under the control of the City of Orono. The City of Orono shall submit to the City of Spring Park a monthly report of services rendered and charges due, as well as periodic suggestions. 4. Personnel Em to ees of the Cit of Orono- Personnel assigned to perform the services or t e C ty o Spr ng Park shall be employees of the City of Orono, which City shall assume all obligation with regard to their salary, workers compensation, P.E.R.A. withholding tax and health insurance. The City of Spring Park shall not be required to furnish any of the foregoing fringe benefits. 5. Coo eretion and assistance - the City of Spring Park shall provide fu coo perartion ana assistance to the City of Orono, its agents and employee's in rendering of these services. 6. Effective Date of Ser.ice- The effective date of services shall be on the day of 19_ and shall be effective until December 31, 1989. 7. Termination of Agreement- This agreement shall remain in full force end effect from the effective date of service and will be automatically renewed annually, until cancelled by either party. Cancellation notice must be submitted in writing by either party upon written notice thirty (30) days prior to termination of contract. Notification of cancellation by Spring Fark to Orono must be mailed to: City of Orono Y.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Notification of cancellation by Orono to Spring Park must be mailed to: City of Spring Park P.O. Box 452 Spring Park, MN 55384 After such a cancellation any amounts due to the City of Orono shall become immediately due and payable. 8. Cost to the Cjt of S rin Perk - For and in consideration of the rendition o the •ervtca, the CLty of Spring Park shall pay to the City of Orono as follows: Page 2 of 4 a. Regular time rates will apply for all services rendered during the hours of 8:OOa.m.-4:30p.m. Monday through Friday, excluding holidays. Training Orono Personnel •3traight time rate $20.60 per hour Public works supervisior $16.28 per hour Maintenance worker b. Overtime rates excluding holidays will apply for all servi- rendered during the hours other than noted below. Emergency call out -Over time rate $30.90 per hour Public works supervisior $24.42 per hour Maintenance worker C. Holiday rates will apply for all services rendered on holidays as set forth in the current City of Orono personnel policy. •Holiday weekend add $50.00 to fixed costs. *Fixed cost for standby personnel d. Friday 4:30 p.m. to the following Monday 8:00 a.m. "Exceptions - Monday or Friday Holiday" $50.00 e. Administration Costs 101 f. •3/4 Ton vehi^le $5.00 per hour All rates subject to change upon 60 days notice. Th• City of Orono shall bill the City of Spring Park on or before the 15th da• of each month for which services were rendered and the City of Spring Park shall remit payment ttereon by the first day of the month. 9. Insurance - The City of Spring Park shall maintain ineurance policies covering personal and public liability in the amount of not less than $300,000, for each of the above mentioned risks and workers compensation for personnel. Such policies shall cover damages or injury caused by neligent operation while operating under the terms of this agreement. SPring Park shall furnish Orono with a certificate of insurance on the policies in :orce or a letter stating self insurance at said limits. 10. Hold harmless and Indemnification - The City of Orono shall not be liable for and the City of Suing Park agrees to, and ,foes hereby hold harmless and indemnify the City of Orono, its employees or agents for any less or damage of any kind whatsoever resulting from: Page 3 of 4 1. Any failure of the City of Orono to discover any defects in the lift stations, water distribution system or failure to repair or maintain adequately the lift stations water distribution system; or 2. Negligence of the City of Orono in performing any services rendered to the City of Spring Park or; 3. The resulting damages, if any, to others, including homes serviced by the lift station, water distribution system which damages are or may be the result of the failure or negligence of the City of Orono. 4. In the event Orono is held legally responsible to pay for the act of its employee or employees while providing service to Spring Park or is held legally responsible to pay workers compensation benefits for an employee as a result of the activities contemplated by this agreement. Orono shall be indemmified for such liability by Spring Park for an Orono employee who either caused the injury or received workers compensation benefits. Likewise Orono shall have subrogation rights against Spring Park for all costs and expenses paid by Orono as a result of such liability or workers compensation benefits. The City of Spring Park agrees to pay to the City of Orono any expenses, including reasonable attorney fees, incurred by the City of Orono in enforcing the terms of this agreement. ATTBSTs Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk James R. Gra e , Mayor Page 4 of 4 102188.3 l TO: Mayor and City Council PROM: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Adminlstrato DATR: October 21, 1988 SUBJRCT: 1988-89 Police Contract ISSUE - Determine if Council desires to adopt a contract with the a—argaining unit for police officers. INTRODUCTION - Based on discussions, the bargaining unit is agreeable to a 1988 contract which increases base wages by 3.5% plus $10 on insurance with a wage and insurance re -opener for 1989. ALTERNATIVES 1. Adopt 2. Suggest alternatives 3. Arbitrate RECOMMENDATION - It 18 ended that the proposed settlement be adopt in order to a a potentially higher award for 1988 from an arbitrator give, .cent awards with 1989 negotiations limited to the wage and insurance articles in the contract. This would be effective 1 January ,.988. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by _, seconded by —, to accept the proposed settlement of the 1988 police contract effective 1 January 1988 which increases the base wages by 3.5% plus $10 on insurance with a wage and insurance re -opener for 1989. Ayes Nays _ cc: Mel Kilbo, Police Chief Tom Kuehn, Finance Director _ 101488.6 41 TO: Mayor and City Council ��\\. ..\ FROM: ' Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator, DATE: October 13, 1988 1,1• SUBJECT: County Road 51 Attachment: A. City of Orono Letter Dated 10/5/88 ISSUE - Presentation of information regarding progress of County Roa�51. INTRODUCTION - At the Council's September 26, 1988 Council meeting the issue regarding County Road 51 was reviewed. Attachment A was transmitted to Vern Genzlinger, the Associate Ac,ainistrator of Hennepin County. In a phone conversation with Mr. Genzlinger the week of October 18th he indicated that he would be referring this work to Patrick Murphy and that Mr. Murphy would be getting in contact with me. They are initially exploring alternatives that would not require reconstruction together with ones that could be on in conjunction with Metropolitan Waste Control Commission work. A meeting with Hennepin County staff has been set for Tuesday, October 25, 1988. ALTERNATIVES - 1. Accept information. 2. Request further action. 3. Table for futher discussion. RECOMMENDATION - It is recommended that Council accept the ni�ormntlonwlth staff continuing to pursue the matter with the County. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by _, seconded by , that the Council accept the information from staff regarding County Road 51. Ayes _, Nays cc: David Singer, 3520 North Shore Drive, Wayzata CITYof ORONO Poet DID. B•e 66•Cjimal Bey. Minna am S63236Munlripal OfAie a e _ • a On the North Shore of Lake Minnetonka October 5, 1988 Mr. Vern Genzlinger Associate County Administrator Hennepin County Center A-2307 Minneapolis, MN 55487 Re: County 51 Parking and Striping Dear Vern, As you are probably aware County 51 has for a long period of time been of concern to neighborhood residents as it relates to the parking and safety on the south side of the road. This issue has been reviewed by the City of Orono in the past, as noted in the attached memorandum. It has again been requested to be addressed by Mr. David Singer, 3520 North Shore Drive, whose letter is enclosed in that memo. The Orono City Council at its September 28, 1988 meeting requested that staff discuss with Hennepin County the possible solutions to alleviate some of the safety concerns that have been raised. The City, at the County's earliest convenience would like to sit down and review the issue. Possible options to address which include, but are not limited to the following: 1.) Widening of the road up to 3 feet. 2.) Double striping between the parking and the "fog line". 3.) Removal of up to 6 parking spaces to improve sight line distance. 4.) Installation of pedestrian marked crosswalks. 5.) Extension of "No Parking" to account for sight lines when there is parking on the south. In addition to the safety issues are is the general issue of public access parking and the inter -relationship to parking with Hennepin County's North Arm access. BUILDING A ZONING -4y]A 1)t • ADIIZNIS311A))ON a MANGE-+D'1)B • •UBLW WORM_U)},])9 ASSESSING Mr. Vern Genmlinger October 5, 1988 Page 2 Your cooperation on this matter is greatly appreciated. The timeliness of a review is even more appropriate given the construction currently being done along County 51 by the Metro Waste Control Commission. Sin/cAerely, (r-I\Be o )�/n'��1@,� City Administrators MEB/dh cc: David Singer 102188.5 ORDINANCE NO. _, SECOND SERIES AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 9.13 ADOPTED APRIL 1, 1984, AND ENTITLED •ANIMALS AND FOWL - KEEPING, TRANSPORTING, TREATMENT, NOOSING.' The City Council of Orono ordains: Ordinance No. 9.13 adapted April 1, 1984, and entitled "Animals and Fowl - Keeping, Transporting, Treatment, Housing" is amended to read: Subdivision 7. Permit Required. Is hereby repealed. This ordinance becomes effective upon publication. Passed by the council this 24th day of October, 1988. James R. Gra ek, Mayor ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk 1o298e.1 Tot Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator Froo: John R. Gerhardson, Public works Director Date: October 19, 1988 Subject: Ame:,i Ordinance Section 2.52, Subdivision 1 - Park Commission On October 10, 1988, the Orono Council approved the appointment of three new members to the Orono Park Commission. The addition of the three members created an eight member commission. Because the current ordinance allows only seven members, it is necessary to amend the ordinance. Attached for review and approval is an amendment to the ordinance allowing eight members to the Park Commission. RECOMMENDATION - To approve the attached ordinance amendment allowing eight members to the Park Commission. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by _, seconded by _, to approve the attached ordinancement allowing eight members to the Park Commission. Ayes nays TO: Mayor Grabak s Orono Council Chambers ��AV q J FROM: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator Forwarded recommending approval. ORDINANCE NO. _, SECOND SERIES An ordinance amending Ordinance No. 2.52 of the Orono Municipal Code relating to composition of the Park Commission, adopted on November 1, 1983. The City Council of Orono ordains: Section 2.52, Subdivision 1, adopted on November 14, 1983 and entitled "Establishment and Composition" is amended to read: Section 2.52 Subdivision 1. Establishment and Composition. A Park Commission composed of eight members, who shall serve staggered three year terms, is hereby established. The Public works Director and one Councilmember shall be membc-s of the Commission ex officio and without vote and are in addition to the eight member commission. Section 2.52. This ordinance becomes effective upon passage and publication on , 1988. Passed by the Orono Council on this 24th day of October, 1988. James R. Grabek, Mayor ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk Published in the Laker Newspaper on the day of 1988. DATE: October 12, 1988 TO: Mark Bernhardson, City Administrator FROM: Chief Mel Eilbo BOBJIICT: Reclassification of Part Time Officer Now that Long Lake has adopted the budget, calling for a decreased manpower allocation to 2 1/2 men dedicated to Long Lake, I feel it becomes necessary to change the status of our part time officer from "part time temporary" postion to a 'part time regular" position. Without this it may be difficult to attract qualified, licensed partol officers to work 20 hours per week on an ongoing basis. This change in classification will allow the City of Orono to offer hospitalization as well as pro -rated vacation and sick leave. I would further ask that this change be made immediately, effective October 24, 1988, so that we may offer our present part time officer, Jim Morrow, an incentive to stay with this department until he finds full time employment. TO: Mayor and City Council �i,�6�rl FROM: Mark E. Bernhardson, City AdministrateO ! Issues - 1. Conversion of position from part time temporary to part time regular. 2. Adoption of resolution placing him in Police and Fire PERA. Forwarded recommending approval. Officer Morrow was hired as a substitute for Officer Eirnyczuk who 1s now resigning. Long Lake is desiring to reduce from an assigned 1 officers to 2 1/2 officers which is accomplished through the use of a part time officer. The budget and revenues contemplated the cost of this change. In a review of PERA regulation's it was determined that for a person in other than a full time police position it would require a resolution so approving. Mr. Morrow has been on PERA since June 13, 1988. This is simply a procedural matter at this point. At this point PERA has not brought this to our attention or requested a copy. PROPOSED MOT70N - Moved , Seconded , that the Orono Council approve the change in positions from pert time temporary to part time permanent effective upon the resignation of Officer Michael Rirnyczyk. Ayes _, Mayas 1 A RESOLUTION TO DECLARE THAT THE PART-TIME POSITION HELD ET JAMES S. MORROW IS THAT OF A POLICE OFFICER WHEREAS, the Public Employees Retirement Association Police and Fire Fund excludes part-time police officers unless a resolution is adopted by the governing body to establish eligibility for coverage in the Police and Fire Fund; NOW, TNNREFORR. RE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Orono Hennepin County, Minnesota that effective June 13, 1988, the position James S. Morrow holds is that of a police officer as defined in Minnesota Statues, Section 153.64, Subdivision 2, pursuant to which said employee shall become a member of the Public Employees Retirement Association Police and Fire Fund. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held October 24, 1988. James R. Grabek, Mayor ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk rk� 101288.1 TO: Mayor and City Council e /ROM: Mark E. Bernhe.rdson, City Administratov DATE: October 12, 1988� SURJW"f: Resignation - C.S.O. - Rick Denneson Attaenment: A. Aesignntion of Rick Denneson Dated 10/11/88 ISSUE - Acceptance of resignation. INTRODUCT•ON - Attached please find the resignation of Rick denneson. dick has been a prime force in the establishment of the City's current animal control program. We wish him the best in h:s new employment as a patrol officer with West Henne '-.. The .:urrent position has been shared with Kevin Walsh. Kevin will continue to handle the program through the winter. We expect to again hire a second C.S.O. in the spring and at this time request such authorization to seek applicants in the spring. The staff will bring an applicant back for approval prior to hire. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by seconded by _, the Orono City Council accepts the resignatr—on of Rick Denneson as a part time C.S.O. wishing him the best of luck and additionally authorises staff to seek a replacement in the spring. Ayes _, Nays cc: Rick Denneson Tom Kuehn, Finance Director Mel Kilbo, Police Chief Personnel File VILLAGE OF ORONO. '!INNESOTA STATEMENT OF RESIGNATION � VV •Oi -� NAME OF EMPLOYEE POSITION TITLE Department Salary Rate Full Time I 5.5612- 1,1 Part Time :c ): -- Statement of Resignation: I request that this resignation be accepted by the Village Council to become effective on I D- IU- Sg , wijich is the Iasr day of actual service. I an request ng co ensa on for personal service to the Village in the above indicated position for accrued annual leave d- for_days. Tire reason for this resignation is as follows: S A�+GV A Full �ynp PnS'd'vv� Q- 4 G}.�.nlAvn _. Date: /Q-rI-SC£f _ —Z,"AL�kI"141 -.-- (Employee's Signature) Recommendation of Department Head: I would P would not ( ) re -hire this employee. Tall position may not be refilled until Date: l0,/^Al _ hh partmeni_e KeeKad� 3) Certification of Accrued Leave: Payment for O days accrued leave upon employee's termination on_ is • y auth&ri:e Data: , Pt�.l'� ege s n s ra or TO, Mayor Grabek Orono Council Members PEWS Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator DATZI October 20, 1988 SOBJBCTi Canvassing Board Meeting As the Council his the Canvassing Board for certification of results it is suggested that the meetings be held: Wednesday, 5 p.m. November 9, 1988 Orono Council Chambers The meeting must be Hold within 2 days of the election. It is anticipated the meeting ..juld last only 5-10 minutes. ALTERNATIVES - r. Establish the meeting for 11/9/88 2. Establish an alternative time and/or data (11/10/98 only option) PROPOSED MOTION - Moved , Sec aded , the Orono Council established Sp.m. Wednesday, November 9,-1T88 as the Canvass L.9 Board meeting for the General elections. Ayes _, Mayes 101988.4 A RESOLUTION APPOINTING ELECTION JUDGES FOR THE GENERAL ELECTION - NOVEMBER 8, 1988 8E IT RESOLVED, that pursuant to Minnesota Election Laws 2048.21 Subd 2 the following persons are appointed for the General Election to be held November 8, 1988. Albert Ackermann Wilbur Andersen Mary Butler Marlene Deschler Ruth Eisinger Barbara Ericson Barbara Garda Ruth Hoffman Miriam Johnson Rose Madden Barbara Olson Marni Platteter Dorothy Rauschendorfer Lill4 , Stubbs Hele .ard Phyllis Andersen Vernice Berg Connie Carruthers Norma Dickey Betty Ekeberg Eleanor Farril Marjorie Gasch Jan Johnson Dolores Lauer Eileen Nicholls Christine Psasley LouAnn Powell Cherry Stubbs Laura Sullivan '.m eth Turnham Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held October 24, 1988. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Cloth James R. Grabak, Mayor 101988.3 _/ TO: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator EEOM: Dorothy Hallin, City Clerk DATE: October 19, 1988 SUBJECT: Appointment of Additional Election Judges for the General Election - November 8, 1988 Attachment: A. Proponed Resolution Appointing Election Judges for the General Election - November 8, 198B Since the September 13th primary election the following persons have indicated their intent to serve as election judges for the general election, November 8, 1988: Laura Sullivan Helen Toward Precinct assignments have not been made as of this date. Training sessions have been scheduled for Tuesday, November let at 2:30 p.m. and Wednesday, November 2nd at 7:00 p.m, in the Council Chambers. In addition prior to the Wednesday trdining session the public accuracy test will be held. This testing of the voting equipment is open to representatives of all political parties, candidates, the press and the public. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by _, seconded by _ Council adopts Resolution 1_ appointing Election Judges for the General Election - November 8, 1988. Ayes _, Nays TO: Mayor Grabek i Orono Council Members , FROM: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administratog J Forwarded recommending approval. 101888.1 TO: Mayor and City Council PROM: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator DATE: October 18, 1988 SUBJECT: Administrator's Information WOODHILL AVENUE - As you may be, aware the final work on the project has been awaiting the movement of two poles by Northern States Power. The indication to the City is that they should be moved this week and, if so, the final coat for the project should be completed within the next couple weeks, weather permitting. COUNTY ROAD 15 PROGRESS - Tre construction of County Road 15 is moving along very well, the majority of the bituminous wear cover has been placed with the exception of a small area aL the intersection of County Road 19 and 15. Street lights are being instal led at a rate if seven per day. There is still doubt that all sidewalks and restoration will be completed this fall. ORONO/MINNETONKA BEACH INTERCEPTOR - The MWCC interceptor construction is moving along very well The placement of piling along County Road 51 has been completed. Restoration of that area is underway and is expected to be open to traffic in 30 days dependent upon weather conditions. The intersection at County Road 51 and 135 is now closed and will remain that way for two weeks. Construction of the pipe will extend 200 feet west of 135 this year. Once that section is completed construction will continue east of Norenberg Bridge to County Road 84 to the pumping station at the old Orono treatment plant site. LAKE MINNETONKA REGIONAL PARK - There has been no further progress on the Regional Paik issue at this time although both sides are in negotiating process. The Judge on the matter has 90 days, which expire on December 23rd, to decide the case. CRYSTAL BAY ROAD - The Planning Commission took further testimony on the matter at their meeting of October 17, 1988. Because of selected concerns raised by neighbors they have further tabled it until 3vember 21, 1988. It is anticipated that the restoration work by the City will out be able to accomplished this year and the City is looking at taking temporary safety measures yet this fall that will ensure safety yet eliminate some of the objectionable items currently there. It should be noted that the letter of September 27, 1988 indicated the neighbors would like to terminate the road at the Orono/Minnetonka Beach border, which is in front of the Richie Anderson house at 3205 Crystal Bay Road. The staff is continuing to pursue the issue of the criteria development and any further comments you Malhave regarding that would be appreciated. Please note in the attached letter from the Mayor of Minnetonka Beach their opposition to closure of the road. D.A.R.E. (DRUG AND ALCOHOL REINFORCEMENT EDUCATION) PROGRAM - As you may a aware of cer Corn atten e t e twTweek DARE program in Illinois the first part of this month. The program that was originally developed in Los Angeles consists of Officers presenting a 17 session training course to school children in order to reinforce their personalities and abilities through various means to resist the peer "presure encountered with drugs and alco'nol in today's culture. Incorporation of this in the school systems in Orono and in a cooperative arrangement with Mound and Westonka will be brought forward to you in the next month. 2 WESTONKA AREA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE BEAUTIFICATION COMMITTEE MINUTES OF 10-5-88 MEETING Members Present: Chic Remien, Gene Shavlik, Dorothy Stannard, John Gehardson, Suzi Pauly, Jim Fackler Guests Present: Gary Decurtins i Bill Beck representing the MTC. Dale Gustafson, own account, •G Mark Kobilka, Otten Bros., to discuss landscape ideas. Topics Discussed: 1. Gary Decurtins of MTC said the existing shelter sites, except for the one in Mound next to the poet office, would be lost and alternative sites need to be found. They tried to place one in front of Rick's Super Value in Navarre but were un- successful. The other two sites under consideration are one west of Keavany Drug store area and one at the Marina shopping center on the east end. Nothing is firm. We found that the bus company is not responsible for the placement of benches and they are owned by Rollie Danielson 721-2525. He sells the advertising on them. We need to learn more about how each city controls them. Gene will contact Spring Park, John will contact Orono, and Jim will contact Mound. We discussed how it is determined where designated bus stops are determined. The MTC makes their recommendation to each city and it is up to each city to decide where to designate the stops. The MTC generally will provide the signs and it is up to the city to place and maintain them. We asked if the MTC could provide us with their recommendations on where they feel bus stops could be designated so we could work with each city to decide where to place them. This will enable us to coordinate them and possibly place our own benches in those locations. Next we discussed how to proceed with our landscaping plans. It seems the proper way is to have a professionally prepared comprehensive plan to cover the entire strip. The plan can take everything into account that was discussed at the previous meeting. Gary Decurtins and Bill Back will each provide us with what they would do for us and what it would cost. We thought possibly each city coulA -----ids funding for the plan once we knew the cost. The next step would be to break the plan into phases as the funding comes available. Probably most of the funding would come from business or individuals who may want to sponsor a tree, bench, etc. 3. We discussed how to make the public aware of what we're doing. It was determined that we can send a letter to all of the property owners indicating that something is being done and they can work with us if the like so all our efforts are in the same direction and that funding may be available for certain items. We also discussed placing a notice in the local paper notifying people what we are doing and naming the members of the group with their telephone numbers if anyone has questions. 4. Chic felt it might be a good idea if we added an attorney to our group. The next meeting will be at 10:00 A.M. Wed. Oct. 19 at the Minnetonka Mist. WESTONNA AREA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE BEAUTIFICATION COMMITTEE MEMBERSHIP ROSTER Chairperson Chic Ramien Wastonka Area Chamber 5600 Lynwood Boulevard Mound, Mn 55364 472-6780 Secretary Gana Shavlik Spring Park city rep. 4608 West Arm Rd Spring Park, Mn 55384 W - 473-8300 Participants Suzi Pauly Spring Perk Business 4470 Shoreline Dr Spring Park, Mn. 55384 471-8000 Dorothy Stannard Spring Park chamber rep. Minnetonka Mist 4050 Shoreline Dr. Spring Perk, Mn. 55384 W - 471-8471 Jim Fackler Mound Supt. of Parks City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, Mn. 55364 W - 472-1155 John Gehardson Orono Publics Works City of Orono 1335 Brown Rd. So. P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, No. 55323 W - 473-7359 WESTONKA AREA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE BEAUTIFICATION COMMITTEE INVITED GUESTS Hennepin County David M. Faltl Project Engineer Department of Transportation Hennepin County 320 Washington Avenue So. "opkins, Mn. 55343 W-935-3381 Metropolitan Transit Commission Gary Decurtins Mgr of shelter maintenance 515 No. Cleveland St Paul, Mn 55114 642-2673 Bill Beck transit supervisor 560-6th eve no Minneapolis, Mn 55411 Landscapers Gustafson Design Dale A Gustafson 1845 Wisconsin Ave No Golden Valley, Mn 55427 544-4215 Otten Bros. Mark Kobilka CITY of ORONO Cr>+W+Bey.Mneroe36827 SEPTIC SYSTEM INSTALLERS LICENSE APPLICATION BUILDINGBESaZONING-417d 151 y�. 9 ASSESSING ��5! All questions must be answered. cense fee Li, bond, certificate of insurance, and evidence of MPCA Certification or Home Sewage Treatment Workshop attendence must accompany this application. All applications are subject ta ten (10)) dday approval period. 1- Business or trade name` 2. Business address 3. Business phone Z177 -ro�_- Residence phone 417%4=GGf) 4. Name of applicaryg p{ company repr�ntative holding MPCA certification / / lc== 5. Type of certification held: _A Installer Pumper Site evaluator _SysteI designer �.. ,� Is this a Provisional ertif icate? �r Certificate No./} / 6. If no Certificate is held, provide evidence of attendance at one of the On -Site Sawa ;e Treatment Workshops held immediate! - prior. to the current construction season. 7. Have you ever held a Septic System Installer license in- , Orono before?�Ar Most recent year ..- "--- 8. Have you ever had a license revoked? elfo"When? -- -.. - Where? _ 4. Do you do Municidal Sewer hook-ups? Yes No _ SUBMITTALS REQUIRED: r - J1. $25.00 license application fee. 2. $2000.00 license and permit bond naming City of Orono as obligee. The State Plumbers Bond will not be accepted. J3. $10-50-100,000 minimum Zertificate of Insurance. it 4. Copy of current MPCA Certificate or evidence of attendence at On -Site Sewage Treatment Workshop held immediately prior to current construction season. LICENSES WILL NOT BE PROCESSED UNTIL ALL ITEMS ARE SUBMITTED. List persons other than applicant who pie authorized by you J,o. apply for permits under your license // 11 The undersigned hereby makes application to the City of Orono, Minnesota, for license to install and repair septic systems, and/or pump out septic tanks, subject to the laws of the State of Minnesota and the Ordinances of the City of Orono. pp � Date to - /I4'l Applicants Signatur '�-`""� xere `, Staff recommendation Approval Denial _ Date ry /i' 9+ CITY Reason for denial: USE City Council Action Date Approved _ Denied ONLY Date license mailed LIST OF LICENSES FOR COUNCIL APPROVAL FOR MEETING OF October 24, 1988 Septic System Installers License - Duane Ritter Excavating 7120 Vernon St. Rockford Charitable Gambling License - Lions Club Mound Northwest Tonka at CEO - Stan R. Drahos Navarre Lanes Septic System Installers License - Industrial Utilities Inc. { 2348 Driftwood Lane Stillwater CITY of ORONO Cy.l.lB.y,Mne�oa6674a SEPTIC SYSTEM INSTALLERS LICENSE APPLICATION BUILDING a ZONING - 473.7351 AMESSING All questions must be answered. License fee, bond, certificate of '.usurance, and evidence of MPCA Certification or Home Sewage Treatment Workshop attendence must accompany this application. All applications are subject to a ten (10) day approval period. 1. Business or trade name Industrial `Jtilitiss Inc. 2. Business address 21LLS Driftwood -ane, Stillwater, MZ4 55082 3. Business phone lL39-6hC3 Residence phone 4. Name of applicant or company representative holding MPf'A_vv'-v4. rr; certification Gary A Ritzer 5. Type of certification held: X Installer Pumper., _q -. Site evaluator System designer Ie tthis a Provisional —Certificate? _ Certificate Nc.GC- 6. If no Certificate is held, provide evidence of atten3'ahas, one of the On -Site Sewage Treatment Workshops held immediatel ' prior to the current construction season. 7. Have you ever held a Septic System Installer license �n Orono before? lt0 Most recent year 8. Have you ever had a license revoked?_0 When? Where? _ 9. Do you do Municipal Sewer hook-ups? Yes X No SUBMITTALS REQUIRED: ✓ 1. $25.00 license application fee. _ 2. $2000.00 license and permit bond naming City of Orono as obligee. The State Plumbers Bond will not be accepted. 3. $10-50-100,000 minimum Certificate of Insurance. .� 4. Copy of current MPCA Certificate or evidence of attendance at On -Site Sewage Treatment Workshop held immediately prior to current construction season. C ICENSES WILL NOT BE PROCESSED UNTIL ALL ITEMS ARE SUBMITTED. a�T List persons other than applicant who aFp authorized by you to apply for permits under your license Ziwr The undersigned hereby makes application to the City of Orono, Minnesota, for license to install and repair septic �/jsi systems, and/or pump out septic tanks, subject the laws of the State of Minnesota and the Ordina the City of Orono. C� Date Aolrlf✓ APP gna Staff recomine ndatio Approva r enial Date ZF2z)'� CITY Reason for denial: USE City Council Action Date Approve _ Denis ONLY Date license mailed N Charitable Gambling Control Board For Board Use Only a Rm N♦TS Gnty Ave. wey Blog. Paid k *l 1021 Paul. Melly Ave. BI. Paul. MN 55I043383 cnecx 'lo (612) 642-0555 Data. GAMBLING LICENSE RENEWAL APPLICATION LICENSE NUMBER: 1.11111-161 I EFF. DATE: IS Il 11 I AMOUNT OF FEE- 116.11 1 Appncam-Legal Nam of Organization 2. Street Add,M L11111 [f11111111MTHIST TMIA 1 I IM 211 a. County ] City. Slate. ?JPIIE 5. Bupnna Pnor4 loved, /1 $SSAI Inn la 412.1267 T. Seemse Pnor4 y 6 Nam of Chief Eseculne OfLcar 112 8YB11► U i I a. N.m. of Trwurer a boomWN Accounts la Rwanuee 9. Pna4 I6li12 1 1e4el-o less Ilerlelndl 10. Nam of Gemplrlp Manager It. Beet Number N t2. euunw PNne Jobs [tells 13. Name of EsisbNllmml Where Gemolmg WIII Take Place Is. Oeurlly 15 No of Alm Members Inure Leos lavarrt Ina le it 17. Mmthly Rant: 16 Lehi Name ........ feet - Is, if Bingo mm N cooduaad w con IkmM, pNate sagacity days and time Of Bingo. RM Tama I 9" Timm I Days Time to, Has lk aver Italian: ❑Revoked Data-. ❑ Suspended Date'. ❑ Denied OW: M. HM Internal controls bean aubminad prw.nusly? Q YM ❑ No (it 'No." atecb copy) 21. Hiss Conant lease been Led In IN bond? QYee ❑ No 111'Np: cosh copy) 22 Hu current sketch been LNG In Ina bond, W YM ❑ No pPNb: main copy$ OAMBUNO SITE AUTHORIZATION By my slgnetun babes. 1.01 law moraines, ofncem or agents of IN Board ere ne eby a nyonsed to fader upon IN via. a1 any rime. gambling n bong ego Mted. 1. move Ina gambing aN to anbr. the lBAM RECORDS AUTHORIZATION or persba By of Nlat grur. babes, the Board d N,aby oni orped td map of IN bank records of the a Dow, Gamlog Bank accoum whaneve. necessary Ip lutell regutrwm is a current Mmbnp rules end law OATH I bal om ilia that'. 1. I Now read this spel,CMbn and all mlormlion aubmlbed to the Board', 2. All information submided is rue. sacuale and corneal 1. All an., snared mlarmolm has bean fully d•v:lossd. A. 1 am the Chief wacNrva onion o1 the aganeallm: !. I ..sumo lull faapansibllny lot the fart and lawful apatn)n of all Won.. to N PamsWed: if IKmaed. I- abda by tno- e. 1 me fool myself with Ina I.. of IN Slate of Mirmscia raaewtin gambling ark rules of IN board aM agree_ I.wa erk rules. rxluding amendment. tnarMo 2] "'loll Legal Nams dl Or,,—.f tin &—"l rw IChTI Ek! u OMMI Carl I Title AMWLEDOENENT OF NOTICE BY LOCAL O En M B ' I ,.be mxnwNkdga 1mk, of . copy of mot npnc.lron By k.a". q receipt I admit Nto, bean sowed won nmc. tell In'* apOLCat4n eel N rw� by IN Charitable Gool,ml Contra Board If n approved by Ina Boardwill become eeai M mys from IN data W wk ar l In DNaw Met a reaaulnm a the kcal gwarning body .s passed wn.Ch apeol.cally u..Jf wa each scoeny and a obey a Ina' ,esowom .s waseed b IN C nsbe Gambling Contra Board Within 60 asy. W 1N Nlow rated dal. Townp It Ll. w 4C.4d wllkn a ,ba m.p. p4ite COmpbla name 2. m. 2a m 1 Gwern 1 and 25 S .1u4 a P Racer m, .cabkm 25 4yNtae W Person Racvwng appcsnm O_ 4T.ftaoDa nmerved Itnia due b.pn. W dsY pergdl Take N.ma 9�Psorl D rig �CenO .l GwerMng Baby Tpwnm.p N.IM JV 1 C4056MAQ IWM1 Who. Coo, -Bake Crony-apWcam P...-Leer Gavenmg So CITY OF ORONO P A Y R D TFtt NO l( bIV- OROS9 40641DIFFALLOIF ACKERNANN AJ_13_ _93,S0___ 0.00 ANDERSON BL 31 29072.67 1t85.46 ANDERSON PM 13 10.00 0.00 ANDERSON Y/ 13 8500 0.00 gets--- -'-W T1-a-f BERNHARDSO ME 12 41864.60 9044.09 BOBZIEN _SA 31 1-M6.50_ 4l- 09 ^..__, OOSMA IL 12 10390.11 433.66 BOYLAN SO 93 3767.67 194.88 BRINKHAUJ_ JF 48 30952.01 1263.92_ BUTLER MC 13- 65.00 0.00 CARLSON MR 35 616.55 61.20 CARRUTHERS C__17_93__SO____0.00 CHESUICK_OB _ 71 1176I'49 1418.00 CORNICK JL 31 26772.70 1091.60 DENNESONNJ 35 3440.77 147.39 DESCHLER__�11J 13-SS _AO _0.00 DICKEY NJ 13 $5.00 0.00 EKESERO EJ 13 S5.00_ 0.00 E NGL1314 TfIN 31 2765A, 69 1__391.02 ERICKSON BE 13 85.00 0.00 ERICKSON DJ 93 1354.53 0.00 ERICKSON---Rt 3f 2B16f.00.1313AE FARR PS 33 2821.04 0.00 -ERRIL EL 13 45.00 0.00 . ISCHENICH OT 31 25148.99 t24.7..20 FRITZLER JM 31 28873. 05 1477.28 GAFFRON MP 33 24839.46 1213.60 BASCH MF13 93_.5v CERMARDS,'•N JR 42 34330.64 1636.04 CREGORY JO 42 24005_3T 1228.6$ MALLIN DM It 2'018.01 t070.00 HANSEN SC 42 2 149.65 1103.04 HANSINO CJ 31 ', �005.48 SOS.91_ _ _ _. BOFFhAN---Rf91T ��---0 :-00 JACOBS TJ 33 2483..45 1213.60 JOHNSONBP 31 27890.36 1647.39._ JOHNSON__ FM II 05.00 0.00 JOHNSON MI 1: 93.S0 0.00 KIL80 MH 31 36906,79 1760.04 KIRNYCTDIC-(-31 5699 $13 3.06 KNUTSON CA 15 15247.97 696.15 KUEHN _ TM 15 34091.891646_.64_ LAUER DA 13 57.S0 0.00 LINDSTROM DJ 93 E91.14 0.00 MABUSTH JA _33.2.9.766.S3 1-41-0.24 MADDEN RM-11 AS 00�"6- MAROUARDT BJ 93 09.26 0.00 MEYER MA 35 _ 20? 0.90 MIKELSON RA 1S 1617' -8 - MILLS JR WH 93 2247 •.25 i ej i L�;IU CITY OR ORONO P A Y R __ _ _ _ _ __ _ Y-T-O . - - - - - - EMPL-NO HAHE OIV GROSS GROSS E%P/ALLOU MORA_N MF 31 30458.46 1658.61 MOROWCZYN8 J 31 29235.20 1323.37 - MORROW JS 31 8289.95 504.00 NAAQ TL_12 1.3982,10 _ R IGNOLL9 [ 13 85.00 _8.56.81__ 0.c - +� OAS DO 93 961.89 0.00 �M1 OQRIENRL 92 5790.00 1010_00 _ OLSONJ 13 45.00 0.00 OMANN LE 33 E0446.86 1017.60 PALMER ►6 31 505.00 0.00 1�--- �lA6L[T C 17 65. 00 0.00 PETERSON RU 93 0.20 0.00 _QUART _ ___WA 98 837S4.75 1013 9&-.___.- _ RATHBUN !J f6 6368.46 10SS.84 RAUSCHENDO 0 13 SS.00 0.00 psi R098 JA 97 88E.00 49.76 __ SASS -TJ�6 EfE64.S7 11�06 -- -- SCHA7S8 CA 31 20400.76 684.19 i1 SCHEFFL94 LR 12 _4_191_0{_ $5E_21_______._ rt SKREEN D! 4Q Qt14E.00 9E9.20 - STEFFENHAO RE 93 22S16.29 1672.60 STEVENS___ 00 93 3405,00 162.50 - STUBBS C 13 85,00 0.00 -- STU1393 L 13 B5 00 0.00 T14OMTON MR 31 23105.86 1101.43 ----- _ - _ TOMCHECR LR 31 23705.98 1319.47-_ TOMCZYk MU 31 27C10.64 1298.24 TURNHAM N 13 85.00 0.06 UALliF- ---- -IfL 7E -079. 7! S{. _ - _ -_ 10 L _COUNT - _ GRAND__- _. 47.390.06 n PAID 00047 TOTAL 00080 TOTAL TOTAL FICA TAX GW35 aiOST7.01 EMPLOTERS FIC A GROUP HEALTH - --.-1 ►WV6TffAff7# "CALTH-PUI - tl� C,P MA6 CROGS/SLUE SHIELD 0 P MEDICAL CENTER PLAN .N I AL is •' P • COORJ. HEALTH CARE - ! • MINNESOTA HMO - --A f 7fANl-AMRRICA OCc - - - �II -1 P BARBARA LIFE - - J • MUTUAL SERVICES - gas n-r CMZCK NO. of aso[Q OAT[ AMOUNT CHECK REGISTER VENDOR ITEM DESCRVTION ACCOUNT N0. INV. 10-EI-e4 PAYS 0 P.O. 0 MISSAOE 29400G 10/20/64 as 13.00 00 A -I MINN[TONNA RENT FUEL 01-4990-919-42 _ o.-CN E1/006 E 9f00 29000► — 10/00/90 9e/!o/se 49I86/44 16 33.as - 33.O6 0] 19 . 9S ACAO-MINN[SOTA INC ACRO-MINHesOTA INC ACRO-MINMESOTA INC Y/FICE Supplies OFFICE SUPPLIES OFFICE SUPPLIES 01-1110-079-12 01-IE10-031-1t 01-1210-17Id3 •..-C M 190031 31#031_- 296031 10/20:99 10/20: ea 10,20/58 3.90 10 11 02 21 13 AT 6 T CON" AT a T COMM AT A T COMM TILEPMON[ TELEPHONE TELEPHONE 01-4320-039-12 01-43EO-129-31 01-1]20-iTs-]. CM 2950•b 10,20,33 566.00 Soo 00 ASSN METAO MUNICIPS PROF TAX REFORM 01-1706-891-78 P90063 t116061 '0/Les/9a 10/20/33 2Sb 50 00 00 BPI GPI EQUIP RENTAL EQUIP RENTAL 01-131t-210-61 T4-/77t-490-13 i 300 00 1'16061 10/10/44 6 00 SLITI ONE MR FOTO OFFICE Supplies 61-I910-1a9-31 6 00 . 'fes6S -1606S t0/20/90 10/2 llaa 130.00 100 230 00 00 SLACKQUTAX E SONS ILACNOVIAN R SON$ MAINT GROUNDS MAINT GROUNDS 01-/7/3-099-17 01-I343-E90-61 `•SO TO 19070 10/t0. e- 10.20. 9b .,0. 11 00 9a SOARMAN I ASSOCIATES sOARMAN I ASSOCIATES SPACE STUDY SPACE STUOY 15-I306-6SO-00 IS-4319-650-00 9B 9lON 9076 Y6H '6971 .96171 V6TA '60T0 16674 p96074 IVMVN 1//80/611 1 VS0/H 10/tVp I1/E0/61 10120/es 10/!6/se IC/as," 1o/86/61 90 109 n 0 1,577 1.599 2, a1• 1a1 51d 1, 7.62. 00 00 93 41 51 Q is dS )0 03 . SON[0TR00 ROSEME ASH SONESTA00 ROSEN[ ASH ROMI]TA00 ROSENE ASH IONISTROO ROSEME AS" GONOTROO ROSINS ASN 90M[STR00 ROOEXI Ask SOM[RTM00 ROS[NI ASK SOMesTR 00 RO9[N[ ASH SONIITROO ROSEM[ ASH INC RETAINER JULY [NG CONSULT JUL/AUG ENS CONSULT JUL/AUG INC SEAL COAT INS CONSULT JVL/AW ERG CONSULT JVL/AUG ENS CONSULT JUL/AVS INC CONSULT JUL/AUS ENO CONSULT JUL/AUG 11-1704-900-41 01-1715-200-41 61-1105-849-I9 11-430S-819-IE -61 01-13OSN-IAYII7-T1 -H 11-179E-12•-00 72-1709-611-91 17-1705-560-11 o-I M CITY OF ORONO CHECK REGISTER t0-24-56 PACE 2 NECN.NO-_OATS AMOUNT VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION AG BLUNT NO. INV. S P.O. s ME "'AG[ QH :0124,05 Ile 00 BLACKS 9HJTOGRAPHY PHOTOS 0i-6l10-059-tA GOGI 10'to/Bs 160 T. SLAW PHOTOGRAPHY PHOTOS 61-4210-129-31 ago TJ . .• CRS SSE -—.10/20/84 90.6E sUOaET PRIG OFFICE SUPPLIES 01-4210-669-16 ROSS 10/RO/40 11 20 BUDC-T PRTG OFFICE SUPPLIES 01-4210-129-31 31 92 ••.-CN9 11 14/26/48 I.W4 d 9JRY 0 CARLSON INC MAIN; BLDG GROUN0S 76-4343-990-93 4144 10/10/08 e14 so COCA COLA VENDING CONCESSIONS RESALE T4-9001-591-94 814.50 . AA.. Ito 1o/2.O.Rs 872 00 :ONCEPT MICROFILM Nn ''CR/PTR 01-4340-129-31 97e 60 ... ...-CRS R 18O ___. 10/20/80 61.45 COLONIAL LIFE INS CO LIP[ INS 01-41st-I96-21 6120 10/m0/9G 105 1. COLONIAL LIFE INS CO LIFE INS 01-4199-129-31 - 166 In ...-eke _-_ ,• 10t 10/!0/2G 42 55- COPT OVP Pk INC OLO COPIER D9EDIT OI-.tt 0-0I9-t2 1.! 10/!0/0S YQ OS COPY OUP PR INC DPIIC[ [UPPLII! 01-AS 10-1tl-N _ 142 1011o/!s 9l GC- COPY OUP PR INC OLD COPIER CR901 01-4810-174-33 142 .•/moles 10.DT1 01 COPY OUP PR INC COPIER SAVIN 14-4949-610-00 0.1E9 71 . N..0 _ ...-CRS _ GIN IVtbs3 2S7 91 "MjLK/JAMS{ SCHOOL. 01-43S6-129-31 - 957.91 .... ...-CBS R tl0 '0180/80 OS TO CULLIGAN MAINT BLDG 01-.343-099-11 RIB6 10120/ss S 00 CULLISAN MINT BLDG T.-q. SIO-93 .4 30 ..•• •..-iMG B1ST 10/t0l9S I20 00 DAMLGREN 9HARDLOV [/Mi .Y 11 01-.306-?93-72 a,- 10/10 od 1 21) '. CLNLGREN SNAROLOU AP.13II It .306-9.0-11 .99 CITY -- —�-_ CHECK REGISTER 10-96-66 RACE 0 OF ORONO -.NECK AD._DATI __ AMOUNT VENDOR ITEM OESCRIP-ION ACCOUNT NO INV . P.O. • MESSAGE 1,110 64 "" -- .... Cgs u b.R isMAIL—. l0/20/sa 34-65 E A SNELN CONCESSIONS RESALE 74-4802-591-99 EA 95 E� wua-- 1} E96199 — 10/80/98 ISS A. ROLF E ERICKSON OFFICE SUPPL 4210-059-14 Ssl1Ei—.10/20/sa 9.2i1.01 ROLF E ERICKSON SERVICE OCT 01-4007-OS9-14 ..286 AA CRS . SSBROR 10/20/85 29 Is- EMRICN BAKING CO CONCESSION$ RESALE 74-4808-990-93 &sagaL_--1.0/20/U 29.58 EMRICN BAKING CO CONCESSIONS RESALE TI-4802-590-93 a9B8E 10/90/99 29 so EMRICN BAKING CO CONCESSIONS RESALE 14-6802-591-94 29 $8 A -. ...-CKE o.o. RR@OR-.. Ip/t0/S8 17. 27 END REPRO SYSTEMS BOHNS PT PRINTING 01-4022-249-42 IT JT A ...-CNE ....... _ isOR1a 10/20/88 14 IS EMPRESS MESSENGER POSTAGE 01-4321-1T4-00 9 1A . .... CKS ...... 253 10/22/80 a go GOLDEN VALLEY CC MEETING 01-4356-1E9-91 9 00 ....GAS 6RE6 10/20/69 68. 79 GENUINE PARTS CO EOUIP PARTS 01-423E-249-42 .96RE6 10/10/88 15 22 GENUINE PARTS CO RAINY LIFT ST. T3-4544-569-92 84 01 . ...-CKS lO/iVaa 52.00 GLENWOOD INGLEWOOD UTILITIES 01-6324-o99-17 s2 00 - ....CKD ow. 944169 10/10/48 95 00 GOUT TRAINING SZRV SCHOOL CHESWICK 01-4I56-129-01 .1Eats 1E/R8/al 262.00 GOUT TRAINING SERV DRIVING SCHOOL 01-4398-11'-04 355 00 - CRS ..tl. 'BRTR 14/40/88 221 69 G 6 A SERVICES CLOTHING 01- ?99-42 CITY OF ORONO CHECK REGISTER 10-24-00 PACE 8 �99 NECK NO_ DATE AMOUNT VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NO INV. 2 P.O. 0 MESSAGE 0272 10/20/98 115 06 C A K SERVICES BLDG MAINT 01-4343-129-31 6272 10/20/68 as Se G ♦ K SERVICES CLOTHING 7e-9221-599-91 Se Te t0/10/00 93 33 G 6 K SERVICES CLOTHING 73-4221-569-92 827e 10/20,80 to 97 G A K SERVICES CLOTHING 7/-4221-590-93 423.93 9 .... ....CN8 8279 10/46/40 173_27 HARMON CLASS MAINT AUTO 01-4341-129-31 173 27 p2p. t0/e0/88 37.2E MAPPYS POTATO CHIP CONCESSIONS RESALE 79-4802-591-94 31 2s . B 291 10/t0/ss 9 96 MALLIN/DOROTMY NEETINO 01-4356-040-11 9211 -10/20/82 T.1O MALLIN/OOROTMY MILEAGE 91-4381-040-13 ' IT 14 ••.• _ .... CAR 8295 10/20,88 22 50 HENNEPIN CO-OP SEED GROUNDS MAINT SUPPLY 74-4231-590-93 92.90 . .... .... INS 0303 10/90/44 2.709 2S HENN C' PIN DIV JAIL CHARGES HUG 01-43P8-080-14 21769 2s e105 IO/e0/1t I1.40 HENN CTY DEPT TAX POSTAGE 01-932!-0.0-13 11 .0 •..• •• -CN8 B108 10/80/08 AO 70 HENN CTY SHERIFF DAY ANTENNA 01-4232-129-31 0306 10/10:00 359.50 HENN CTY SHERIFF OPT SOCKING FEE SEPT 01-4158-080-16 .00 20 9i]0 10,20:90 96 97 ICMA RETRMMT CORP ICMA 10/3-IOYII 01-4140-039-12 8e 97 •u. ....CN8 9115 1J,4 69 +SL 11 ILLIES A SON 1 4RNOS 74-43.1-590-93 6b 3o .... ...-CNB 1349 10. 2u. 93 10. 00 INTL CDIF-OLDG OFFLS MEMBERSHIPS 01-^J80-174-13 I'N69 CITY OF ORONO CMECN REGISTER 10-E9-80 PAGE B ONECIL. NO- GATE _ AMOUNT VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NO INV R F.O. • MESSAOE _ 30 uo . _.__. ....CRB !U791 10/10/64 20.50 TON JAC00➢ MILEAGE 01-4391-174-33 So GO . ...-CMS w.0 190372 10,20,96 60 06 JOHN➢ AUTO SUPPLY SEALED REAMS 01-4232-121-11 60.06 . ...-CNS 29O991 10120�99 997 .. NORTUEMS ➢ALES/➢V EQUIP PARTS 01-4212-249-42 21O191 10i20%09 10 19 NORTUENS SALES/9V MAINT EQUIP 01-9762-249-42 307.61 • - - ....CNS 9...• 90404 10,90/90 1 00 THE LAMER PUBLISHING 01-9102-069-19 11/04 1N20/00 9690 THE LAMER PUBLISHING 01-4392-174-I3 I9409 10,20/04 19.90 THE LAMER PUBLISHING 29-9399-407-00 94909 10/00/00 10 91 THE LAMER PUBLISHING 29-4311-612-00 1A].Al . ...-CNS >19930 10/20/90 105.00 LINQEAFELSERS MAINT SLOG BRADS 7A-43.3-990-91 101 00 . ...-CNS 296411 t0/BO/0S 30 AO LONG LN FORS TRACTOR OLD➢ GRND6 MAINT 01-4211-290-61 01E9 10/10/00 20.99 LONG LM FORD TRACTOR EQUIP PARTS 01-•2J2-2A9-A2 10419 10/90/09 90 q LONG LN FORD TRACTOR EQUIP PARTS 74-4212-590-9- 1.9 92 ...-CMS •i1fS 10/201U 91 59 MACGREGOR GOLF CO PRO SHOP RESALE 74-.901-S -9A 91 59 . ....CNS .16462 10/20/69 1. 019 S MARTINS NAVARRE 66 MAINT AUTO 01-43A1-129-11 1.035 TA . ...-cM9 90:69 10,20i10 920 00 METRO U INSP SEAN INSPECTIONS 01-4106-1 N-ll 290 00 . ....CNS 9.40 10:20i69 221 75 MIDWEST ASPNALT STREET MAINT MAT Ot-AL l]-2A9-.2 966 CITY OF 3NONO CHECK REGISTER 1n-S4-86 PADS 6 CMSCN-NO. DATE AMOUNT VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NO. INV. E P.O. D MESSAOS 221 ]S ..... ....CKE I.99445 10,20,86 29.40 MPLS OXYGEN CO UTILITIES 01-4121-269-42 29 .0 . 98490 10:20/98 96 32 NINNEGASCO JTILITIES 01-4329-099-IT .6 12 . ..... ...-CKS 90500 10,20/96 1T 00 MINN COMM PAGER 01-4320-199-1I 90S00 10:2[ 18 61 60 MINN COMM PAGER 72-4320-549-91 9SS00 10,20,58 92.40 MINN COMM PAGER T3-4320-569-92 171 00 ...... _ ....CRS 96540 10/20/D4 61 90 NAVARRE HARDWARE OFFICE SUPPLIES 01-4210-040-13 99540. __ 101&0/06 10.99 NAVARRE HARDWARE OFFICE SUPPL 01-016-179-33 98540 10,90/86 T 67 NAVARRE HARDWARE SLOS MINT 01-4E31-099-17 90549 10/20/60 04 10 NAVARRE HARDWARE SLDO MAfNT 01-4431-149-31 905.0 10/80,06 1,40.69 NAVARRE HARDWARE EQUIP PARTS 01-4E39-219-92 9SS40 10/20,98 2.59 NAVARRE HARDWARE MAINT EQUIP 01-4340-249-42 185.0 10,10/00 19 10 NAVARRE HARDWARE UTIL SYS MAINT 79-4934-549-91 90515 _- 10/E0/66 30.15 NAVARRE HARDWARE UTIL SYS MAINT T3-4239-561-92 9SS40 10/RO/00 3 RT NAVARRE HARDWARE MAINT LINES 73-4344-569-99 �90540 10,90188 30 30 MAVARRt MARDWANE SLDD HAIRY T4-4E31-S90-93 391 T2 . . •.0 u.-CKH M 0SS9 10/20,86 96S 17 NSP STREET LIGHTS 01-q2S-2.9-.2 965 Ii ••..• •..-CNH 90S62 10,20.88 1)1. 86 HIP UTILITIES 01-a2•-N9-.2 90S62 1 G20/09 2 138 87 NSP UTILITIES 72-4324-549-91 9056E 10/20:HH 181 93 HIP UTILITIES 73-4324-561-12 2..2. 58 . •v •• . -CN9 90S17 +0/20/89 9 00 PUOLIC EMPL MET ASSN LIFE INS 01-N 5l-129-T 9 00 i0611 10:20:SS LST .SO PERRY$ TRUCK REPAIR MAINT AUTO Ol-4341-174-33 96613 'Oi20�33 S 00 FIRSTS TRUCK REPAIR MAINT KISC EQUIP O1-4349-249-42 265 SO IEa CITY OF ORONO :NECK NO_LAIL •.$ede 10/20/85 !SARS.-- 10/R0/as IsaaO 10/20/06 398020 10/80/88 194648E 10/84<84 ASIA&$ t0/a0/$1 Class$ 10,10/98 asafta.._ -10/90/18 tla6te 10/90/04 98448 to/to/es :1$6Rs 10/90,88 11$690 10/toles tills$ 10/20/49 1 91639 10/20/24 '90659 toll0lsa 1666/ 10,90,44 $ue- t0/1S/as Y660 10,10,98 )$660 10/20/88 '.11i16 10/20/66 IL 20/se 14647 10/20/oa 0696 101204ea CHECK REGISTER 10-24-08 PAGE 9 AMOUNT VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NO. INO. t P.C. 0 MgSAOE _ ...-CKS 1.107 65 POPHAM MAIN 6 ASSOC LEGAL RETAINER AUG 01-4301-080-16 11.967.31 POPHAM 41-K A ASSOC LEGAL PROSECUTN AUG Ot-930E-060-16 751.46 POPHAM MAIR A ASSOC LEGAL CONSULT AUG 01-4303-080-16 11068.10 POPHAM MAIN 6 ASSOC LEGAL CONSULT AUG 01-4303-060-71 --331.40 POPHAM HAIR A ASSOC LEGAL CONSULT AUG 2I-0303-408-00 901.IT POPHAM MAIN 6 ASSOC LEGAL CONSULT AUG 24-4399-407-00 14 OS POPHAM MAIN 6 ASSOC LEGAL CONSULT AUG 99-6399-911-00 .IT A3 POPHAM NARK 6 ASSOC LEGAL CONSULT AUG 2I-4399-412-00 ass 14 POPHAM MARK 6 ASSOC LEGAL CONSULT AUG 94-4399-415-00 63.34 POPHAM NARK ' ASSOC LEGAL CONSULT AUG 14-6399-461-00 TT.11 POPHAM MARK A ASSOC LEGAL CONSULT AUG 91-4399-451-00 as 15 POPHAM MARK 6 ASSOC LEGAL CONSULT AUG 24-4399-19S-00 3.405 TO POPHAM MAIN 6 ASSOC LEGAL CONSULT AUG 0S-4303-139-00 IS.a63.33 . .u-CRt 53 63 FROCK PHOTO $UP PHOTOS 01-4910-174-33 S3 83 . ...-CKt 3.So R C INOENTIFICATIONS OFFICE SUPPLIES 01-4210-069-14 1 00 R C INDENTIFICATtONS PERSONAL EQUIP 01-4021-129-31 Is 50 . ....CK9 S1.00 ORLIN REOEPENNING MAINT SLOG GROUNDS 01-4343-189-31 33 00 ORLIN REOEPENNING MAINT RLOO GROUNDS 01-4343-890-01 90 00 ORLIN REOEPENNING MAINT SLOG GROUNDS 74-4343-290-93 209.00 . ...-eKa 3.S24 00 ROLLING OIL CO GASOLINE 01-1966-000-00 3.Ss. 00 . ...-CKa 36.30 RUFFRIOGG-IOHNSON EQUIP PARTS 01-1232-249-40 R6 30 . ....CMS S 34 ST PAUL GOOK OFFICE SUPPLIES 01-4010-159-31 5.34 . ....CBS 1. 065 00 SENIOR COHN SERVICES .TH OTR SERVICE 01-430S-iOC-al 1.065 00 . CITY OP ORONO CHECK REGISTER 10-2♦-OB PAGE e CK NO- DATE AMOUNT VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NO. INV. R P.O. 0 MESSAGE f ...-CNS 40 10,20/98 242 00 STREICHERS EQUIP PARTS 01-1202-129-01 2q.00 . 0.... ...-CKS 96732 10/20:se TST 92 SUBURBAN TIRE INC EQUIP PARTS 01-1232-129-3I ]5] 92 • IeTT6 I0/20/BB 50.70 THORPE DIST CO BEER PURCH 71-4815-591-94 so TO . r.... ....CNS 10]f2 '0120/98 90 00 TWIN CITIES DICTN By TAPES 01-1210-129-]1 90 00 . ..••. ...-CNE 1691s 10,2018, 40 9t us NEST COMMUN TELEPHONE 01-I]8O-It9-]1 too's 1P/2o/3e IT 50 we WEST CoenuN TELEPHONE 01-13e0-249-42 reels 1R120/33 20.7t us WEST coeeuH DATA PROCESSING 01-1055-069-15 18615 1o.0,S7 to Ts us WEST CONMUN TELEPHONE TE-43E0-519-91 reels 1R/tolss 1s ST US WEST COMMUN DATA PROCESSING T2-4339-549-11 18515 10/ER/33 31.12 us West COMMUN TELEPHONE 73-4320-509-98 1es's 10.eO.e3 21 Ss US WEST COMMUN DATA PROCESSING 73-1393-e69-98 174 .. ....• ...-CKS 1ee1T i0:20/93 51.70 VESSCO INC RAINY WATER PLANT 72-4345-549-91 51 TO . .•.•. ...-CKS Iete0 10,10/89 5,121 S1 WALOOR PUMP MAINT LS 73-1041-509-92 9.114.54 .... ...-CKS Nee 10,20/e9 119 00 WALL STREET JOURNAL SUBSCRIPTION 01-4240-069-IS 119 00 . ...• _ ...-CKS am 10/EO/es 180.00 WARNING LITES INC EQUIP RENTAL 01-1001-919-IE .ee 00 . •..• ...-CKS eeS0 10,20/33 091 75 W MENN RECYCLING CON RECYCLING PROD 62 01-4019-t19-I8 GEMUNIS FINANCIAL SYSTEM 10/BO/BB ACCOUNTING REPORT USER 00 1988 CITY OF ORONO NUMBER OF REPORTS 86 UPDATE DESCRIPTIONS 0 FINANCIAL REPORTS NUMBER OF UPDATES 0 SUMMARY FILE 0 SCHEDULED RUN DTTE 000000 NUMBER OF RECORDS PAYROLL A REPORT DATE 000000 LEVEL 1 950 BENEFIT ACCRUAL LEVEL 2 0 ACTIVITY REPORT 0 ACTIVITY REPORTS LEVEL l 0 CHECK REGISTER D SCHEDULED RUN DATE 102088 LEVEL A D TRIAL BALANCE 0 REPORT DATE 102488 LEVEL 5 24 BALANCE SHEET 0 LEVEL S 0 REVEI.�- STATEMENT 0 PAYROLL POSTING DATES 000000 LEVEL T 0 OPERATIN. ➢TATEMENT 0 000000 LEVEL 8 514 BUDGET WORKSHEETS 0 LEVEL 9 0 CLEAR-CURR-MONTH 0 000000 LEVEL 0 E CITY FILE OPTION 0 000000 _ PROJECT DEPARTMENT K TOTAL I,49B CHART OF ACCOUNTS NO CHECK RECONCILE 0 YEAR TO DATE PERIOD 09 BUDGET RECORDS CREATED 0 PAGE . I `96 CITY OF-ORONO NECK NO. DATE 298901 -10/20/sa 29890E 14,90/89 . 98901 _ __ 10/20/a0 990108 10,20/49 BIHOS 10/20/aa 998906 10/90/49 898906 10/90/88 P8906 10/20,98 f 8l890T 10,20/88 AMOUNT 691 TS 3as. 00 305 00 470.00 470 00 119.20 1t9 20 962.as 862 a5 99.00 99 00 25.96 1T 31 41 26 86 53 3.876 00 3.8T6-00 . 9T.558 09 O.aT2 00 93 98 A.606.56 3.•05 TO 3,740 01 5.633.90 3.318 as T8.953.ST CHECK REGISTER VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION GLEN FRY PLYMOUTN ROOFING INVER HILLS CONNELLY ELECTRONICS SEMINARS INTL GAGNON PRINTING CO GAGNON PRINTING CO GAGNON PRINTING CO GESTONKA CORM 9ERVIC FUND 01 TOTAL FUND 19 TOTAL FUND 15 TOTAL FUND 29 TOTAL FUND 23 TOTAL FUND 72 TOTAL FUND 73 TOTAL FUND T. TOTAL TOTAL SUN PORCH CEILING RAINY SLOGS SCHOOL MAINT WATER PLANT SEMINAR CHESWICK BILLING ENVELOPES BILLING ENVELOPES BILLING ENVELOPES UESTONKA SR CENTER GENERAL FUND IMPROVE 6 EOUIP OUTLAY P BUILONG CAPITAL OUTLAY F PERM IMPROVE REVOLVING F roes IMPROVEMENT FUND WATER OPERATING FUND SEWER OPERATING FUND GOLF COURSE OPERATING 10 10-29-89 PAGE 9 ACCOUNT NO INV 0 P 0 0 M,,,All 79-4343-590-93 01-9343-099-t7 011356-1 N-33 72-9396-S99-91 01-9356-129-31 01-4210-111-33 12-4210-549-91 7I-9210-SG9-92 01-9195-100-21 •.•-f.NS uB-CNS 1999 CITY OF ORONO CHECK N0. SATE MCeele 16/11,68 NCO290 t0/It/Be MCB2le IC/11/e8 MCa296 10/11/69 MC8294 10/II/Be MCB298 10/11/98 MC8298 10/11/BB MCB298 to/11/66 MCa299 14/11/88 HC8296 10/11/90 MC6299 10111/88 MCO299 16/11/8e MCa299 I0/t I/ae MCa299 10/11/68 MCaa99 16/11/08 MCR300 10/11/84 MC0102 10/11/48 • MC4304 10/1,160 MC9104 10/11/66 • MC6105 16/11/00 MC410S 16/11/14 • MC4105 10/11/08 MC067 I6/n/ae • MC039T 10/11/ae MC9007 10/11/a9 MCQOT 10/11/ae MC0347 11/tl/Be MC8001 16/11/ae MCSI47 - - 10/11/8e MC4347 16/11/6e MC0347 10/tl/0e MC6367 11/11/89 4C0007 19/11/a6 4C630T 16/11/8e MC0167 16/11/aP MC63BT 1#111/64 CHECK RECISTSR 09-30-69 PACE o AMOUNT VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION ___ ACCOUNT MO._ INV. 0 PO 0 MESSAGE - 4.50 CML LIFE INS LIFE INS SEPT 41-4151-039-11 MANUAL a.TO CML LIFE INS LIFE INS SEPT MANUAL 1.T0 CML LIFE INS LIFE INS SEPT 01-415E-I99-0I MANUAL 3.60 CML LIFE INS LIFE INS SEPT 41-115E-120-01 MANUAL 9.90 CML LIFE INS LIFE INS SEPT -- — - " 01-4152-199-31 - - - MANUAL 3.60 CML LIFE INS LIFE INS SEPT 01-4159-174-17 MANUAL 6.30 CML LIFE INS LIFF INS SEPT 01-/I5E-149-41 MANUAL .T4 CIE. LIFE INS LIFE INS SEPT 7E-4159-549-91 MANUAL 1.05 CML LIFE INS LIFE INS SEPT 77-4152-569-91 MANUAL .94 CML LIFE INS LIFE INS SEPT 74-4158-594-90 MANUAL ]6.10 14.41 PRUDENTIAL LIFE INS SEPT 01-415E-069-15 MANUAL 24.60 PRUDENTIAL LIFE INS SEPT 01-4112-196-51 MANUAL 37.97 PRUDENTIAL LIFE INS SEPT /1-41SM-129-31 MANUAL 9./0 PRUDENTIAL LIFE INS SEPT 01-415E-174-11 MANUAL 6.00 PRUDENTIAL LIFE INS SEPT 01-415E-149-42 MANUAL 91.55 77.60 LAMES LORENCE REFUND VARIANCE FEE 01-3906-060-00 MANUAL T1.00 ....CMS 500.00 MAIL LEAGUE CITIES COMFENSNCE _ _ 01-<I94-039-12 MANUAL 960.64 . ....CMS 19 IS POSTMASTER POSTAGE 72-4321-549-91 MANUAL 29 01 POGTMASTSR _ _ POSTAGE 7I-4321-S69-92 _ _ MANUAL_ 49 AS 12 00 COMM REV SALES TAX SALES TAX AUG 01-1500-000-00 MANUAL .. 6 00 COMM REV SALES TAX SALES TAX AUG 72-2222-000-00 MANUAL 9.0 00 COMM REV SALES TAX SALES TAX AUG 14-2222-000-00 MANUAL 95B 00 ...-Clla 14 00 IST SANK LANES FICA 9/5 T6 9/16 01-4148-424-11 MANUAL 1.2 01 1ST SANK LAKES FICA 916 To 9/14 01-4140-039-11 MANUAL 219 50 IST DANK LAKES FICA 9/5 TO 9/14 at-4148-169-15 MANUAL 10 69 IS? BANK LAKES FICA 9/5 TO Y/t6 - 01-414E-099-IT MANUAL 25 71 IST BANK LAKES FICA 9/5 TO 1110 01-414E-111-11 MANUAL _ 102 49 IST BANK LAKES FICA 9/1 TO 9/16 01-4141-IIS-11 MANUAL 14 94 1ST BANK LAMES FICA 9/6 TO 9/16 01-414E-12t41 MANUAL 16 11 ISt DANK LAKES FICA 9/5 TO 9/l$ 01-414E-126-31 MANUAL 421 90- 111 BANK LAKES FICA 915 TO 9116 01-4141-174-II MANUAL 421 99 111 DANA LAKES FICA 9/9 TO 9/14 01-4t41-114-II MANUAL 423 90 I6T BANK LAKES FICA 1/5 TO 9/18 /1-042-174-33 MANUAL 4 01 IRT BANK LANES FICA 9/5 TO 9114 01-4140-165-19 MANUAL 106 45 IST BANK LANES FICA 9/5 TO 9/16 61-414E-E49-N MANUAL TO 63 IST BANK LANES FICA 9/5 TO 9110 01-4149-190-61 MANUAL Ilea C OF ORONO CHECK REGISTER 01-00-88 FAG[ 1 CHECK N0. GATE AMOUAT VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NO INV 4 P 0 0 MESSAGE MCS814 10/11/64 293 23 IST SANK LANES FICA 4/22 TO 9/4 01-4142-039-12 MANUAL MC414194 10/11/99 IRS. 74 IST BANK LAKES FICA 6/22 TO 9/4 01-4142-069-I5 MANUAL KC8294 10/11/49 10 89 IST BANK LAKES FICA 9/22 TO 9/4 01-4149-099-17 MANUAL NCOR94 10/II/90 64. 13 IRT BANK LAKES FICA 4/22 TO 9/4 01-4142-111-1. MANUAL MCGR94 10,11/e4 102.99 IS? BANK LAMES FICA 0/22 TO 914 I1-4142-11M MANUAL MCS294 10/11/ae 34.41 IST RANK LAKES FICA 9/22 TO 9/4 01-4142-1' MANUAL MCS294 10/11/44 14.04 1ST BAMM LAKES FICA 0129 TO 9/4 01-4142 MANUAL MCOR14 10/11/e6 44I. 98 IST BANK LAKES FICA 912R TO 9/4 01-414P MANUAL MCS294 10/11/06 ].40 IST BANK LAKES FICA 4199 TO 9/4 01-414. MANUAL MC9294 10/11/49 344. 10 IST BANK LAKES FICA 0/22 TO 9/4 01-414t MANUAL MCBE14 10/II/49 74. 97 10T BANK LAKES FICA 0/22 TO 9/4 01-4142-i MANUAL MC8294 10/11/00 104. a0 IST BANK LAKES FICA $122 TO 9/4 19-4142-S MANUAL MC4294 10/11,98 HI 2S IST BANK LAKES FICA 6/12 TO 9/4 13-4142-5 MANUAL MC6294 10/11,04 ISe 19T RANK LAKES FICA 0/22 TO t14 7I-4142 • MANUAL e,047 "cash 10/11n6 19. 43 PURL IMP MET ASSN PENA a/a TO 1121 01-4111-039- . MANUAL NCa2I5 10,11/e9 9 34 PURL IMP MET ASSN PERA 9/0 TO 6/11 01-4141-040-1- MANUAL MCafte 10/11/66 1.14 PUBI. GP SET ASSN PENA 0/0 TO 9/91 01-4141-059-I4 MANUAL MCRsts 10/11/96 IRT. 41 PURL IMP MET ASSN PERA 4/0 TO 0/81 01-4141-049-15 MANUAL MCe29f to/lilac 0.61 PURL EMP PET ASSN PGA 4/6 TO e/81 01-4141-099-17 MANUAL MCBfti 10/11/90 1,71].5] PURL EMP MET ASSN PERA 0/6 TO a/tl 01-4141-Illgl MANUAL MCBtoa 10/11/00 62.01 IMPL EMP REt ASSN PGA 010 TO 9/21 01-4141-11f-]I MANUAL MC499E 10/11/fe 4f-. 91- PURL EMP BET ASSN PIMA 9/4 TO VSI 01-4141-ilSdi MANUAL MCalli 10/11/82 42. a1 PUBL IMP SET ASSN PERA 9/6 TO 9/21 01-4141-119-]I MANUAL MCOUi 10,11/64 4]].40 EMPL EMP SET ASSN PERA TO 0/91 01-4141-121-11 MANUAL MC92oa 10/II/La 4f1. 40 EMPL ENP BET ASSN PERA 4/6 TO a/21 01-4141-124-31 MANUAL MCa29i 10/11/$$ 09 EMPL EMP BET ASSN PERA $10 0/0 TO 0/91 01-4141-149-42 MANUAL MCa21E 10/11/SS 194. I60 EMPL EMP MET ASSN PERA 8/0 TO 01-4141-a90-42 MANUAL Beasts 10/11/99 E9 04 J4 IMPL EMP SET ASSN PER. 410 TO 6/11 a/fl 41-4141-899-41 MANUAL MCRcoa 10/11/U 19.1i EMPL EMP NET ASSN PGA 9/0 TO 4111 Tf-4141-E49-12 MANUAL MCORIS 10/11/98 II/. If EMPL EMP SET ASSN PERA TO 4121 T]-4141-f94-92 MANUAL MCaf9S 10/II/09 EMPL GP SET ASSN PENA 6/4 0/4 TO 0/fl H-4H1-HO-fI MANUAL 97 ].i91 35 li 14C/H4 '6/11/06 it 94 PURL EMP MET ASSN PENA 9/22 TO 1/4 01-4141-039-12 MANUµ MC9290 10/11/90 21 13 PURL ENO SET ASSN PENA 8/99 TO 914 91-414I-044-13 MANUAL MC9210 It/Il/U IfT 19 PURL GP OCT ASSN PENA 9/22 TO 914 01-4141-611-If RAN MCO194 10/11/69 4 16 PURL ENO NET ARCM PGA 2/29 TO 9/4 91-4141-099-17 MANUAL MC4214 19/11/U I,f44 31 PURL EMP NET ASS.. PGA 4/22 TO 1/4 91-4 U1-III-II MANUAL MCS290 10/il/a0 I,5{U.]1- PUSL EMP RET AGSM REBA 0/E2 TO 914 •1-1 H1-III-JI MANUAL MCSal4 10/11/60 I1E94 31 PUSL EMP ACT ASSN PGA 0/22 TO 9/4 01-4141-111-]1 RAMUµ MCRf/I 14/11/64 S9 t0 PUBL EMP P-T ASSN PERA 4/It TO 914 91-4141-115-11 RAMUV_ MCa290 10/1I/9S 419 11 PUBL EMP SAT ASBM PERA 8/42 TO 9/4 01-4141-191-11 MANUAL MCaf94 10/11/96 444 01 PURL GP MET ASSN PERA e/U TO 9/4 01-4141-I84-31 MAMUµ MCS214 10,11140 Sao 94 PURL EMP MET ASSN PERA S/t2 TO 9.4 91-4141-111-]] MANUAL MCO114 10/1I/09 104.14 AUBL UP MET ASSN PENA e/RE TO 914 01-4141-249-48 "ANNUAL NC9t14 10/11,96 42. 43 PUBL IMP BIT ASSN PENA a/tf TO 9/4 11-4141-t90-41 MSONAL MCast4 10/11/eS 40 49 PURL GP PET ASSN PGA 9/10 TO 114 72-4141-519-91 MANUAL MCO294 10/11/48 9].]3 PUBL EMP MET ASSN PGA 0/82 TO 1/4 /3-4141-541-18 MANUAL MCSR90 10/11/68 17 U PURL ENO SET Aa9N PENA O/tt TD 9/4 TI-411 i11-1] RAMUAL 3,454 90 MCON91 19/11/N 3.441 11 CITY OF UATIATA END OTR WATER 72-4359-949-41 MANUAL 1.449 39 1984 CITY OF ORONO MONTHLY CHECK REGISTER 10/11/08 PACE 1 PAGE 1 CMECN M0. DATE AMOUNT VENDOR 259001 1 1 01/08/09 50.00 A-1 MINNETONKA SENT 256006 1 1 09/09/21 15E.6S ACRO-MINNEGOTA INC 196010 1 1 09,02/96 9 02 AT&T INFO SYSTEM 156014 1 1 09/02/92 92. 09 ALL STAR ELECTRIC &SIDE$ 1 1 09,04/90 E0. 00 AMERICAN NATL BANK 296030 1 1 09/09/09 190 IE AT A • INI SYSTEM ASI031 1 1 09/09/22 11.95 AT & T COMN &SING 1 1 09,04/29 111 00 APACHE PAPER CO 25I041 1 1 01,00/69 >T. 00 ASPLUND COFFEE 256$I1 1 1 09,04/94 15. Be 2LITZ ONE MR FOTO t36071 1 1 09/04/49 S0 00 BDBZIEN\SUE A 2E6021 1 1 09/00/40 71 22 BLACKS PHOTOGRAPHY 256110 1 1 09,04/99 130 10 CHAPIN PUBLISHING 96122 1 1 09/02/N 00.00 CONCEPT MICROFILM n9131 1 1 N/0BSB2 45I 30 COMMERCIAL BLDG MAY &5I150 1 1 09/64/66 91. 05 CYS UNIFORMS 15I197 1 1 09/00/60 96 &T ELVIN SAFETY SUPPLY 256206 1 99/02/2$ t9 29 ENRICH BAKING CO 154818 1 1 09/09/04 II.2S EXPRESS MESBEMCER 0 1125 CITT I OF ORONO CHECK N0. DATE t. MCtl OT 10/II/60 I' MCSIOT 10/11/66 HC2I07 10/1,199 ' MCSIOS 10/11/O HC4I09 10/11/60 MCtl10 I 10/11/69 MCEI11 10/1,104 MC8I11 10/11/96 MC8312 16/1 ves MC8313 19/11/E2 AMOUNT III 34 210 T9 1I2 ES 2,OI0 19 TS 1♦ 79,44 Is 00 'S 00 . SO 00 IIO J0 . is 00 IS 00 TO 00 . 65 00 SS. 00 S 00 S IO 10,611,80 3.819 TT $SS 91 11363 Is I9,IS9.$0 CHECK REGISTER VENDOR ItEM DESCRIPTION IST BANK LANES FICA 9/S TO 9/I4 IST BANK LANE$ FICA 9/S TO 9/I6 IST BANK LANE$ FICA 9/5 TO 9/iS RADISSOM ARROWHEAD GFOA CORP MM $FDA GFOA CORR STATE OF RN SCHOOL OCA INC CONFERENCE OCA INC CONFERENCE AMER LDS: .,JIM CONFERENCE S V COI. ♦:.T CLUB MEETING FUND 01 TOTAL GENERAL FUND FUND TS TOTAL WATER OPERATING FUND FUND T] TOTAL SEWER OPERATING FUND AUND TI TOTAL GOLF COURSE OPERATING eD TOTAL 09-30-80 PAGE I ACCOUNT NO INV S P 0 0 MESSAGE T2-11112-519-91 MANUAL 7I-1112-S49-92 MANUAL 74-1112-S90-9I MANUAL 01-II59-049-IS MANUAL 0I-43SG-069-IS MANUAL 01-QS2-129-]1 IANPAL 01-4JS2 0I1-11 RANVAL 01-IIS2-12•-01 MANUAL 01-4I52-171-II MANUAL 01-I3S9-121-II MANUAL ...-CNs Me" o� -Tu' IV\'uw Lv pc.a( �J1,0 u METROPOLITAN COUNCIL'S 1989 PRIORITY PROJECTS t%A i The Council's proposed 1989 work program and budget includes six priority k�! projects. A brief description of each follows: o Planning for the 21st Century. Anticipate and define future regional issues through an ongoing strategic planning process. Develop and implement a process t^ achieve a multi -year program planning schedule for the Council. Provide assistance to other organizations in the region, especially local governments and regional agencies, to help them with environmental scanning and strategic planning efforts. o Solid Waste Management. Lead the region to establish a solid waste �U�-- system that protects the environment and is economically responsible. f' Adopt a revised regional solid waste management plan providing policy direction for 1990-2010. Provide leadership and a3sistance to counties, cities and private entities in providing the facilities, programs and services necessary to implem_nt the regional plan. Review policies, permits, contracts, ordinances and plans to encourage effective decision- y� t making and system implementation. Prepare thorough environmental reviews proposed facilities and study emerging environmental issues. Work with others in developing compatible solutions to regional and state-wide f solid -raste management needs. �&4, 'j,��_ � , �t Q {,Y`)*Water Quality and Water Resource Management. Maintain water quality a throughout the region. Implement the first year of a five-year nonpoint ,t v source pollution control program starting with the Minnesota River. Identify need for changes in the planning, implementation and regulatory •S1 systems. Assess physical problems and seek implementation of solutions. 1 Continue to develop research -based solutions to the urban runoff pollution E b J0` problem and lake quality problems. Direct regional sewer policy through `~ A the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission implementation plan. Define, through public involvement processes, the purposes for which the water resource is to be managed. Identify shortcomings of existing institutional structures and define the role of the Council. Review watershed plans, environmental assessment worksheets and impact statements, and local comprehensive plans to implement Council policies. t o Transportation. Develnn a balanced transportation system to satisfy the long-term social and economic goals of the region. Support the r Regional Transit Board (RTB) and other agencies in developing new transit strategies to ensure implementation of the Transportation Policy Plan. lj Ensure incorporation of regional values, goals and policies of the regional plan in implementation of the metropolitan highway system. Ensure regional coordination and provide focus for land development issues through { participation in light rail transit plan —Ing with the RTB, regional railroad authorities, local units of government and the private sector. Ry Continue to provide a regional forum for discussion cf .ransportation fLnding strategies to implement the regional plan. Maintain tle transportation forecasting capabilities of the region to better predict future transportation needs and the impacts of changing travel behavior. Participate and provide technical support in special studies affecting the regional transportation system. f� T4( rt- TO: Mayor Grabek Orono Council Members FROM: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrato01 DATE: October 20, 1988 SUBJECT: Orono/Long Lake Discussions The date for the first meeting is Wednesday, October 26, 1988 at 7p.m., Orono School District offices. os ociation of metropolitan municipalities 1� OCT 2 i ges 7, B U L L E iL iN� �' CDuA„L� -� N�k �tV4�j W ok October 19, 1988 ANNUAL LEGISLATIVE POLICY ADOPTION MEETING WHEN: Thursday Evening, November 3, 1988 KICK OFF: 5:45 P.M. WHERE: Mangini's Restaurante' �. 1177 Clarence Street St. Pauls' East Side 'MA'MANGINI DINNER COST: $14.00 Per Person SPOUSES, FRIENDS AND EVERYONE WHO ENJOYS GOOD ITALIAN FOOD ARE WELCUMEI 5:45 P.M. 6:30 P.M. 7:30 P.M. Social Hour Deluxe Buffet Extravaganza Business Mee ing (Sponsored by Juran 6 (featuring 8 salads, (adopt legisiat:ve Moody and assorted pasta dishes, policy program.. Briggs and Morgan, P.A.` chicken, BBQ Ribs, dessert mailed previiusly, and more) *DINNER RESERVATIONS A MUST BY Tuesday, November 13t. Piease call Carul Williams at 227-4008 (Reservations not needed if you attend only the business meeting portion of this event *We would appreciate it very much if the reservations could be channeled through your City Manager/Administrator's office to help provide a more accurate count of reservations. Thanks! Governor Perpich has been invited to speak but has not confirmed as yet. SEE MAP AND BUSINESS MEETING AGENDA vN BACK <>J i>IIIIars+ty :�. :.w cadat A pji,+ ru+llteau'a 55101 (612) 227 4kXA Btsiness Meeting Agenda 1. Call to order - 7:3f. P.M. 2. Introduction of Guests and Announcements. 3. Guest Speaker - Go,ernor Perpiph has been invited but if he is unable to attend, ,:here will be a presentation on the just released controve►sial Airport Adequacy Study Report. 4. Status Report on Prcperty Tax Computer analysis Project - Larry Bakken. 5. Consideration -nd Adoption of Legislative Policies. 6. Legislative Policy Priority Input. T. Other business. 8. Adjournment. W M W LO M MAP (not drawn to scale) Highway 36 Maryland Ave. E--- 2.3m I-94 u park behind restauran MANGINI'S NORTH SOUTH W 31, 9m I L I � t Z MINUTES OP THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 3, 1988 ATTENDANCE 7:00 P.M. The Orono Planning Commission met on the above date with the following members present: Chairman Kelley; Planning Commission members Johnson, Cohen, Hanson and Moos. Planning Commission member Brown arrived at 7:20 p.m. The following represented the City staff: Building and Zoning Administrator Mabusth, Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator Gaffror. and City Recorder Scheffler. Council Representative Edward Callahan, Jr. attended and Councilmember Goetten was also present. i1327 ARNOLD SOSKIN 1100 WILDHURST TRAIL CLASS III PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION PUBLIC HEARING - 7:40 P.M. - 7:55 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were duly noted. The applicant was not present for this matter, however, Mr. Jim Krautkremer was present as a representative for Mr. Soskin. Zoning Administrator Mabusth explained that this matter involved one acre, LR-1B zone, sewered, property. Applicant was proposing a Class III subdivision of 7 acres. Private wells will be used because municipal water is not available. Access to the three lots on the east side will be via Wildhurst Trail; access to the four lots on the west side will be through unimproved Garden Lane that will be constructed at the time the 30 lot subdivision that surrounds the Soskin property is approved. Planning Commission member Johnson asked if the Planning Commission had already reviewed that subdivision. Mabusth replied that there had been a sketch plan review only and the matter would be formally heard at the October 17, 1988, Planning Commissior meeting. Chairman Kelley asked if it would not make more sense to do the entire plan all at once? Mr. Krautkremer explained that the reason for presenting the Soskin proposal now was due to the need for variances due to front yard widths along Wildhurst Trail. The required width is 140' and two of the lots only have 1191. The grades along in the front of those two lots is quite steep. The houses would be situated toward the front of the lots with tuckunder garages. There would be a common access between lots 6 6 7 so there will be only one exit between those two lots. Planning Commission member Hanson asked whether the applicant was requesting a variance for two lots rather than three to replace lots 5, 6 and 7. Mr. Krautkremer stated that he wished to create the three lots as presented. Chairman Kelley clarified that the application was basically straight forward, with the exception of a lot width variance. Mabusth added that Lot 1 would require special consideration. Mr. Krautkremer explained that Lot 1 has a significant drainage ditch that wi l l affect the buildability of that lot. When Garden Lane is 1 MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 3, 1988 ZONING FILE /1327-SOSKIN CONTINUED developed, the drainage outlet will be placed in the ditch coming into the north end of this lot. The ditch has a gradual slope and because of the layout, the storm drainage will be directed away from the southern portion of the ravine. There will be no need for the ditch because any necessary drainage can take place over land. That area could be then be filled in which would provide the requirements for the building envelope on that Lot. Chairman Kelley inquired as to the existence of flowage or conservation easements in the area proposed to be filled. Mabusth stated that there were none so the filling could be done with site grading approval only. Planning Commission member Johnson asked if the ditch would be filled in all the way to the northeast corner of the lot? Mr. Krautkremer explained that it would be filled in so that there would be enough area to build a home in the back. Kelley expressed his concern over where the flowage would go. Mr. Krautkremer indicated that drainage is redirected to the road. Kelley asked if the road would then have curbs. Mr. Krautkremer replied affirmatively. The Cit} w,,uld maintain the road. Planning Commission member Johnson stated that in his opinion there was only one buildable lot between Lots 1 6 2 because of the ditch, unless the entire area was piped with storm sewer. Mr. Krautkremer explained that once the curbs and gutters were installed, there would be no need for the ditch anu it would be entirely filled in. Mabusth added that filling in the ditch would provide a half -acre, contiguous, building envelope. Kelley asked about the increase in drainage that would result from redirecting the drainage. Mabusth stated those concerns would be addressed at the October 17 Planning Commission meeting. Ms. Pamela Wood and Terre Pate, 1131 Wildhurst Trail, asked how the ravine bordering the Soskin property interacted with the large ravine that runs down the north side of their property. Ms. Wood sta-.ed that the portion of the ravine proposed to be filled in cc,nnects with the ravine that runs through her property. Mr. Krautkremer explained that the connecting portion of the ravine wouldstill carry drainage through the ravine within the Soskin property and eventually to l's. Wood's portion of the ravine. Chairman Kelley interjected that this flowage question would need to be addressed before the next Planning Commission meeting. Ms. wood also wanted to know the reason for the 140' frontage. Kelley stated that was a good question. Assistant Planning anJ .'cuing Administrator Gaffron stated that Orono's one acre zoning started in the mid-50's. The 140' standard probably goes back 25-30 years. The specific• reasons for the 140' standard were not known, but past councils o.,viously had been comfortable with it. Ms. Wood also questioned the number of %ariances the City of MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 3, 1988 ZONING FILE i1327-SOSKIN CONTINUED Orono haO previously granted for the 140' setback and asked what criteria was used to grant su, h variance. Ke) ley stated that a Hardship was necessary to grant a variance. Ms. wood asked whether the Planning Commission would prefer a reconfiguration as opposed to granting a variance. Kelley stated that they preferred tc irant subdivisions without any variances, and added that the Sc0,in property was unique because of the slopes. Mabusth stated that redesigning an access road would necessitate granting lot area variances a; opposed to width variances. There is no additional area to cover a road outlot. Ms. Wood believed that there were alternatives to the proposal to fill in the ravine to create the seventh lot. She is very concerned about the possibility of increased runoff on her property. Planning Commission member Cohen stated that he did not want to commit himself to any possible agreements or disagreements that he may have with the proposal. Cohen stated that there was a definite difference between a ditch and a ravine and that would need to be further investigated. Chairman Kelley stated that an engineer would need to study the amount of water running through the ravine/ditch. The City's objective is to protect the current homeowners first, before the subdivision would occur. Mr. Krautkremer understood that the water ran across the road and the engineer was proposing a culvert system that would handle the water. It was moved by Kelley, seconded by Moos, to table this application. Motion, Ayes=6, Nays=G, Motion passed. #1343 EDMUND W.F. RYDELL 135 ORONO ORCHARD ROAD NORTH CLASS I PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION PUBLIC HEARING - 7:S5 P.M. - 8:02 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were duly noted. The applicant was present for this matter and stated that his intention was to subdivide so he could place a portion of his property in his wife's name. He had nc intention of building or selling off the other parcel. Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator Gaffron explained that the existing parcel contained 39.6 acres. T'iere is a wetland area that is 19.2 acres and an existing house which is located at the end of the 1,300' private driveway. Gaff ron indicated where the proposed split would take place. The applicant is not proposing to create an outlot for a road, but rather an easement would be established. There is a potential problem should future development occur in that Mr. Ryde 1 1 may have to share some of the costs to alter Orono Orchard Road. Mr. Rydell questioned why the road would need to be altered. MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 3, 1988 ZONING FILE #1343-RYDELL CONTINUED Gaffron stated that there was a sight distance problem. Mr. Rydell's property extends to the center of Orono Orchard Road. Gaffron had asked Rydell's surveyor to provide a diagram showing the actual location of the road in relation to the corridor that was platted. As a part of the subdivision, the applicant would quit -claim an easement for right-of-way, drainage, and utility purposes. Mr. Rydell stated that he did not understand the ramifications of the quit -claim deed. Chairman Kelley explained that Orono Orchard Road was on Mr. Rydell's property. The City would like Mr. Rydell to grant an easement for that portion of the road so the public would no longer be travelling without formal permission on his property. Gaffron addressed some concerns involved with the potential development of parcel B. There are currently no standards that address setbacks from an easement. Gaffron requested that there be a stipulation of approval that any building on parcel B be required to meet the minimum front yard setback from the edge of the easement. There were no comments from the public regarding this matter and the public hearing was closed. It was moved by Planning Commission member Cohen, seconded by Councilmember Johnson, to recommend approval this application subject to a non-exclusive easement over parcel B, in favor of parcel A. Approval is further subject to a driveway access easement be- ng drafted and submitted to the City so that parcel. A not landlocked. An easement will also be given to the City of Orono over the Orono Orchard Road where it encroaches on parcel B. Any construction on parcel B would be stipulated on the structure meting the minimum front yard setback from the edge of the easement on Orono Orchard Road. Motion, Ayes=6, Nays-0, Mo'-ion passed. i1'131 METROPOLITAN WASTE CONTROL COMMISSION 32110 NORTH SHORE DRIVE CLi,SS II PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION PU.ILIC HEARING 8:04 P.M. - 8:10 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were du'. y noted. Mr. Jim Olson was present as a representative of the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission. Zoning Adminstrator Mabusth explained that the subdivision wag necessary in order for the M.w.C.C. to construct the lift station or pumping station structure. :'ee ownership of the property had to be acquired if the structure was to built. The corcern about the creation and designation of a "lot" is that se, era 1 variances wi 1 1 need to be addressed, such as lot width and lot area. Mabut:th asked Mr. Olson if the designation of MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION METING OCTOBER ?, 1988 ZONING PILE i1331-M.W.C.C. SUBDIVISION CONTINUED "outlet" could be used. Mr. Olson stated that the designation of "outlot" versus "lot" would have no significance to the M.W.C.C. Mabusth explained furl?,er that designation of the lct as an outlot would mean the lot was unbuildable. Chairman Kelley inquired as to what had been done in the case of Orono's other pumping stations. Mabusth did not know but surmised that perhaps they were built on property that the City had acquired at one time. Mabusth was not aware that the City had ever built a structure of this kind to serve as a pumping station. Smaller pump stations have been constructed within utility easements. Mr. Olson confirmed this and added that some were located in public right-of-way for roads. The M.W.C.C. has a policy that they prefer to own the property for lift stations. Planning Commission member Hanson asked what issues would need addressing if the designation of outlet were used? Mabusth stated that those concerns were addressed in her memo. It was moved by Chairman Kelley, seconded by Planning Commission member Hanson, to recommend approval of #1331, and that an outlet designation be used per staff recommendation. Motion, Ayes=6, Nays-0, Motion passed. #1306 METROPOLITAN MASTB CONTROL COMMISSION 3280 NORTH SHORE DRIVE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING The applicant was present for this matter. Zoning Administrator Mabusth showed the Planning C..,mmission what was being proposed and indicated that the M.W.C.C. had complied with all of the requests of the Planning Commission. Ms. Joellen Hurr, Metropolitan Waste Commissioner for *-5e Orono area, stated that she lived close to the proposed site of the lift station. She said that she fought hard to get the proposal approved by the Commission because she did not want anymore raw sewage going into Lakes Minnetonka. She was hopeful that the Planning Commission would a in favor of the building. It was moved by Planning Commission member Cohen, seconded by Planning Commission Hanson, to recommend approval of application 01306, per staff recommendations. Planning Commission member Johnson inquired about the process for obtaining the building permit and whether the permit process would monitor staff's conditions. Mabusth affirmed this. Motion, Ayes-6, Nays-0, :Motion passes'.. 5 MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 3, 1988 !990 WARD FERRELL 3411 WATERTOWN ROAD REFFJU D BACK TO PLANNING COMMISSION FOR FURTHER REVIEW The applicant was present for this matter. Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator Gaffron stated that this matter had been before the Planning Commission back in 1986. Mr. Ferrell owns three separate parcels of property which are 1.C4 acres, .85 acres and 1.01 aawes with an existiny house. z original request was to have a variance to the 2-acne ida.:d so a house coul('. be built on each of the two vacant �s. After their review of this matter in 1986, the Planning Commission indicated that they would not recommend ar--)roval of two houses on the other two parcels. The matter went on to the City Council but was tabled several times and never finalized. The applicant was now requesting to build on one of the two vacant one -acre lots. Chairman Kelley asked why there were no plans, only a letter indicating tho applicant's intent. Mr. Ferrell stated that he would like to build a house on one of the two lots and leave the other one vacant. Kelley stated that he would stand by his previous decision to allow two houses on the entire three acre parcel,, with the middle lot being split and used between the other two lots. Mr. Ferrell stated that it would be :ery costly to rearrange the lot lines. Cohen stated that he was not in favor cf the applicant building even one additional house. Moos concurred with Cohen in that she would like to see the 2-acre minimum upheld. Hanson asked applicant if there was any adjacent land he could acquire. The applicant replied that there was no acquirable land in any direction. Hanson said that he would consider joining the two lots for a total of 1.89 acres. However, there would need to be septic system contingencies placed upon the approval. P=anning Commission member Hanson asked whether certain legal issues would come into play based upon the house being built back in 1958. Gaffron stated that there was no need for a legal opinion in that respect, the City Ordinances were very clear in dealing with Mr. Ferrell's situation. Johnson stated that he would be in favor of Kelley's suggestion to split the middle lot between the other two. It was moved by Chairman Kelley, seconded by Planning Commission member Johnson, to recommend that the 2.90 acreage be divided equally and two building lo+-s be established with the existinq house and one other lot. The variance would be for the lot area in the 2-acre zone. All yar i setbacks and front yard setbacks would have to be met. Mct:or, Ayes-2, Moos, Hanson and Cohen, Nay. Planningi Commission member Hansen asked wh+ther combining the [i MINU'YAS OF THE PLANNING CON14ISSION MEETING OCTOBER 3, 1988 ZONING PILE i990-PERRRLL CONTINUED 1.04 and the .85 lots would meet the City's septic requirements. Gaffron sated that in a rural area a 2-acre minimum would be required. However, from a septic point of view, each of the lots could meet the requirements for primary and alternate septic sites, but there would only be room to build a modest residence and none of the amenities (pools, tennis courts, etc.). It was moved by Planning Commission member Hanson, seconded by Moos, to recommend combining thes.1.04 and .85 acreage for a total of t.89, and grant a variance to build cn that lot. Kelley asked why Hanson favored that proposal rather than splitting a lot between the two lots. Hanson replied that he wanted to keep any new building sites as close to the 2-ac:re minimum as possible. Conen, reiterated his desire to uphold the 2-acre minimum standard. He did not want to open pandora's box. Hanson stated that were it not for the fact that applicant had no acquirable land, he would not be in favor of such a proposal either. Kelley added that there is also history to take into consideration. Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator Gaffron explained that the City has allowed variances for much less than 2 acre parcels in the past, but only in single, separate ownership situations. This case is unique in that the property in question is substandard and is owned by an adjacent property owner. "ity Ordinances prohibited a property owner under such conditions to sell off the property and obtain, a 'wilding permit. Motion, Ayes-3, Johnson and Cohen Nay, Brown abstained. Zoning Administrator questioned Brown's abstention.. Planning Commission member Brown stated his reason to be that he did not get the full benefit of the discussion due to a late arrival. Gaffron apprised Brown of the gist of the application and a recall vote was taken. Motion, Ayes-4, Johnson and Cohen, Nay, Motion passed. 11310 HOWARD EISINGER 3245 WAYZATA BOULEVARD RENEWAL CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT SBCOND REVIEW The applicant was present for this matter, as was Mr. John Gannon of Park Construction. Zoning Administrator Mabusth stated that this matter involved the renewal of a conditional use permit for 100,000 cubic yards of f ill to be obtained from the "394" project and placed on Mr. Eisinger's property. Mabusth stated that the City Engineer had addressed the issue of time involved with grading and seeding. The City Engineer had determined which months would be bes _ fcr seeding. It will be staffs responsibility to call when the seeding and grading should take. place. Mr. Gannon had also written a letter in response to the concerns involved with the amount of trucks and time it would take to haul 100,000 cubic yards of fi 1 1. MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 3, 1988 ZONING FILE i1310-EISINGER CONTINUED Chairman Kelley asked Mr. Gannon if the project would take 5 weeks to complete. Mr. Gannon replied that it would, provided the fill remains available. Kelley also questionned when the project was expected to begin. Mr. Gannon replied it would start sometime in December of January. Kelley asked for confirmation of the 11,000 trucks expected to be necessary for hauling the fill. Mr. Gannon replied that it would take 11,000 tandem trucks. If "belly dumps" were used it would reduce that number �y 30%. Kelley asked to what degree the traffic safety issue had been investigated. Mr. Gannon stated that if there were a flagman on Highway 12, the hauling during the morning rush hour would not be a problem. Kelley mentioned the tact that a neighbor had been killed in that area because of the sun limitinc_ vision. Kelley recommended limiting the movement of the fill during rush hour traffic which would be 6:30 a.m.-8:30 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. Kelley inquired as to how the City, particularly the Police Department, felt about the magnitude of this project. Zoning Administrator Mabusth stated that the Police Department had not been asked to respond to this application. Mabusth inquired as to whether she should elicit feedback from the Police Department. Kelley answered affirmatively. Mabusth asked Mr. Gannon if it were normal procedure for Park Construction to work with local police departments when taking on such a large scale project. Mr. Gannon stated they do coordinate with the police when netcesbary. Mabusth suggested that an Orono Police representative be present at the pre. -construction conference. Planning Commission member Cohen agreed with Kelley's suggestion to limit the hou-s in which the hauling could take place. He also Expressed concern over the school hours. Planning Commission member Moos also expressed her concern with the school busses from the Elementary School. Planning Commission member Hanson clarified the fact that the there were no objections to the land use application. Kelley concurred with that and added that he would Leave the safety aspect up to the Police Department. It was moved by Chairman Kelley, seconded by Planning Commission member Johnson, to approve 01310, subject to the approval of safety standards by the City Engineer and the Police Department, prior to this matter being heard by the City Council. Also that the Police Department be informed of the pre - construction conference. Johnson asked what. input had been received from MN DOT. Mr. Gannon stated that MN DOT would require a permit for safety signage and had restrictions as to what time of the day hauling could take place. Kelley directed Mabusth to inform the Police Department of the bl indinq sun, as d MINUTES Ot THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 3, 1988 ZONING PILE #1310-BISIDGB.R CONTINUED we 11 as the school bus schedu 1 es and ruates Rnd rush hour. Motion, Ayes=5, Nays-0, Motion passed. i 1328 HOMARD B. JOHNSON 1635 i 1675 CONCORDIA STREET SUBDIVISION OF A LOT LINK REARRANGEMENT -CLASS I SECOND REVIBM The applicant was present, as was the new owner of 1635 Concordia Street, Mr. David Eiss. Chairman Kelley read a letter that had been sent by Mr. Thomas Kelly, an Attorney for Mrs. Trainor. The letter indicated that Mis. Trainor supported the proposed subdivision applied for by Mr. Johnson. Kelley stated that the main issue now involved with this application was whether the side setback would be 5' or 10'. Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator Gaffron reiterated Mr. Kel ley's statement regarding a 5' or 10' setback. He reminded the .Planning Commission that the current zoning for this property was LR-lC, half acre district, and that the standard side setback was 101. The 5' that the applicant is proposing improves the current situation. Kelley surmised that this lot line rearrangement was necessary for Mr. Eiss to obtain title insurance. Planning Commission member Hanson inquired as to how much acreage was available. Geffron responded that Tract A was approximately 170,500 s.f., which would be approximately 0 acres. Mr. Fiss stated that he did not understand how the City could "reward" Mrs. Trainor for encroaching on Mr. Johnson's property by giving her an additional 5'. Councilmember Johnson stated that the City was not giving a reward, it was merely trying to conform to the City's standards. The applicant asked why Mrs. Trainor could not be asked to give up 10' of her house. Hanson replied that the Planning commission tried to look upon all applications with common sense. Mr. Johnson stated that he was trying to be neighborly by giving Mrs. Trainor 5', but she was to pay for the survey and attorney's fees. Mrs. Trainor has not paid these fees and Mr. Johnson suggested that she therefore, pay for the additional 5' of land. Hanson stated that those issues were beyond the control of the Planning Commission. Kelley informed Mr. Johnson that going to Court would be another recourse. Planning Commission member Hanson stated that he would like to see the 10' setback standard upheld. Mr. Johnson asked what effect the 10' requirement would have should Mr. Liss want to subdivide that lot. Hanson stated that he could not address that issue without further information being provided. Plann.619 Commission member Cohen stated that someone applied to the City to have this matter heard by the Planning Commission. we 9 MITES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 3, 1988 ZONING FILE 91328-JOHNSON CONTINUED informed mr. Johnson tha* he chose the Planning Commission as a remrd:al source, and now he was not happy with the Planning Commission's decision. Planning Commission member Johnson was sympathetic to Mr. Johnson's situation, but felt that conforming with the 10' standard was more important. Planning Commission member Brown concurred. It was moved by Chairman Kelley, seconded by Planning -ommission member Cohen, to allow the rearrangement of the lot line 10' from the Trainor residence. Mr. F.iss questioned if the 10' was from the lot line or from the Trainor house. Hanson stated that it was from the house. Mr. Fiss stated that l,rs. Tre _nor would then be given 111, not 101. GNffron stated that at one point, the house was one foot over the lo`_ line, rather than being on the lot line. Gaf f ron stated that if try* lot line were changed so that it was 10' from the house, it would be I" from the existii_ . line. Away to alleviate that would tie to p— a jog in the lot line. Chairman Kelley interjected tha-- the Planning Commission's only duty was to determine whether the lot line be 5' or 10' irom the house. Motion, Ayes-6, Nayes-0, Motion passed. i1335 WOODBILL CCWNTkX CLUB 200 WOODBILL ROAD CONDITIONAL USE PEFMIT/VARIANCE PUBLIC; BEARING 8:12 P.M. - e:30 P.M. The Aifidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were c.a l y noted. The applicant's representative, John Winston, was present for this matter, as was Mr. Rick Sathre and Mr. Michael Wood. The topographical survey prepared by Rick Sathre was given to the Planning Commission members prior to the meeting and showed the proposed maintenance structure. Mr. Winston explained that the applicant ;as seeking two approvals, one for a conditional use peror which would allow the constructions of the maintenance fac lity; the second would be approval of a variance for an accessory structure exceeding 1,000 s.f. maximum floor area. The proposed structure has 10,800 s.f. Mr. Winston stated that they worked closely with Mr. Mark Fox, whose residence is adjacent to the golf course. The current proposed site was determined to he one that would least affect Mr. Fox, as well as the existing vegetation. The structure meets all required setbacks. The existing maintenance facility will be removed, which should make the entire are,% more aesthetically appealing. The residential house structure to the s.2uth of the proposed maintenance structure will be vacated prior to construction. The resw vat of the house will occur at the same time the excavation work is to be done. 10 MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION FETING OCTOBER 3, 1988 ZONING PILE i1335-WOODHILL COUNTRY CLUB CONTINUED Ch&irman Kelley stated that his only concerns involved the view point of the adjacent property owners. Mr. Mark Fox, 1230 Woodhill Avenue, stated the applicant had proposed a different plan that place-' the mainentance structure 150' from the corner of his house. revised plan places the proposed structure will be 310' t V from his house. Mr. Fox added that he was pleaned with t compromise that had been reached. His only concern had to d,, ,+ith the location of the fill. A possible berm was discussed, using the fill. Noise may be a problem, but that would be determined as the maintenance structure was used. Mr. Fox asked how many trees would need to be removed from the boulevard. Mr. Sathre stated that they are trying eery hard to remove as few trees as possible. Mr. John McDowell introduced himself as the person who purchased 17 acres of land from Woodhill about a year ago, which is now referred to as Woodhill Ridge. Mr. McDowell stated that he had just sold a portion of that land which abutts with the golf course. He wanted to be assured that the maintenance shed would not affect any new residences being built on that land. Chairman Kelley inquired as to whether the new owners of the property had received notice of this application. Mr. Sathre stated that it was Mr. Fox more than anyone else that would be affected by the shed. The noise and activity generated from the facility would occur on the other side of the shed, away from Woodhill Ridge. Mr. Wood stated that Mr. McDowell's development was kept in mind while they were planning the shed. The nearest house in the Woodhill development would be approximately the same distance from the shed as Mr. Fox's Koine, approximately 350'. Mr. Sathre stated that there is a hill behind the existing house, and the peak of the roof of the shed would be lower than the floor elevation of the house. The hill will be contoured so the top of the t.i 1 1 wi 11 not be taken down. Chairman Kelley asked what would be done with the fill that would be remo•/ed from the hill. Mr. Sathre stated that they would be very receptive to any ieeas. Mr. :vx has been very cooperative and agreeable with the aspect of storing it between his property and the maintenance facility. Mabusth stated that there would be a need for the applicants to obtain a land alteration conditional use permit for the fill. Zoning Administrator Mabusth asked about the doors rf the face 1 ity and whether they facea north. She also asked ill r he: e would be any other doors in the structure. Mr. Winston slated that there would be an access door on the other side. Mr. Satt.r- confirmed this and added that the vehicle doors would be on the north side. Mabusth aske,: ?bout the unused road to the west border and whether the road would be opened during construction. Mr. Sathre stated that he was not aware of any need to open the road. 11 MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 3, 1988 ZONING FILE #1335-NOODHILL COUNTRY CLUB CONTINUED Mrs. Rae Pesek, 1235 Lyman Avenue, expressed her concern desire to nave some kind of screening between her house and the maintenance structure. She also wanted to know if the building slab was going to be higher than the previous shed. Mr. Winston stated that the location of the old shed allowed it to be more visible. The proposed location for the new facility will make it far less visible due to tree lines that will obstruct the view. Planning Commission member Johnson suggested that sight lines/view elevation be prepared before this matter was brought before the City Council that would address Woodhill Ridge and the neighbors to the north as well. Chairman Kelley inquired as to the hardship involved with this application. Mr. Winslow stated that it was necessary to maintain the golf course and to do so requires a facility to .louse maintenance equipment. .he only other option to building such a large facility, is to build several smaller facilities. Planning Commission member Brown asked how many buildings would be demolished and removed. Mr. Sathre responded that the old maintenance shed and the house on the hill would be removed. There were no further comments from the public regarding this matter and the public hearing was closed. It was moved by Planning Commission member Cohen, seconded by Planning Commission member Johnson, to recommend approval of application #1335, based upon the hardship that the proposed structure is necessary tc maintain the golf course. Approval is subject to sight lines being provided to the City Council and continue discussions pertaining to berming with the adjacent property owners. Chairman Kelley, Planning Commission member Moos and Planning Commission member Brown abstained from voting on this matter because they hold a membership to the Woodhill Country Club. Motion, Ayes-3, Nays-0, Motion passed. #1336 LOUIS B. OBERHAUSER 3877 SHORELINE DRIVE VARIANCE PUBLIC HEARING 8:32 P.M. - 8:45 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailinq were dull- noted. The applicant was present for this matter. Assistant Planning and explained that Mr. Oberhauser is 3 properties adjacent to his variance is required is due renovate 2 rental houses that a question were the subject of a and Mr. Ober hauler has decided to City Code. The houses were Zoning Administrator Gaffron as the owner of 4 rental houses on )wn residence. The reason the a to the applicant's request to re or, a single lot. The houses in recent hazardous building action to upgrade the houses to conform built back ir. the 1920's. 12 MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION METING OCTOBER 3, 1988 ZONING FILE f1336-OBERHAUSER CONTINUED Planning Commission member Johnson questioned why this matter was not a non -conforming use. Zoning Administrator Mabusth responded that in a residential zone, residential use is conforming. The houses conform to the p7 oper use, they do not conform to the current standards. Subdivision 4 states that anytime repairs are made to a substandard structure that does not conform to required setbacks or area standards, a variance is required. Chairman Kelley stated that the basic question involved with this application is whether to allow one structure on the lot or two. Planning Commission member Brown asked about the property rights that may exist due to the age of the structures? Kelley replied that the Planning Commission should only determine how this property conformed in a planning sense, and not take the time to ponder the legal ramifications. Brown stated that from a planning view point, the lot was not sufficient for all of the structures. Planning Commission member Johnson concurred with Brown and recommended that the applicant choose which of the tw- buildings lie would like to renovate and raze the other. Mr. Oberhauser suggested having the City of Spring Park annex the land where the houses are located. He said that Orono would have the same probiem with all of the properties from 2405 Dunwoody all the way to the end of that stretch of houses. Ncne of the houses in that area conform to Oron-'s standards. Mr. Oberhauser had spoken to the City of Spring Pai k about annexing that property if the City of Orono would be willing to give it up. Mr. Oberhauser stated that he was in a catch 22 situation in that he either has to repair the structures or be cited for hazardous building and he cannot get a building permit to repair them because the lot is substandard. He stated that the City staff would need to initiate the annexation. Zoning Administrator Mabusth did not believe that either the City of Orono, or Mr. Oberhauser's neighbors would agree with the annexation. Chairman Kelley asked Mr. Oberhauser if he would like this matter tabled until he had time to explore the acquistion by Spring Park. Mr. Oberhauser stated that he could do nothing at this point, so tRbling would be desired. Planning Commission member Cohen suggested the option of tearing down one building and then obtaining the building permit to repair the other. Mr. Oberhauser stated that due to the historic nature of the houses, he did not want to tear eithAr of them down. Planning Commission. member Brown asked about the option of phasing out the other building. The question then arose as to how long the structure could remain and whether any improvements made to the structure would be done with that time frame in mind. Planning Commission member Cohen expressed his opinion that only two options be available. The phase out option would not be practical. Mr. Cberhauser agreed. Planning Commission members Hanson and Mods 13 MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 3, 1988 7ONING FILE #1336-013SRHAUSER CONTINUED were in favor of having only one structure on the lot. There were no comments from the pub) " regarding this matter and the public hearing was closed. It was moved by Chairman Kelley, seconded ty Planning Commission member Johnson, to table application N133C. Motion, Ayes=6, Nays=O, Motion passed. #1337 ROBERT PAIGE 3493 CRYSTAL PLACE VARIANCE PUBLIC HEARING 8:45 P.M. - 8:52 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were duly noted. The applicant was present for this matter. Assistant Planning anA Zoning Administrator Gaffron e::plained that the property in question was located at the corner of Crystal Place and Navarre Avenue. Mr. Paige is seeking a setback variance `Co construct a detached garage in his front yard. The garage would be located 5' from the street lot line of Crystal Place and 10' from the street lot line of Navarre Avenue. Chairman Kelley asked about the designation of the front of the house. Gaffron stated that because the applicant was using Crystal Place as his address, that side of tine house would be considered the front. Gaffron stated that there is a question as to whether the codes require the detached garage to be located behind the existing front line of the house parallel to the side street. Chairman Kelley asked whether there were any neighbors who were present to express their opinions of thin application. There were none. Kelley asked Gaffron if any cor.. :x,<?nce had been received from neighboring properties. Gaffro. ;titt-t ' he had not received any comments from Mr. Paige's neighbor w. 'fit-. Paige stated that he felt embarrassed about proposing s ►i ,i plan. if 30' setback was required. He was not aware of th- !act. He stated that had he known that, he would not have made such a proposal. Mr. Paige stated that he was "stymied". Chairman Kel ley asked Mr. Paige if he would like to come back with a revised plan. Mr. Paige stated that he could not afford another $ 150.00 fee. Kelley told him it would not be necessary to pay any additional fees. Mr. Paige said he would like some advice as to where a feasible location for the garage would be. Planning Commission member Hanson sugqested building the new garage in the location of the old garage. Mr. Paige stated that he could not afford to build in that lccation because of the e;cavation required. Planning Commission member Brown stated that he did not see where there would be a need for a great 14 MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 3, 1988 ZONING FILE ;1337-PAIGE CONTINUED amount of excavation to place the garage in the old garage site. Planning Commission member Cohen concurred with Brown. Hanson stated that anything that projects toward Crystal Place, beyond the average front yard setback, will not be approved. Mr. Paige stated that he did not want +-.i remove any trees from his property. Hanson reiterated f,is opinion that the southwest corner of the property was the best location for the garage. There were no comments from the public regarding this matter and the public hearing was closed. - It was moved by Planning Commission member Cohen, seconded by Planning Commission member Hanson, to table application #1337. Motion, Ayes=6, Nays=0, Motion passed. #1338 DUANE i CONNIE SCHIBILLA 3235 CRYSTAL BAY ROAD VARIANCES PUBLIC HEARING 8:52 P.M - 9:05 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were duly noted. The applicants were present for this matter. Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator Gaffron explained that the applicants were requesting hardcover and accessory structure area variances to construct a new garage to the rear of their property. Access to the garage would be through a driveway that serves approximately 8 houses and is along the railroad right-of-way. The proposed location of the Schibilla garage would conform to the locations of neighboring garages. The Schibillas had a garage that was destroyed in the July, 1987 "Super Storm". The old structure has been removed. The proposed garage would have two stories of 624 s.f. each. Chairman Kelley asked what the actual size of the garage would be. Mrs. Schibilla replied it would be 24' by 26'. If the size of the garage were reduced to 500 s.f. per story, which would not require a variance, the total area would be 20' by 25' or 22' by 22'. Gaffron asked the applicants about the feasibility of putting a half basement under the garage which would allow for the large size of the upper f loor and cut down the f loor area below. Mr. John Nelson, the contractor for the Schibilla's, stated that their house only has half a basement, so the applicants were in need of storage space. Gaff ron added that from a hardcover standpoint, there was not really any reasonable hardcover that could be removed. The applicant was asked whether he intended to retain the gravel parking area, Mr. Schibilla replied that the parking area was not really needed. It would just be a question of whether his guests parked on grass or gravel. Planning Commission member asked if there was any alternative parking 1� MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 3, 1988 ZONING PILE 11338-SCHIBILLA CONTINUED available. Zoning Administrator Mabusth stated that the City would not want people parking on Crystal Bay Road. Gaffron added that there was limited parking area located in the rear access. Planning Commission member Cohen asked for clarification about the 33' easement for public highways at the rear of the property. Gaffron explained the history of the easement and added that there remains a question as to whether the easement was ever actually created or not. A Proceeding Subsequent may be necessary to clear this flaw in the Schibilla's title. Mr. Schibi l la stated that he had been in touch with Minnesota Title to attempt to remedy this problem. They indicated that this easement does not show on either of the adjacent properties. The easement is not continuous and only pertains to the Schibilla property. There were no comments from the public regarding this matter and the public hearing was closed. It was moved by Planning Commission member Cohen, seconded by Planning Commission member Hanson, to recommend approval of the proposed garage location, and hardcover variance, subject to the easement issue being resolved before the building permit for the garage is issued. Mr. Schi lbi l la asked if Cohen could re- word his motion. He was not certain as to the time frame involved with resolving the easement issue. He was granted federal funds because of the storm damage for rebuilding the garage. There was a time limit involved with the availability of those funds. Gaffron and Cohen concurred that the status of the easement would have to be determined before a building permit could be issued. Gaffron inquired as to what structural area the motion recommended. Kelley stated that the motion recommended approving structural area of 12641. The hardship in this matter is the fact that the applicants' previous garage was destroyed in a storm. Planning Cor.�mission member Brown added that the motion should also include language prohibiting the conversion of the extra level of the garage into a dwelling. Kelley added that no additional hardcover could be placed on the property in the future. Motion, Ayes-6, Nays=0, Motion passed. 11339 DAVID LEE 2695 CASCO POINT ROAD AFTER -THE -PACT VARIANCES CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PUBLIC HEARING 9:10 P.M. - 9:37 P.N. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were duly noted. The applicant was present for this matter, as was Mr. James Robin, the applicant's Landscape Architect, and Louis Oberhauser, Mr. Lee's Attorney. 16 MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 3, 1988 ZONING FILE i1339-LEE CONTINUED Zoning Administrator Mabusth explained that this matter involved 3 tiers of retaining walls. The lake level tier begins at a 5' elevation and continues to a 7' elevation on the north side and goes all the way up on the north side to an elevation of 12'6" above lakeshore elevation. On the south side it extends up to a 12' Plevation. There is an 8' wide section of non -spaced wooden stairs. There is a dock that has not yet been connected to the lower lev^1, but will be connected if approval is granted. Chairman Kelley stated that a chronological accounting of this application woula be very helpful.. Mr. Lee state0 that he started removing the old rock back in June. He also started moving dirt at that time. In July he started installing the timbers. On August 15, a stop work order was issued by the City of Orono. Kelley asked Mr. Lee as to the progress of the project at that time. The only thing left to be done was lnsta_ling approximately 20 timbers to tie into the steps. After August 15th, the City directed Mr. Lee to perform some remedial land alterations until the permit for the project could be approved. This included filling in some of the sand that had been shred along the shoreline because it was being washed back into the lake. However, Mr. I.ee exceeded that direction and was issued a citation on August 26th. Mr. Lee performed more work after the citation was issued. Mr. Lee stated that all that involved was a truck load of dirt being dumped where he needed fill. Kelley stated that regardless of the facts involved with this, the project is now done and there is now a 12' wall on the lakeshore. Planning Commission member Johnson asked who performed the work. Mr. Lee stated that he and several high school aged kids did the job. Mr. Lee stated that he was not aware of the fact that he needed a permit to construct the wall. The previous wall fell apart due to erosion. Mr. Oberhauser read several letters that had been written by Mr. Lee's neighbors indicating their support for Mr. I.ee's efforts. Planning Commission member Cohen asked Mr. Oberhauser if Mr. Lee had read the memo from Mr. Robin setting forth his ten recommendations. Zoning Administrator Mabusth stated that Mr. Robin was Mr. Lee's landscaper. Cohen then asked if the City Engineer concurred with Mr. Robin's recommendaticns. Mabusth stated that many of the recommended improvements were confirmed by the City Engineer. Mr. Robin.'s stated that the intention of providing the recommendations was to Allow staff tc see what would be necessary to maximize the impact of such a restoration project. Chairman Kelley stated that he would have a difi,cult time requesting Mr. Lee to tear down the wall. Cohen concurred with this and added that as long as the ten recommendations were met MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 3, 1988 ZONING FILE #1339-LEE CONTINUED and paid for by Mr. Lee, he would have no problem with the application. Planning Commission member Hanson asked about the need to place 12" of clay fill. Mr. Robin stated that 12" of existing soil would be removed and modified so it would better support plant growth. Mr. Robin addressed the issue of the stair width. He stated that the plant materials that he recommended are very dense and will eventually cause the stair to be unusable for the bulk of that 8'. The R' st Ar structure would continue to support steep lakeshore bank. There were no comments from the public regarding this matter and the public hearing was closed. It was moved by Planning Commission member Cohen, seconded by Planning Commission member Moos, to recommend approval of this after -the -fact application, subject to the applicant working with the City to implement the ten steps recommended by Mr. Robin. Hardship in this matter would be the necessity to rebuild the stairs and wall for safety purposes. Planning Commission member Johnson asked if any trees were removed to accomplish this project. Mr. Lee stated that only two dead trees were removed. Johnson asked if Mr. I.ee understood the ramifications of the 0- 75' zone ordinance. Johnson explained that looking from the lake, one would see a 12' wall, which in his opinion, was not aesthetically pleasing. Mr. Lee agreed that presently the wall looked horrible. Mr. Lee stated that within a few years, the wall would be virtually invisible. Planning Commission member Brown stated that there were recommendations of the City Engineer that did not concur with Mr. Robin's recommendations. Mabusth responded that the City Engineer's recommendations were based more on the final actions of Council on similar applications. Planning Commission member Hanson stated that he was trying to envision this matter as though Mr. Lee had come in with this application prior to any work being done. He questioned whether the City Engineer's option 2 would be a more appropriate direction to take. Reducing the stairs from 8' to 4' would be a step toward the City's standards that would not require tearing down the wall. Mr. Robin stated that it would have been possible to conform with that recommendation at the beginning of the vroject, now, however, it would be very difficult to do. He believed that plant materials would be a much more effective way to deal with the visual aspect of the wall. Brown mentioned that the City's normal recommendations for erosion control is a gradual sloping of the bank. Mabusth stated that normally that would be true if the existing soils had not been altered, as was the case now with the Lee property. Mr. Robin stated thet the level terraces -fer more stability at this point than a sloped bank. Kelley bated that the Planning Commission should grant the variances and allow the City Engineer and Mr. Robin to work rut the best method of accomplishing stalility. Motion, Ayes=5, fianson-Nay, Motion passed. 18 MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 3, 1988 #1305 WASHINGTON SCIENTIFIC, INC. 2605 WEST WAYZATA BOULEVARD CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Mr. Joe Pallansch, a representative of Washington Scientific, Inc., was present for this matter. Zoning Administrator Mabusth explained that this matter was tabled pending more hydraulic information and receipt of the final report from the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District resolving the issue of a retention pond. The City Engineer had asked that a retention pond, approximately 1/2 to 3/4 of an acre in size be instilled in the southwest corner of the property. The final resolve of M.C.W.D. review asked that a very minimal retention area be provided at the base of the filled area along the west lot line before it entered the low drainage path alonq the south boundary to the drainage ditch. Chairman Kelley stated that this matter had already been thoroughly examined by the LMCD, the PCA. Planning Commission member Cohen added that Washington Scientific had been very cooperative and had complied with all requests. It was moved by Chairman Kelley, seconded by Planning Commission member Brown, to recommend approval of the conditional use permit for application 01305. Motion, Ayes=6, Nays=0, Motion passed. #1340 WASHINGTON SCIENTIFIC, INC. 2605 WAYZATA BOULEVARD CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PUBLIC HEARING c :40 P.M. •- 9:45 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were duly noted. Mr. Joe Pallansch was present as a representative for Washington Scientific, Inc. Zoning Administrator Mabusth explained that monitoring wells were being located on the property. Mabusth indicated where ;he trench and the hazardous materials were located on the site. The City of Orono and the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission will monitor the flowage into the filtering trench. Chairman Kelley asked how much soil will be displaced on the site? Mr. David Ronnei, the Hydrogeologist with Delta Environmental Consultant3, Tnc., stated that approximately 2,000 yds, total soil will be removed as a result of digging out the trench. Kelley asked where the soil would be placed. Mr. Ronnei stated that about 1/ 2 of the soi 1 wi 11 go back into the trench, and the remainder would be "thin spread" around the trench. Kelley asked if this soil was contaminated-- Mr. Ronnei replied affirmatively and added that the contaminants were lour level. The PCA has approved the thin spreading to allow the contaminants 19 MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 3, 1988 ZONING FILE #1340-WASHINGTON SCIENTIFIC CUP -CONTINUED to be treated. Kelley asked how difficult it would be to haul all of the soil off of the property and bring in clean soil? Mr. Ronnei stated that it would be very difficult to proceed with such a project. The soil would have to be incinerated. Once the soil is incinerated, disposal would still be required. The chemical that is being used to clean the soil is similar to rubbing alcohol and will volotize as soon as it is exposed to the air. Kelley asked how the City felt about this process. Zoning Administrator Mabusth stated that the City had no problem with the proposed process. She had been in contact with the PCA's Hazardous Material Division and Air Quality Division and they will be working on that phase of the application. They in turn will work with the City of Orono. Mabusth stated that she was still awaiting more information from the City Engineer concerning phase two. Mabusth recommended tabling that portion of the project. There were no comments from the public regarding this matter and the public hearing was closed. It was moved by Planning Commission member Brown, seconded by Planning Commission member Moos, to recommend approval of the conditional use permit for land alteration. Motion, Ayes=6, Nays=0, Motion passed. 11341 DANIEL R. VAUGHAN i TODD ZIESMER 3440 BAYSIDE ROAD VARIANCE PUBLIC HEARING 9:46 P.M. - 9:50 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of MAiling were duly noted. Mr. Todd Ziesmer was present for this matter. Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator Gaffron explained that the applicants were seeking a lot width variance to construct a new residence. The property area is approximately 2.3 acres. There was a pre-existing house that was demolished. Applicants are proposing to locate the new house where the old structure stood. The existing lot width is 118' where 200' is required, so applicants would require an 82' variance. Chai-Tan Kelley asked whe*her there was an adequate building envelope. Gaffron replied that it would leave the required 30' side setbacks. Mr. Robert Anderson, a neighbor to the east of applicants' property, stated that he had concern about the house interfering with his view of Stubbs Pay. He had contacted Mr. Ziesmer and discussed this t.uncern. Mr. Ziesmer had indicated that he may be willing to move the house tank 15'. Kelley asked if a lakeshore setback would be a concern. Gaffron responded that this property 0 MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 3, 1988 ZONING FILE t1341-ZIBSMER CONTINUBD was not considered a lakeshore lot. Planning Commission member Hanson inquired about conforming with the front yard setback. Gaffron stated that the width variance was the only requirement involved with this application. Mr. Anderson inquired as to whether the Planning Commission had any sight regulations that would apply in this matter. Kelley responded that the only requirements the Planning Commission could regulate would'be covered under the average lakeshore setback requirements. However, due to the fact that this was not lakeshore property, tiat would not apply. Planning Commission member Brown stated that a conditional use permit, such as the Woodhill Golf Course could regulate sight interference. Mabusth reminded the Planning Commission that specific requirements could be included with a variance as well. Chairman Kelley asked Mr. Ziesmer if he would be willing to comply with the 15' relocation should the Planning Commission make such a recommendation. Mr. Ziesmer stated that the 15' would not make a difference in the view of Mr. Anderson. The exact location of the new residence was shown as it would relate to Mr. Anderson's property. Kelley stated that the 15' would make a difference. There were no comments from the public regarding this matter and the public hearing was closed. It was moved by Planning Commission member Hanson, seconded by Planning Commission member Moos, to recommend approval of this application, per staff recommendations. Motion, Ayes=6, Nays=0, Motion passed. i1342 DAVID i VALERIE PETERSON 1125 NORTH ARM DRIVE VARIANCE PUBLIC HBARING 9:52 P.M. - 9:56 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication. and Certificate of Mailing were duly noted. Mr. Peterson was present for this matter. Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator Gaffron explained that Mr. and Mrs. Peterson were requesting a side setback variance to construct a detached garage. The applicants are propusing to place the garage 1' from the side property line from the southwest corner of the garage. The driveway comes in off of North Arm Drive. There are no hardcover problems, the only problem is the side setback. Gaffron asked Mr. Peterson what his reascns were for placing the garage so close to the lot line. Mr. Peterson responded that the driveway is 150' long and is difficult to rack into or back MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 3, 1988 ZONILG FILE f1342•-PETERS-ON CONTINUED out of. By placing the garage as he is proposing, it would allow a space to turn around. Mr. Peterson stated that his neighbor had written a note of approval on the survey itself. From the northeast corner of the garage to the slope is approximately 14' which would allow enough room to turn around. Mr. Peterson stated that 3' would be possible. Chairman Kelley asked about placing the garage in a different location. Mr. Peterson stated that by doing so, it would cut the property in half and would not fit in with the driveway layout. Kelley said that he had a hard time with just 1' from the property line. Planning Commission member concurred. Gaffron added that the overhang would drop the drip line onto the neighboring property. Planning Commission member Cohen asked if 5' would be possible. Mr. Peterson stated that at 5' he would fall off the driveway. Gaffron stated that the angle of ti,e garage would have to be changed. Mr. Peterson stated that could be done. There were no comments from the public regarding this matter and the public hearing was closed. It was moved by Chairman Kelley, seconded by Planning Commission member Brown, to recommend approval of #1342, for a side yard setback of 51. The hardship being the contour of the lo'. Motion, Ayes-6, Nays-0, Motion passe!. /1344 ROGER RODER 1099 WILLOW DRIVE SOUTH VARIANCE PUBLIC HEARING 9:59 P.M. - 10305 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were duly noted. The applicants were present for this matter. Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator Gaffron explained that the applicants were seeking an accessory structure floor area variance in order to construct a 35' x 33' garages. The garage will be built behind the front line of the house, and is technically less than the 50' setback from the street. There will be storage space above the garage so a front setback variance of 14 1/2' will be necessary. In addition, the upper level would be considered as floor area because it will allow for more than 5' of headroom. Chairman Kelley asked about the size of the footprint.. Gaffron responded that it was 990 s.f. Planning Commission member Cohen pointed out the use of the upper level as being storage and/or office space. Gaffron asked the applicants whether they intended to use the upper level as strictly storage, or as an of f ice. Mr. Roder stated that it would mostly be used 22 MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 3, 1988 ZONING PILE t1344-RODER CONTINUED for storage, but that a desk would probably be placed up there. Kelley asked whether there would be plumbing and insulation. Mr Roder stated there would be no plumbing, but more than likely insulation. Planning Commission member Cohen observed that the proposed garage was as big as the existing house. Mr. Roder said that was one of the reasons for the extra level of the garage. They were in need of more storage area. Chairman Kelley asked the applicants if they were aware of the fact that if the garage were attached to the house, they would not require a variance? Gaffron stated that a variance may still be required for try. 50' front setback, depending upon where the garage was added. Kelley told the applicants that would be a very good alternative and asked if they would like this matter tabled to consider that option? Gaffron reminded the Planning Commission that the applicants would need to ro- :- ign the garage, if attached, tD conform with the 50 foot setback requirements. Kelley stated that should the applicants not conform to that setback, he would have no problem granting a front setback variance. The other Planning Commission members co,:^urred. Kelley stated that they could have this matter heard again on the 17th of October. There were no comments from the public regarding this matter and the public hearing was closed. It was moved by Chairman Kelley, seconded by Planning Commission member Cohen, to table this matter until a later date. Motion, Ayes-6, Nays-0, Motion passed. PLANNING COMMISSION RBPRESENTATIVE It was agreed that Planning Commission membe-, Sarah Mcos, would represent the F tinning Commission at the Cc-ober 24, 1988 City Council Meeting. ADJOURIQ®T The October 3, 1988, Planning commission Meetinq a:?,curr,ec' at 10:05 p.m. LA 1INNETONKA C)NSERVATION DISTRICT REGULAR MEET.NG ikL—L=L OCT 2 QTONKA BAY VILLAGE HALLSeptember 28, 1988 The regular meeting of the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District was— c— 5= to order by Chair Robert Rascop at 7:30 pm, Wednesday, Sep'��iber 28, 1988, Tonka Bay Village Hall. Present: Chair Robert Rascop, vice Chair JoEllen Hurr, Secretary Carl Weisser, Treasurer Mark WestlL Di,-ector,� Marvin Bjorlin, Jar Boswinkel, Albert Foster, Ron Kraemer, John Le Robert Pillsbury, Tom Reese, Robe-t Slocum, Executive Director Eugene Str- , Attorney Charles LeFevere• Absent: Dave Co-.hran, John Malinke; PUBLIC COMMENTS: .terry Rockvam, Rockvam Boat Yards, Inc., Spring Park, requested further Board consideration for extending his deicing permit tc the dock installation at Site 2 immediately east of the original installation. It is Rockvam's intention to use vinyl curtains draped underwater from his docks to prevent the endue water movement thus containing the open water area- The Board expressed interest in the vinyl curtain system. which Rockvam will share his experience for other interested parties. Question was raised of the attornej as to the deicing being expanded in use. The Code restricts lisp in its provi- sion which states "Applications for new de-icing inst�llati'7rs shall, not be received after January 22, 1986•" LeFevere concluded, as i- his November 27, 1987 opinion which stated • • • "The Board will have to dec_.Je whether the EXTENSION of a deicing operation to cover new docks under the facts of this case is a "new deicing installation" so as to be prohibited, or me--eiy an inconsequential charge to an exisitng operation•" Deicing violations were discussed, with a recognition that residential as well as commercial marinas have had them share.of violations,- Open water beyond the fenced area, and f?nces not complete or kept upright have been the typical problem. Staff was asked to document recent experience on deicing violations. The re -consideration of the Rockvo deic.ng request will be taken up at the October 7 Water Structures Committee meeting, Chair Rascop agreed. Duane Marcus, Wayzata resident on Bushaway Road opposite the Wayzata Yacht Club, brought the Board`s attention to the nine foo'_. excess lengt" the Club has allowed its furthest moorings to reach. The executi.e director was advised by Club officer Robert Albright that the mooring chains would be shortef -,d• Marcus does not believe the chains have been shortened. Rascop was satisfied that, given the limitations of measuring with measured lengths of rope from a dock end at 200 feet to a distance of 600 feet would not be unreasonable with a 1-112% error margin. Marcus was present at the time the 609 foot Me4surement wos taken. Marcus also called attention to two 2x4 posts with nails on the shoreline posinq a public safety hazard. The Board agreed those should be removed, having be9n put In to establish the measuring distance for the buoy pldcemOnt accordi'19 to Foster. Lights on sho-e shinino out over the lake were also questioned by Marcus. Rascop noted LMCD monitors lights for creating navigation hazards. Concerning a question on the use the Club outs the adioining island to is a matter for city to review, ►4scuo advised Marcus. There being no f �o- t her questions, or comments, the pue l i c col sgefld-0 wa;5 adjourned at 8:'1S pm. LMCD Board Minutes, 9-28-88, Page 2 MINUTES: Reese brought attention to the 8-24-88 minutes, page 10, Consultant's Contract Agreement, Sub. Part 2.00 A ill to include the addition: "INVOICE BY TASK WILL BE SUBJF:T TO THEEXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S DETAILED REVIEW AND RECOMMENDATION." It was moved by Reese, seconded by Westlund, that the minutes be approved as amended. The motion carried unanimously. Minutes of 5-25-88 were recommended for amendment to clarify the DNR's position on approving or denying dredging applications. DNR Hydrologist Judy Boudreau, speaking to the Board 5-25, took exception to the Board minutes which stated no dredging applications have been denied". Boudreau's letter stated . . . ^oredging applications have been denied and/or limited by the DNR in the past. In addition, :many projects have been discouraged prior to any applications having been received." Reese moved, Foster seconded, to approve the minutes amendment as noted by attachment of the Boudreau correspondence to the minutes file. The motion carried unanimously. COMMUNICATIONS: No communications were reported outside of the planned agenda. REPORTS: Al FEE COMMITTEE STUDY: Chair Hurr noted no further offers were received from the directors to serve on this committee, Foster having so offered. The committee will welcome all directors upon notice of meeting. A2 MCWD OPERATING PLAN REVIEW: In Cochran's absence, no report was made. 81 TREASURER" FINANCIAL CONDITION REPORT: The report as of 8-31-88 was presentee' by Westlund. Financial balance decreased by $51,033 to $197,115, influenced by only minimal levy income for the past month. Notices for the last quarter are out and being paid. There were no questions on the Financial Condition as of 8/31/88. B2 The audit of vouchers for payment was reviewed by Westlund. Three separate billings on legal notices was questioned. It was noted that the Board adopted the policy in January to run legal notice in all three area weekly papers, the LAKE, SAILOR, WAYZATA WEEKLY to maximize public notice on them. It was questioned as to how well read the legal notices are. The official legal paper is the WAYZATA WEEKLY. Some help with news releases on the subjects was suggested. Westlund moved, Reese seconded that the Financial Condition Report and vouchers for payment be approved as presented. The motion carried unani- mously. C1 WATER STRUCTURES 8 ENVIRONMENT: Hurr Moved, Reese seconded to accep' the committee action report of 9-10-88 as presented• The mo�4on carried unanimously. CITY OF MOUND refund request for WSU not used was reviewed by LMCD Dock Inspector Charles Melony. Strommen reported. A records check and spot-check of 7 docks verified boat assignments with dock applications- It was then mutually agreed that the present year's dock registrations would be used for the next year {1989} dock application upon which WSU count and fees would be based, thus eliminating the refund/additional LMCD Board Minutes, 9-28-88, Page ? payment adjustment at the year's close. A proposed procedure for this purpose was provided the Board dated 9-16-88• Strommen added this is in agreement with Parks Director Jim Fackler and Mound City Administra- tor Ed Shukle- It was the Bo6rd's consensus that this procedure be followed, Strommen to confirm in writing to Mound city acministrators• MCWD GRANT APPLICATION ENDORSEMENT: As reported in the Water, Structures action report- a resolution endorsing the Long Lake Non -Point Source Pollution Abatement Project was presented for Board consideraticn• Hurr moved, Westlund seconded the adoption of the Resolution, amending paragraph 1, line two to read "PHASE" instead of "phases" The motion carried unanimously. , C2 LAKE USE: Pillsbury moved, Kraemer seconded, that the action report of 9-10-88 be approved as presented. The motion carried unanimously. WATER PATROL REPORT: Deputy Bill Chandler reviewed the Water Patrol activity as detailed in the Lake Use Committee action report of 9-10• Pillsbury expressed his appreciation on behalf of the Board for the work being done by the Water Patrol. There were no questions. DEPOSIT REFUNDS: especial Event refunds for MN -WI Pro -Am Bass Tourna- ment, Happy Hookers Bass Club, Antique & Classic Boat Parade, and MN Oper, Bass Classics for $100.00 each were reviewed by Pillsbury, having been included in the voucher payments requests, all events having been inspected and resolved as well run without incident. D1 ADVISORY COMMITTEE. Vice Chair Tom Reese reported agency invol -it is expanding. Of the ten agencies, seven are attending regu' amely Freshwater Foundation, Hennepin Country Transportation/Lake _ �ment Divn., Hennepin Parks, Hennepin Conservation District, Met Cc,,,,,( -,I Open Space/Systems Committee MN DNR, MN PCA. Five sub -committees are iow being established to address one or more of the twelve management pl.in priorities. They are: Shoreland Protection, Natural Environment, Public Safety, Lake Access and Use, and Stakeholder Studies. The sub-con.mittee recommendations will be arrived at through consensus, Reese added. Rascop recommended that an LMC_D Board member or two be represented on each of the sub -committees. Directors partit-ipating in the Advisory Committee meetings since March have included Mary Bjorlin, Jan Bo:;winkel, Bert Foster, John Malinka, JoEllen Hurr, Ron Kraemer, John Lewman, Bob Pillsbury, Tom Reese, B Slocum, Carl Weisser and Mark Westlund• A schedule of public meetings .s being prepared for five locations, three at lake communities and two outside the lake area. It appears they will be held in January/February. The project schedule is on target- Revisions occurred in select areas due to the early termination of Lake Use data collection as a result of low water. The public meetings are utilizing the funds saved by Lake Use early termination, some $2,214 value. Legislative grants-in-aid funding is being pursued through the DNR bill as reported earlier. The Legislative Commission on Minnesota Resources declined LMCD's request for $150,000 in matching funds to cover the Comprehensive Management Plan Study as of a recent written advice- D2 EURASIAN WATER MILFOIL TASK FORCE: Reese reported that signs are now being distributed for installation at marinas, public access points. LMCD, Board Minutes, 9-28-88, P. 4 Participants in the Eurasian Water Milfoil Task Force have included the Freshwater Foundation, MN DNR Divn of Waters and Ecological Services*, U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, Suburban Hennepin Parks, and a private aquatic weed treating company, Lake Restoration. Upon a description of the weed and the lake environment in which it grows, Reese suggested that it could cost up to one million dollars annually to combat the weed through chemical and weed harvesting means. Presently residents are known to engage their own lake treating companies, such as Lake Restoration. Cost per acre has been identified at $200. Full shore- line treatment is not permitted to preserve fish habitat. Mapping the weed is being done.through combined efforts of the DNR, Corps of Engineers and Lake Restoration. Funding to assist eventual lake treat- ment programs must come through legislative appropriations which will be time consuming, Reese noted. The Corps of Engineers is determining the extent to which they can support the project through photography, weed mapping, and helping to develop a management strategy based upon studies being done in similar lakes at other parts of the country. Communicating the problem and engaging citizen cooperation as well as enlisting funding support is intended through news releases, brochure development. The lake access signs are the first step now coming in place. It was suggested fishing and sporting organizations would be interested Citizens in attendance at the meeting, namely Jim Bedell, Steve Cabillot and Duane Marcus expressed interest in helping to expand weed treatment. Restrictions on fertilizer use which provides nutrients to weeds is a further consideration in attacking the problem. A model ordinance now in use at Shoreview, MN for some three years controls fertilizer use. A suggestioi '�y Marcus to have LMCD issue boater lake use pe mits was responded to as a DNR responsibility which is not likely to be extended. Upon further encouragement by Reese, Hurr moved, Bjorlin seconded LMCD's involvement in an education and information campaign to develop a fund raiser to combat Eurasian Water Milfoil. The motion carried unanimously. E1 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT: Bookkeeper Sheila Laughlin has completed her six month probationary employment period, and upon the mutual recommendation of former executive director Frank Mixa and the observa- tions of the current executive director, Laughlin's regular part time employment with an increase of $.50/hour to $8.50/hour was recommended. To further assist in administrative staff needs, Strommen further recommended the additional use of a temporary help clerk/typist from salary funds budgeted of approximately $425 above projected needs, combined with a reduction of bookkeeper hours to an average four hours per week. This would allow a temporary clerk/typist an average of eight hours per week through 12/31/88, and given satisfactory experience continue into the 1989 administrative year - Pillsbury moved, Boswinkle seconded that Sheila Laughlin be accepted as regular/permanent part-time with a s•50 hourly rate adjustment to $8.50, effective with ier six-month annivar,sary of Aug 8, 1988, and authoriza- tion be approved to hire a temporary clerk -typist for an average eight hours per week, contingent upon the bookkeeper's hourly adjustment to an average four hours per three-day week. The motion carried unanimously. LMCD, Board Minutes, 9-28-88, P. 5 E1 Strommen noted that phone usage is dictating the eventual necessity of adding a second line, frequent mentions made of the line being busy• This would require new instruments in the $500 to $700 range as well as installation cost of $50-75 and monthly operating cost of an additional 952• This proposal will be re -introduced after the third quarter finances have been tabulated• A priority meetings and exchangas highlight summary was circulated. 7A UNFINISHED BUSINESS: DNR Shoreland Management Rules Draft Review -- a meeting with city managers, planners and planning consultants is set for 7:30 am, Friday, Sep. 30, to offer an open discussion on the above rules draft. LMCD is hosting this meeting at the Wayzata Council chambers, Strommen to facilitate, with DNR representatives, and Dave Arndorfer present. A nine -page summary of the "Statement of Need and Reasonableness"of the rules draft was prepared by the executive director and sent in advance to city representatives and LMCD Board• Following this review and comment, the St. Paul area DNR rules review is set for 1:00 pm and 6:00 pm, Monday, Oct 10. Strommen will represnt LMCD at this meeting. 78 Hurr reported on the Fee Study Committee preparations earlier in the meeting. 7C Professional Fund Raising Service report: A workshop review of this report was recommended to be held following the Water Structures and Environment Committee meeting Saturday, Oct. 8• Attorney LeFevere announced the assignment of Steve Tallen as prosecuting attorney• The opportunity to expand on this assignment follows Tallen having hand!-' some of the earlier prosecutions, LeFevere noted. The Board concurred it Id discuss the assignment in the Oct• 8 workshop review. Secretary Weisser requested the Board review the Mixa settlement as to the individual director's responsibility for authorized payments• It was agreed this would be discussed in an executive session following this meeting. 8 NEW BUSINESS: Nomination of Officers and Election Procedure: Pillsbury moved, Kraemer seconded that the resolution recommended by directors at the Lake Use Committee meeting of 9/10/88, specifying candidates for the LMCD Board officers be recommended for selection by the Board after notice of the candidates is provided memb?r cities• Motion failed with Bjorlin, Foster, Hurr- Lewman, Reese, Weisser and Westlund voting nay {7} and Boswinkel, Kraemer, Pillsbury, Rascop and Slocum voting aye fS)• LeFevere then reviewed the officer/board status, noting that all directors serve until their replacement is designated• Since October is the found- ing date cf LMC), allboard members terms ace renewable the same year in October. Volunteering to serve as officers prior to open nominations were: Mark Westlund, offered to be a candidate for Vice Chair or Treasurer; JoEllen Hirr, expressed interest to serve as Chair: Bob Rascop expressed interest to serve as Chair: Tom Reese, expressed interest to serve as Vice Chair Nominations for Chair were opened from the tloor. Westlund moved, Reese seconded to nominate JoEllen Hurr for chair• Slocum moved, Pillsbury seconded to nominate Bob Rascop for chair• There being no further nominations, LMCD Board of Directors, 9-28-88, P. k Lewman moved, Boswinkel seconded that nominations be closed. The motion carried unanimously. A secret written ballot was taken, with Hurr receiving six votes, Rascop receiving six votes- A second ballet was taken, with Hurr receiving six votes, Rascop receiving six votes- A third ballot was taken, Hurr receiving seven votes, Rascopy receiving five votes. Hurr was declared elected as Chair. Nominations for Vice Chair were opened from the floor. Pillsbury moved, Rascop seconded the nomination of Dave Cochran. Kraemer moved, Hurr seconded the nomination of Mark Westlund. Boswinkel moved, Bjorlin seconded to nominate Tom Reese. Hurr moved, Lewman seconded to close nominations. The motion carried unanimously. It was then agreed in the event of a tie for any of the candidates, the two.tied would be voted for separately and then stand election with the remaining non -tied candidate. A secret written ballot was taken. Reese received six votes, Cochran and Westlund received three votes each. A secret written ballot was then taken for Cochran and Westlund. Westlund received the majority vote. A secret written ballot was then taken for Reese and Westlund. Reese received the majority vote and was declared elected Vice Chair. Nominations for Treasurer were opened from the floor. Hurr moved, Reese seconded the nomination of Mark Westlund. There being no further nominations a unanimous ballot was cast electing Westlund Treasurer. Nominations for Secretary were opened from the floor. Weiss/ moved, Pills- bury seconded the nomination of Jan Boswinkel. Pillsbury moved, Kraemer seconded that nominations be closed and a unanimous ballot be cast for Boswinkel. The motion carried unanimously. EXECUTIVE SESSION: Weisser moved, Kraemer seconded that the Board meet in executive session to discuss the status of Frank Mixa's retirement settlement. The motion carried unanimously - ADJOURNMENT: Reese moved, Foster seconded that the meeting be adjourned at 9:55 pm. The motion carried unanimously. Submitted by: Carl H. Weisser, Secretary Approved by: Robert Rascop, Chairman as ociation of metropolitan municipalities October 12, 1988 B U L TO: AMM MEMBER CITIES FROM: VeAetersot. Executive Director RE: AMM AND METROPOLITAN MAJOR ITEMS 1. MEMBERSHIP POLICY ADOPTION MEETING: THURSDAY EVENING, NOVEMBER 3RD.: We would encourage you to mark your calendars now for this important meeting. The consideration and adoption of the annual AMM legislative program is very important to you as member city officials. The policy program which you adopt at this meeting, determines and directs the staff lobbying efforts for the next year. The policies to be considered at this meeting were mailed last week to your City Manager/Administrator and should be available from him or her if you have not already received them. A detailed meeting notice and program will be forthcoming but it looks to b- entertaining as well as informative. Make plans now to join your friends and associates at Mangini's Italiin 'Restaurante' on Novemher 3rd. and enjoy the hospitality of 'Ma' Mangini on St. Paul's East Side. For those of you involved in re-election campaigns, the delicious food and good company will give you renewed strength and energy for the final four day campaign push! 2. NOMINATIONS WAYTED FOR THE TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE (TAC): The AMM has eight suburban appointees to the TAC and the individual:: who serve must be at, the Department Head Level. i.e. City Engineer, Director of Planning, Director of Community Development, etc. The major function of the TAC is to provide technical assistance and advice to the regional Transportation Advisory Board (TAB) on all facets of regional transportation planning and programs. The TAB is a very valuable instrument for city officials to get their views heard on transportation issues. It meets monthly in the Metropolitan council Offices and most members also serve on at least one subcommittee. The individuals appointed by the AMM Board will serve two-year terms commencing in January of 1989. -1- 183 Lin versitN avenue east, st. tmul. minnesuti tlq101 (61 J) -;600 THE BOARD IS SOLICITING NOMINATIONS VIA THIS BULLETIN. THE NOMINATIONS SHOULD BE IN WRITING AND FORWARDED TO THE AMM OFFICE BY NO LATER THAN OCTOBER 26TH. INCUMBENT MEMBERS WILL BE GIVEN PRIORITY BUT SOME NEW MEMBERS WILL BE APPOINTED SO NOMINATIONS ARE NEEDED FROM ALL PARTS OF THE REGION. 3. PROPERTY TAX COMPUTER ANALYSIS CAPABILITY FOR 1989 - JOINT EFFORT: The AMM Board of Directors at its =eeting on October 6th. voted unaminously to proceed with this project which is being coordinated through the LMC Organization. The response to the letter from AMM President Gary Bastin and MLC President Dick Wedell requesting voluntary contributions from suburban cities to support this effort, is very gratifying. As of the Board meeting, voluntary commitments totaling slightly over $40,000 had been received and several other cities are still considering this matter. Based on those commitments, the Board felt that 40 sufficient funds will be available to meet the funding target of the suburbs and voted to proceed. However, additional funding is still need,:d as the suburb's share will be around $50,000. The LMC coordinating Committee met on Friday, October 7th. and the decision was made to draw up a contract to be signed by the various groups such as the AMM. While a snag could still develop, it appears that a coordinated effort among the various organizations to develop and share a computerized property tax data base will become a reality. THANK YOU FOR YOUR SUPPORT! 4. METROPOLITAN SIGNIFICANCE RULES REVISION: After nearly eight months of concentrated effort by an AMM Task Force under the 1=adership of Mendota Heights, City Administrator Kevin Frazell, the 'battle' is nearly over and 'victory can be declared'. Ttie initial rules draft revision proposed by the Metropolitan Council contained 10 or 11 provisions which were not acceptable to the AMM and its member cities. With two exceptions, all of the AMM concerns were eliminated and even the concern with the two exceptions were somewhat mitigated by formal and informal agreements with the Metropolitan Council. The final public hearing in this matter was held on September 29tn. before Administrative Law Judge, Phyllis Reha and her findings and recommendations will be available by month.5 end. Please contact the AMM Office if you would like a copy of the final AMM position paper which was entered into the 'record' at the before mentioned public hearing. The AMM Task Force members in addition to Cnair Frazell were Bill Barnhart and Floyd B. Olson, Minneapolis, J. Diann Gotten, Orono, Jim Miller, Minnetonka, Geoff Olson, Maplewood, Dave Ornstein, Bloomington, Steve Proeschel and Nancy Frick, St. Paul, Ade Rygg, Crystal and Ryan Schroeder, Robbinsdale. 5. 2ND. ANNUAL (ALMOST) SHANK AND TUMMY GOLF SOCIAL: Mother nature did not cooperate very well (only two rainy days all summer and one had to be on September 28tn!) and the 'Shank' part of this event had to be cancelled. There was one foursome, however, from a city in Washington County that braved the elements and did play 9 holes in spite of the weather. Psychological exams have been ordered for all four and their names and the city name are being omitted to protect the guilty. The 'Tummy' part of this event went on as scheduled in the Brooklyn Park Community Activity Center and after the dinner, Connie Levi, President of the Greater Minneapolis Chamber of Commerce and former House Majority Leader addressed a good turnout of city officials. We do want to thank the City of Brooklyn Park and their officials headed by Mayor Jim Krautkremer for their gracious hospitality. We are only sorry that we could not try out their world class Edinburgh USA Golf Course. Jerry Marshall, Brooklyn Park Councilmember and AMM Board Member who was the official 'host' and Charlie Darth, Intergovernmental Affairs Director who was the 'hands on' event coordinator deserve special mention and thanks. 6. LEGISLATIVE CONTACT PROGRAM UNDERWAY: The Legislative Contact Program under the leadership of AMM Vice President Wait Fehst and Board Member Sharon Klumpp has been enhanced and expanded and is getting 'fired up' for the next session. Melanie Ault, Grac;uate Student at Hamline University, has been hired as the Legislative Intern to coordinate this effort. The first step is for each member city to designate a Legislative Contact Person or to confirm that your last years contact person will again serve in that capacity. A letter wa_ mailed to your city last week making such request. We look for the Contact Program to be a very effective lobbying technique during the 1989 Session. Your help and support is needed to make it work. DISTRIBUTION NOTE: This B.illeti� has been mailed to Mayors, Managers/Administrators and Delegates. Please distribute to other officials in your city as appropriate. 3- MINUTES LAKE MINNETONKA CABLE COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 5:00 EXCELSIOR STUDIO TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 20, 1988 I. CALL TO ORDER Vice Chairman Anderson called the September 20, 1988 meeting to order at 5:00 p.m. .0 w- Directors Present Others Press Tim Adams Holly Hansen Tom Anderson Mary Smith Barb Brancel Shelly Quaas Jim Olds Lesley Hughes -Seamans I1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES MOTION 9.20.88.1,: Olds moved, seconded by Brancel, to approve the minutes of August 16, 1988 as written. Motion carried unanimously. r VTO ti A. OFFICERS Vice Chair Anderson announced that Treasurer Jerry Roehl has moved out of town and that the LMCCC will need to elect a new treasurer. Administrator Hansen reported that she received a Franchise Fee for $28,356.97 and Statement of Gross Revenue from Dowden for the period l/l/88 - 5/31/88. There are a few items which Hansen is questioning and will look into. Hansen would like W.F. Denny to review Dowden's Statement of Revenue ending 5/31/88 in addition to the year ending 12/31/87 in their upcoming financial review of Dowden. MOTION 9,20,88.2; Adams moved, seconded by Brancel, to expand the audit to include the Statement of Gross Revenue for the period l/l/88 - 5/31/88. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION 9.20.88.3: JUST CLAIMS: Olds moved, seconded by Brancel, to approve Just Claims as written on Appendix A. Motion carried unanimously. B. ADMINISTRATOR Hansen informed the Commission that the Long Lake City Council denied the LMCCC budget for 1989. She will be speaking at their October 4th Council meeting to explain the duties and budget of the LMCCC. October is Community Television Month, a few of the items coming up are as follows: October 3 - Open House at the Excelsior Studio 6:00 - 8:00 p.m. October 21 - MACTA Mini Conference $20.00 per person October 22 - NFLCP Workshop October 22 - Slate Awards Presentation Hansen would like a majority of the Commission members to attend the MACTA Mini Conference, she would also like to extend the invitation to the City Managers and to also include Monique pdsaht (LMCCC's Secretary)) Hansen would .like to send Bill Strohm to the NFLCP Work_ p. LMCCC MINUTES September 20, 1988 Page 2 REPORT - CONTINUED MOTION 9.20,88`4: Olds moved, seconded by Hughes -Seamans, to authorize 20 members `o attend the MACTA Mini Conference and 5 members to attend the NFrrD Workshop. Motion carried unanimously. Hansen presented a benefit program to the Commission for LMCCC's part-time employees. Hansen. feels the ?art -time employees are underpaid and a benefit program world give them incentive to stay with LMCCC. The program would consist of Seven (7) 1/2 day paid holidays and one (1) week of paid vacation after 1 year of employment. Both employees are working approximately 20 hours per week. This program will not affect the 1989 budget. MOTION 9,20,88.5: Olds moved, seconded by Hughes -Seamans, to allow seven (7) 1/2 day paid holidays to the part-time employees after a six month probation period, and to authorize one (1) week of vacation after one (1) year of employment (vacation will be based on weekly hours and weeks employed). M-`_ion was discussed. Ac:ams feels that using benefits to compensate for salaries is not right. He feels that if there was a budget error it should not be covered up by addi,,g benefits. Motion carried - 4 Ayes - 1 Nay (Adams). C. TJ'AA Mary Smith of Triax reviewed her monthly report. Net loss is at 3 which is not unusual for this time of the year. Construction for cable will begin this month for the Hamel area. Effective October 1st new rates will go up from $14.95 to $16.95 for Basic Cable, subscribers have been notified in their August and September statements. Triax will launch two new services beginning October 3, they are TNT and the Discovery Channel. Smith reported that Triax is also working on "Bravo" which may become a non -pay service on Basic if Triax can find another program to coordinate it with. Bravo is an evening service only. IV. Nod_ BUSINESS Election of new Treasurer: The Full Commission will elect a Treasurer in November to fill the vacancy of Jerry Roehl. The Executive Committee may elect a Treasurer to fill the vacancy until the Full Commission can meet in November. MOTION 9,20,88.6. Anderson moved, seconded by Adams, to appoint J:m Olds as Treasurer and Lesley Hughes -Seamans as Assistant Treasurer. Motion carried unanimously. V . ADJOU NMEN1' MOTION 9.20�88.7; Olds moved, seconded by Brancel, to adjourn the September 20, 1988 meeting at 5:45 p.m. Motion carried unanimously. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, Shelly Quaas LMCCC JUST CLAIMS 8/17/88 - 9/20/88 CHECK N DATE PAYABLE AMOUNT 1729 8/16 Dora] Hotel $ 333.00 1730 8/16 NATOA 8th Annual Conference 200.00 1731 8/26 Skads Travel Service 240.00 10105 8/31 Holly Hansen 737.34 10106 8/31 Monique Basart 142.23 10107 8/31 William Strohm 247.61 1732 8/31 P.E.R.A. 8;.94 10'n8 9/15 Holly Hansen ,zd.34 10109 9/15 Monique Basart i08 40 10110 9/15 William Strohm 248.96 17" 9/'15 P.E.R.A, g5.94 17?1, 9/15 P.E.R.A. 9.0r, 1735 9/15 Commissioner of Revenue 125.57 1736 9/15 Bank Excelsior 649.38 1737 9/15 U.S. Postm-ister 25.011 1738 9/15 Paychex, Inc. 27.80 1119 9/20 Sayerigan Graphics 68.00 1740 91'20 u.5. West Communications 128.19 1741 9/20 Excelsior Rotary Club 130.00 1742 9/20 Tonka•Printing 170.05 1743 9/20 Audio Visual Wholesalers 42.34 1744 9/20 Wager's Inc. 136.68 1745 9/20 Shelly Quaas 60.00 1746 9/20 Holly Hansen 100.00 1747 9/20 Monique Basart 3.15 1748 9/20 Holly Hansen 26.08 1749 9/20 Holly Hansen 262.23 1750 9/20 W.F. Denny b Co. 2,115.57 TOTAL $;,237.30 BANK EXCELSIOR Beginning Balance $15,560.99 Claims ( 7,237.30) Interest 67.29 Dowden F Fee 5 mos. _,�28 ,_3.�56. 7 ENDING, BALANCE 33S 6 14?.95 STATE CAPITOL CREDIT UNION Balance-', $ 6,349.91 *Does not reflect 3rd qtr. interest C.D.'s ACCOUNT Conferences Cor.; erences Conferences Payroll Payroll Payroll P.E.R.A. Payroll Payroll Payroll P.E.R.A. P E.i .A. Life Mti Taxes 941 Taxes Postage Sect'I. Svcs. Misc. Video Telephone (2 mos.) Memberships Office Supplies Misc. Video Off. Suppl. (contract) Sect'l. Svcs. Conferences (Advance) Mileage Mileage Health Ins. Finc'I. Audit 1987 90 day p 6.75% due 10/8/88 $13,000 180 day a 7.00% due 10/8;88 20,000 i ,LiJ�� 0\ v. MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE SCHOOL BOARD OF ORONO INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 278 _ HELD ON SEPTEMBER 26, 1988 The ►egular meeting of the School Board of Orono Independent School District No. -� 278 was held on Monday, September 26, 1988. Present: Dave McKown John Maresh Thomas Mich Don Anderson Lucie Taylor William Fenholt Absent: Kitty Crosby Jim Franklin UPON MOTION by John Maresh, seconded by Lucie Taylor, the consent agenda was approved as follows: approved the minutes of the September 12, 1988 regular meeting; approved the following variance requests: Anthony Fisher, grade 10, Awuli Fisher, grade 7, and Nicole Fisher, grade 5, to attend the Orono Schools John Murphy, grade 8, Amber Murphy, grade 6, Lindsay MIL!".y, grade 4, and Morgan Murphy, grade 2, tc attend the Orono Schools; approved the following coaches for fall spurts: Al Kreb, assistant foot- ball coach; Steve boylan, assistant football coach; Lowell Seashore, head soccer coach - boys; Fritz Cleveland, assistant soccer coach - boys; Brad Carlson, assistant soccer coach - boys; David Miklethun, assistant soccer coach - boys; Barb Moeller, assistant tennis coach - girls; Amy Luesebrink, head volleyball coach; Annie Adamczak, assistant volleyball coach; Tina Von Wold, assistant volleyball coach; approved the appointment of Lynne C. Bryant as hiq_h school business edu- cation computer clerk; approved the development and distribution of the Annual Report in accordance with the provisions of the P.E.R. law; declared its intention to develop projects which expand and improve the educational programs of the District, and said Board authorized Dr. Thomas B. Mich, Superintendent of Schools or his designee, to execute and file application for and in behalf of the school district, and otherwise to act as its autnorized representative in state and federally funded programs and that the Board declared its intention to comply with all of the requirements set forth in the "Applicant Statement of Assurances"; approved the bills as covered by vouchers 060017 through 060152. Dr. Mich reported that the School District has one National Merit semi-finalist and seven commended scholars and he extended congratulations to each of tnem; that "Back to School Night" is in progress at the high school tonight and that the other schools have completed these events with excellent turnouts and posi- tive comments; that the Task Force on the school Gay schedule has been formed and will hold its first meeting on October 4, that he will be teaching a non- credit exploratory course it Latin at the high school; that the class sizes are as follows: kindergarten - 23, grade 1 - 21, grade 2 - 25, grade 3 - 25, grade 4 - 23, grade 5 - 28.8, grades 6-8 - 24.9; that a half-time teacher is being r,ired for reading and math in order to lower those class sizes; that the NCA visit will take place March 14 - 16 covering the curricular areas of English/Language Arts, Reading, Foreign Language and Physical Education; that the P.E.R. Annual Report will be mailed to residents before October 15; that he wanted the Board to be aware of the Inside The Aquarium article on the aae/appearance of the high school building; that there will be a Board workshop following the October 10 meeting for the purpose of the evaluation of the Superintendent and continued discussion regarding facility needs; that a break- fast with area clergy will be held on October 13 at the Orono Primary School. Bill Fenholt reported that on September 19 Lucie Taylor, Board attorney Tony Leung and he had met with the Orono City Planning Commission regarding the land purchase across Crystal Bay Road. Mr. Fenholt stated that there are still some details to work out but if all goes as expected, tney snould close on December 1. Bill Fenholt reported to the Board on the improvements/adjustments that nave been made in the bus transportation area. He stated that after continual moni- toring and wor►;ing closely with the bus company, he feels tney nave now achieved very close to the most efficient routing system possible with the current school schedule. UPON MOTION by Don Anderson, seconded by Lucie Taylcr, the School Board authorized the call for bids on removal and replacement of underground oil tanks at the Orono Senior High School and Orono Primary School sites. UPON MOTION by Lucie Taylor, seconded by Don Anderson, the School Board directed the Clerk of the Board to certify allowable levies, as calculated by the Minnesota Department of Education, to Hennepin County on or before October 23, 1988. UPON MOTION by John Maresn, seconded by Lucie Taylor, the meeting was adjourned. r i Katherine I P. Crosby, ClerW --.� Approved: Dave MCKown, Chairman 9 U XT a CHURCH OF ST. GEORGE 133 South Bruwn Road Long Lake. M,nrwmta 55356 473-1247 October 5, 1988 Orono City Council 1335 S. Brown Road Orono, MN 55356 Honorable James R. Grabek, On behalf of St. George Catholir Church, we thank you for your "Resolution of Appreciati.ot,' (City Council Resolution #2500) for our annual festival. St. George Catholic Church started the Corn Days festival in the fall of 1971 for the purpose of bringing the community together, and in the years since its inception, it has served as a excellent catalyst for that purr)ose. Our association with the Long Lake Chamber of Commerce fo. the pur.)se of increased community involvement has proven a great par -hip, mutually beneficial to both groups and to the comrruni s a whole. Once again, we thank you for the recognition. It helps us im- measurably to know that our goal of building community in the Orono area is being attained. Sincerely, Rev. Mr. 'Virgil aoll�ngs Deacon ZONING FILE NO. 1346 CITY OF ORONO NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 473-7357 Date of Notice: 10/20/88 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- TO: Einar Hagberg COPIES TO: 740 North Arm Drive Mound, MN 55354 TYPE OF APPLICATION: Variance ------------------------------------------------------------ DATE OF MEETING: 10/17/88 VOTE: 5 For. 0 Against Planning Cos ission recos ends the following: Approval subject to conditions noted below NOTES AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS: Planning Commission recommended approval for the garage without requiring concurrent removals of hardcover, finding that the gravel driveway leading to the lake is hardcover that benefits the City by providing a maintenance access for the municipal sewer, hence should not be included in the hardcover calculations. This decreases the percentages of hardcover to 11.5% in the 0-75' zone, and to 29.5% in the 75-250' zone (or 31.8% when the proposed garage is included). Applicant's next scheduled meeting is confirmed as: City Council Monday, October 24, 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. EiN � - P��-•�s � �-e"� 7� /tl ey'` o 'F-r77V-*r-C-L� 7-c) r� S , , � L CHI �-0M w r1,a� cti ,a S � .1 7'� �'<.-� � r N G Cori r•-• � J s i o nl � D WA t fCrO o 6) 7s-1 C.-i;-G4rv�2 T� - L.A-A7 f C. 960 i- f, , ac) _ 1No To: Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson From: Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator Date: October 13, 1988 Subject: #1346 Einar Hagberg, 740 North Arm Drive - Variance - Public Hearing Application - Hardcover variance to construct a detached storage garage. Zoning District - LR-lB List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Application Exhibit B - Plat Map Exhibit C - Property Owners List Exhibit D - Survey Exhibit E - Staff Hardcover Calculations Pertinent Facts - 1. Applicant is proposing to construct a storage garage near the west end of the property. This garage, of 576 s.f. and one story, is intended merely for storage of lawn equipment, boat, etc. and is not intended to have an apron or a driveway leading to it. 2. Existing hardcover on the property in the 0-75' zone is 18.6%. Existing hardcover in the 75-250' zone is 32.9%. These figures include a graveled driveway area that, while being only partially graveled, provides access to the lake from the high part of the property, and also provides access for maintenance of the City sewer lines which are directly below it. The proposed garage is partially in the 250-500' zone. In the 75-250' zone, the proposed garage adds 480 s.f. of hardcover, which increases that to 35.6%. In the 250-500' zone, hardcover would increase from 30% to 33.2%. Hardcover Survey Existing Proposea 0-75' 2,070 s.f. (18.6%) No Change 75-250' 7,148 s.f. (32.9%) 7,724 s.f. (35.6%) 250-500' 900 s.f. (30%) 996 s.f. (33.2%) 3. There are a few areas of landscape rock over plastic sheeting on the property, which are potentially hardcover areas that could be made non -hardcover as a trade-off for the additional har3 surface with the garage. These areas occur between the house and the lakeshore stairway. 4. Note that the existing boat house was constructed in 1960 and is considered as a non -conforming structure, as is the small shed next to it. Zoning File #1346 October 13, 1988 Page 2 of 2 Discussion - The applicant notes that this storage garage is intended for storage of his lawn care equipment and other miscellaneous items for which he has no other storage room. Although the gravel driveway leading to the lake is only partially graveled, and is only driven on perhaps half a dozen times a year, it is still technically considered hardcover for this review. Staff has not discussed specific hardcover removals with the owner, however, it appears there is enough rock over plastic on the property that removals of the plastic could equal the additional hardcover proposed with the garage, hence there is potential for a result of no increase in hardcover on the property. The garage is located lower than the road, and some drainage is directed toward it. For many years the applicant has had a tile line which outlets next to the gravel drive, perhaps 100' back from the lakeshorp. Although the garage is intended to be over this tile line, there would appear to be no great concern with possible future clogging of that line and if it did clog, water would naturally flow around the back side of the garage and generally follow the property line on down. Staff Recommendation - Given that this garage meets the required 10' side and rear setbacks for a lakeshore lot, staff would recommend approval subject to the condition that as much hardcover be removed as is being added with the new garage, by removing plastic from below 576 s.f. of the existing rock beds. r S � 14 f;:$� CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee $150.00 _ (;50.00 per each additional variance) - Renewal Variance Fee $75.00 - =:;C� (no change from original application) 'tc;y0 . _ .. . After -the -Fact Fees (Double application fee) A i�.'.Vv ----------------------------------------------------------- - .Y Ti 14 �'�ZW1 IL ♦WV.%,. PROPERTY LOCATION ;r`;,i;;-`-.),*,;� 'r WW �7 7%L 1VV♦ V YVY� ,�VL , 1� Site Address `J r'_.; li:�% -+ Property Identification Number (P.I.D. 4-- 2/7-.t 7 413 COrE Please check one - Property abstract or __�L torrens? Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- APPLICANT Phone ( home) 41 %Z - Y NamePhone (work) Address: City: '%7'.t-:�.... '-'I zip: .ti S �1 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- OWNER (if different than applicant) Phone (home) Name Phone (work) Address: City: Zip: Date Property Acquired u:,<.., 41 • 0 )`C (month/year) I-441w1 (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 $��t��% If Describe request in dp+.a`ii:�''(�cc.L f�`-c..Y..e,Er► %rj .,l VARIANCBS REQUIRED Lot Area Lot Width X Hardcover Setback Variances ( Front Side Rear) Other HARDSHIP Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty resulting from strict enforcement of zoning regulations: --------------------------------------------------------------------------- DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code Requirements: _ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- REQUIRED SUBMITTALS ✓1. Completed Application Form 4fT2. Certified Property Owners List of owners within 150' (you must obtain this list from Hennepin Count Department of Finance A-603 Govt Center 348-3271). 04o — /1% — Q1 1 s coo(. 3. ta�e, legal sized envelopes (410) pre -addressed to each of the names on the above list with no return address (use address labels obtained with property owners list). 4. ertificate of survey including hardcover calculations as required. 5. Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing grade are proposed. N . ]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 notifieu 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. Znning 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 c)f this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. Applicant's Signature i L .tit /T c�-t �'+ Dated 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 Date Applicant must have all submittals into11the 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 meet-ngs 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. RUII DATE 09/20/88 HEINEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY I14FCPMATION SYSTEM REPORT NO. PI435401 PROPERTY OWNERS LIST PACE 10 BATCH 005 38 06-117-23 32 0002 PROP ADUR 00405 NORTH ARM OR OWIIER NAME LAKEVIEW GOLF OF MTKA INC TAXPAYER LAKEVIEW GOLF OF MIKA INC NAME/ADDR 855 RED 04K LANE MOUND MN 5536% 38 06-117-23 43 0005 PROP ADDR 00710 NORTH ARM OR 040IER NAME JERRY D OLSON ETAL TAXPAYER JERRY D OLSON NAME/ADDR 710 NO ARM OR MOUND MN 55364 38 06-117-23 43 0008 PROP ADDR 00760 NORTH ART' DR OWNER NAME WALFRID LARSON ETAL TAXPAYER WILLIAM SCHMITT NAME/ADDR 750 NORTH ARM OR MOUND MN 55364 38 06-117-23 43 0003 00700 NORTH ARM OR GREGORY M HARTY GREGORY M HARTY 700 NORTH ARM DR MOUTID MI 55364 38 06-117-23 43 0006 00743 NORTH ARM DR E G E HAGBERG ETAL E G HAGBERG 740 140 ARM OR MOU143 M11 55364 38 06-117-23 43 0009 00770 NORTH APM DR TARRY W JOEL ET Al CARRY W JOEL 770 NORTH ARM RD MUUI10 MH 55364 38 06-117-23 43 0004 00720 NORTH ARM OR MIKE R REJSA MIME R REJSA 72P NORTH ARM DR MOU14D MI 55364 38 06-117-23 43 0001 00750 NORTH ARM OR WILLIAM L SCHMITT W L SCHMITT 750 N ARM OR MOUND MI 55364 TOTAL BATCH 005 00006 I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE RFPRESENTATIJII OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT Of PROPERTY TAXATION, TO THE BEST OF MY K140WLEDGE AND BELIEF. DATE �T I Apr—".i A-T Ali Elc\ S /T1P. AALL GLI• DRS. 2'T14 �N 12:x14 041 "wtY r-"_ Izx14 Try ,L r�DR I o CvofL I -Ksr QW clz .1 lom — � `o 5-1 ------- - -- - - - o T -- \ --- -_ - Z. I' mmlr— (.'xlci 7:,-,1 o4 1 A10& lY6Ncl1 MAW i �7 m w( o e. --- t 0 _ Url --- o ti .nuoe c 4 sr�c Q ZJ.� �' Z� •o Zo'- c" Zo'.p' 2.a'. O'� Z o .� � 2 0 � o' 20 � o � 2 c' o ��GALJE - �'3� 1. ,� -. 1� VAIZco• :�2u CG1'l ISUI WI AKA To WAVE. Zo'-v Ewvt 411AT. Z) WALL Sy 4TlJ11 Tv �L, ZL Gqu(a rc. FCCF1N1SyCD RIBaCo F7.cyCLi WIL4J �G£� 2,aGULaZ1oA�. _4, _ 3� Rao 4+{ TC4-% To gG 24 Z.No6.t 64 Lvf-L--- s,F-iw\ '^glTl,'\ 0 FNeAL- TjJ%uLA_-nou 4) Z4' lry x.E Ll ert JANGL_ To FIRS] G-I I Lj o Al AI..L_ �L NS a.I IATEn `NA.L.!_S S�W►.1.1. Zr+S.iLJ.i,oa Aeou+�� 51-,oP ONL�. <.J L" FAQ ,r�s�Jl�.-�,va ;ra IzoeF ova1Z UuKE-1--TE.p AfLEn�S. STEEL STRUCTURES, INC. 821 NINTH AVENUE S. E. MINNEAPOLIS. MINNESOTA 55414 l;—LLIIL I ''c RNIAIO Ni OATS JOS NO. CNSORS. iY DRAWN ■Y DRAS/1N• NO. ��tlo G4�cic FQaFiro�� S>1DI"4ZI �: FiatAO WALL. 47I o tQ a=t,. -,- �Zx�o 1o�STs 11: oc_ I Zx 4- S'i-vs Fe pay w>�-A- -- • d ra CLcoR w/ Cyr - lo/, u mc.S to C omc-p- , L.--" RM R AQ&A V, c�NT- �� 01V NP- 7'ri P¢Y FaLL ST�QS —Su L i'.:L fZeo1L /6- to /o MESt� tiV L1♦��1J' uw1E2_ P&.-jF,J_-- aErlefC - RI•'',, �I Q 0 cr I �) Z 3 O CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY AND PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR FULLERTON PROPERTIES, INC IN THE SW 1/4 OF SECTION 30 —118— 23 HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA PAINTERS WOODS ' \ f. r( � p '.{doff ' \�..OZ !.]c G3 � lul � � 1 • l Nf �I 3_ ac�L3 Ner \ L 3.�� o � �—ter"� � • _ s , ' i. O 'daNA•,pK dad i ° 16 4! .Y 3 �--�— O 00 is 8 - I t u�w Il•' a.:w r l and r r YrSt or tM1a str, rnnr:rei w r.i •�. .. ,. - _ r. r. nAPM1t • . pR r -_7 � 1 0 w 00 SCALE - I'= 60' DATE 8-16-88.-•°--•— IRON MARKER DATUM U.S.G.S. BENCHMARK EXISTING CONTOURS COFFIN 81 GRONBERG, INC. ENGINEERS, LAND SURVEYORS ANG PLANNERS LONG LAKE, MINNESOTA I_ \ IS l N. Y7 +113 $��"`�T� .�15 ` .�A.'.-}S'j� :L �7 L �.{'� 'raE.t -.�•3 � - - _ _ ' " ��•�='-?4 v' S r 1 +,r.�` I � �'-�; n••4 •.ir'�_ 14�y _ .uu�'%� •�. _ -8 - �. !+� L. !3 L •MSS. l T '�-'a�"• .•. •-c �• - !t tt y .'-ljyj '4 1.. - :`..5„ = MMI . -+c4- c -'-` - r I '�tp v Ja . +�+ac'l� �• i.7ri�7._r.-%� .il�(',• t )) - i .r Im- • l `�� .. f. •� 7+---\\\.., F �, a 2 is -..s• 'fy"� � � 'xa�'�°,s�,..,f�bw:�.�a^,,,,r: `�':' i •, i,�i` �yF`. 1 .�5.��.Er _ y� _,4;i;• �-�•£"- rj J �J �Ky,� s�yf�ri � �3yµ„ +' 1 ��'_ �,... - . ai y, 1 _ a� .+a-,i 3 � t..� x.'r- x 1� c � -_ _•� �r ,�•a✓,s,�- _ � `'±-• _ 7`r t7t.�'. 'w•g�:d."`t�.�r ' ,�I � 14' ..-r sit �- 1`-34. p� �e :,a+KYy _:;v�� t^�fi � 'y�• y r;.�. i "r. rI ' r. Yv7'rp 'iig�'v�< :ems •� - ;?fti. � - -.!' 4 , _ sz 'U2c'S'`ani:f-r�� ,s I] wj� /�/� L /f �'�z •,�p�lo�m2iY'�-.- o rx ` _ { s - 44, • L v" 3` rrt'•. �. .'��: • i - re ` sx -' K-.^�r=F �, r r" �•0' { M a 3b! m •s�i.a •Ir^ re S ! ...+t,� rr ?• t 306t�r '-'.` .., o ��•�+..�� , r ` 1. �' �� y 3•.a; �"1 'T a �; .C,g, �-4r . a,4 •-r•�• p- .«F�.'T'rr» - - .F ., 'a .:�y„%5•'r�'^t4.' .f—^ .-Sf-'T� -,° .lL l� "`^f �: `'(+Y' Syr'.••__ r a J� ,. ¢sr f4 � � NZt f L4. lilt" �. 4 •. -:_ '.., „ •.� / �- r 'r v' t -r s' .7.tA< ^�4` L r t1 '%i' - 1 .i0 � 84 t CR - :Y � I � : � G -- � ... _ / � .•1;e•SlS1C y[j ��tl :.7�'`�.p4� �y � *--'�4 � •�_ { --••'.,"°:ai — . _ .�-y Cta�"k*.C� _ ZLO GCS:, i „sr�•,,,y„ - _ r� + -�%. - Y v=r '4•+ 33_ y F'+v}'t X - S. -_" bl •s'7 _. •/ i,� - ; :j; �t co- "`x-: .-'=`y�C.`,.e3�'+. 3c a.€r�% � � �• J �� i.,F,�. t �� -%:v� r 's -� h /1-�ii�i.: `v • `�� - :�% - i - - S C�.'i is � _ � _ •+(1FS _ Piii" .�.. '�� p� "bs � r� �Clr � t ti� �+� x s �•a - .Z! i � pi �! .f•` � � ' h'Y � �rS h {- y,F Y� J- 4 Y� �+ ,.i y '! _� ��.�y�..T -?ED ►[AT. rcr ' i :+.Z �i•♦ _ q,•a"'/i:F3 � - j �� C�.., - - 1 '..,X !•`i- {t .� �,r,�i Y"sK. I •p•'F .�E.. Meoggn. }^ -u. 3}': U. y f-•�..�+,. � - 'ate •�- _.,.�� i � .r rs' . -� �,G-ta COL ^'S►' �.: i- - +, ° - ;. .G y�'� a ` #. .�a;� y�g- - ��• Y- -•-ye S = .,sue•. _ i. -ACREA ;1.�•i'.+}' ♦ 1•.7 . .THE • RS . -+f; :. f. .t -� . ,4�,�ry "�R7 � � r'• 2� � 16 �,`.e3F�L t - .j� T ��.-'7y�,�' P• ;F. ^ -; S N U4 _ _ C..: 4 �..: •/_ .°J AMTNb(Tt AN W- 9W INE_�SE�- 1/N' .SW .•I• �..' SE 472 SJ40.I041 I$ <00 396 40.31 I t 4048' 21' za LJ, '.�•a...k, So' 1aP Vie.) 2x6 x la — RrJu-j s Nxy,<r.a. tt,bs 5.1y...i n'- Z-ZXkjv-7,-J VX,W4 t. —4 61—I j 6X1D R<J,,j 2,(VID 7...J 2x 6XIO RrJw., j }30 2.(6 QKiw.0 S)r�s �1J14 RrJ _J �O 00 z- V1 4 �o �J zq,t, h'o sAr o?o q ads/l �• 4�f%' O.is, 31�•;•f! ihs�w�� AO /repteeb Y pREy 2 ry or sea cer �' tia TIP 69 y9'� ✓ F �FrCNt{kgLt n of rh F F q S7 a 2g r{ r�i oc 417 J eFgCI�, S qp� 4qc ��s�isr'�S•s�'r G 3 c11merytrnortall hd etr0!✓ TVI'Rx C/�e rUe , `RCNBEkC to h W/iaryy �t o4e r hPLZCf ore f c S I�y� her crye 6U� 1 F es r , 1 pdj r vemehc Ir ,fi od S n, ` s or •, hnecr tt.Ueyors ..,, r3 6 plane s3 ark er M.idiey�,ito s� 0-75� ca«est{�e oEc« sr.Irrs h'la S'S. SL S Rau -Cs�K ! ' — — — .. S W-d Witt A.w EN.t�.t � .. _... jro�tSf 514 S O..ks w? L°kw M:wnetwnk j� •ry . r •jlGwrptLr+9 A&eL —ADt41 S CS �. /SgpvJN% W)L-1s PO-" .!tl'/ rt' !f 11w� i, ! -. boo pCPaTi� RcDDITfoN P' c 12A ,,: 1 � qo � , ��7•.,! ail < 4• h > f61e: e',..r../w/i ......I ti0 . 0.3 - 2.0 4.5 31 /(&, 1 ♦ _/S' 7Sv0'N�TI Ils° • b B' 1S. r7 /lsu ! Jr F. 2s r 7. ....� /:�• / e 1020 !r{ n g0q 1 L. West A.•. Vock �•s; Loh.zt- -70 M.e ete.,ra f 16' 511EL us THICEE a 3'0'� m SE/1sPoRc# i L NIGH 2-zxy rri h v r ow —sJUwr1 y6 DOOR N JL- Bii16YNDLWS r fl _MoNvRAY cross- ' : LAgWRs •J88L OL/ AETi►/I. FOOL �h � _.pY377J.tLAiiIN �. �. \ M tEV n \ V �37yrlf 3l r�l�-J7�'y REF SW4E ,E s _ L� C{,05ET /O' � fAM /2M j DECifG I ;o I � Eivney T 6 /,fDOOSEI /JDD/T/cW R)RDYHOME I97S i9sf.P..vESI PT zo- A 1, J rJ 1 O REF 711-, c CLOSET 00 86 ,Ar ti koe Poop ./NE L.- �n 'PURDY -0. 1609 ;B-k, 5 K� Scale 1" = 20' Date 7-5-88 o Iron marker - -9�--- : Existing contour i7L J Existing aIevut ion (7j's) Elevation un 7-8-95 Topographic Survey for Gerald R'. %Ielson in Tract A, R.L.S. No. 565 Hennepin County, %Iinnesota # 4 - C 1 r E - i ti n � n COFFIN R GR09I5li RG, INC. Engineers, Laud 5u:-- cor:: Long Lake, Dli nn.•.0 to I P jLq Topographic Survey for Gerald R'. Nelson, HTract565 e C R.L.S. No. ota �. Hennepin County, Minnesota � % � � � � 1 Scale 1" = 20 Date 7-5-88 a Iron marker - -f"-- : Existing contour C^a,1i.J Existing elevation (vii.r) Elevation un 7-8-q5 COFFIN s GRON111'N(. 1%C. \Engineers. Lun' `n::, : "r, Long Lake, N n. -"I.I C I T I Z E N S A L E R T T O . �A 9 E U R A S I A N W A T E R M I L F 0 I i. Ce[ acquainted with this new dominant aquatic weed. Your lake area may already be its new home. Ilow can you tell if your lake area has Eura- ,isn water milfoil? You may lc k for: * Surface evidence of weed bud tips in ! maturing weed beds (see illustration). * Weed stems distinctively pink. �y * Closely spaced leaflets, 14-16 pairs. * Four symetrical leaflet groupings per position. * Dense multiple stem growth, 8-12 per plant grouping. * Mats of extended horizontal water surface growth. * Positive identification can be confirmed by calling the DNR 612/296-2835. . i9111 ' As a concerned citizen, your action now can help control and prevent the spread of this prolific weed. As a lake resident, please . . . * Examine lake frontage for Eurasian water milfoil. * Where identified, remove mechanically or by hand. One-half of lake frontage up to 50'x 50', not to exceed 2,500 sq ft, to include a boat channel not to exceed 15' in width extending to open water, may be maintained without DNR permit by hand raking or power -operated cutter removal. See DNR Commissioner's Order 2210 for complete rules on mechanical or chemical treatment. * DiapOse of weeds in an upland area, away from lake; use as compost. 3. * Encourage neighbors to examine [heir lake frontages. f� * Form neighborhood groups to treat uniformly. Advise LMCD 4.. \ of plans to apply for treatment. U * Engage professional used -control service to mechanically or chemically treat weed beds with proper DNR permit approval (list available through LMCD). * Avoid using fertilizers on lake frontage lawns. Keep fer- tilizers off hard surfaces which drain to lake. * Remove all weeds from your boat after each use, and when leaving the lake, remove weeds from trailer. Always dispose of weeds away from the lake. -,-,� ,hy all this concern for Eurasian water milfoil? At present - it to in only a few Minnesota lakes, including Lake Minne- L touka. It is an abundant growth aquatic weed which inter- feres with: i. - * Water recreation activities and pleasure boating. * Fishing and fish habitat. * Wlldllfe habitat. It also fosters . . . * Mosquito breeding in its dense vegetative mats. * Rapid growth through spread of cuttings. Who can you contact for more information, report weed conditions? Lake Minnetonka Conservation District (LMCD), 402 E. Lake St., Wayzata, MN 55391 612/473-7033 11'fjhVSter Tomdat1011, 2500 Shadywood Rd., Box 90, Navarre, MN 55392, 612/413.7033 MM Department of Natural Resource. (IfMR), Water Resources, 100 Lafayetta Rd., Box 25, St. Paul, MN 5515 612/296-2835 WOO DIHILL, --------------- --------- ---- -------------- -------- 1p ------ (C-V ........... ----------- - -------_-------- ....... .......... ---------------------------------- % X - --------------- -- ---------- \ •�\ . -- --------- ---------- % - x ----------- - ---------- ---------- --- -_----------- ------------- ........................ . ----------- .......... TOPOGRAPHIC MAP o SATHRE-BERGOUIST, INC. prepared for: 106 SOUTH BROADWAY - WAYZATA. MN. 553111I • 1000 WOODHILL COUNTRY CLUB oRoNO ol D.- 0 'jO5 P oRcN . I W6bCtHIL 1 \� r m' n 0 n „I 41111, EKISTING CONTOURS `\ AVE E—� \L oD ART r, `TAD R C. AND 1 EkIST��y` ORIyEN,4�h` � !1�-rE'EnP _1 �Ery� A u j`t I IEREOY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN ON SPECIFICATION WAS PREPARED By WE OR UIDFN M DIPELT SUPERYI IOx AID LINT I AN A DULY REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL �•' -ENGIIE U ER TIE L F STATE OF NINNESOTA, \.• / a DATE 8 PEG, f,.I.313 mosomEWA I INCH - 30 FEET C"�Ia4f 0 1� L@AL DESCRIPTION '„» .R.c—��cn. Porm.vc m,.rc.r eL s«c,a„ P 1 R.Lc.S.�aN0V159E. IIOOLYIRILI, RIDGE �FaaVHCOD PLACC,C fY• ---L�1--�tI 41L�LLI ISED FACILITY` rt, saoc + fr;; •.• V IL L M J U M ui U V Z J w c J_ gp� O `I 0. GRG /DRN RS 9- 2b '88 9iso-z �8 • ..39�4� CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY for John Theobald in Lots 4, 5 and 6, Ilighwood Lake Minnetonka O� Hennepin County, Minnesota 1 V V'•t \�^^. \J co�NTY \\ 0040 r �9lkwA.� WCfL ., Y�/wi eAxAt•E i/i• �> I "+rs. .-NerJllerly /.:rc a{Ae! V 25! S2'•3L9r` ` 'O•�_ -•'•NerfAta,t lrro- IF „., r ! - • fir: ' ' ``'4n NetncoveR inJFoeA*0770.v Vie ` o J,J LD% 0-71' 7,ft .+.{i. t Stsr..in i `�� J "� +,''•/rr••:/+ 1 7f=.... /9. /7o+i k. S. L.OeO .AA.! 71-3 a6 y - e \ \ J 1 M ej 1 hereby certify that this is a true and ,^orrect representation of a survey of the boundaries of that part of Lot 4 lying 0.,5 Westerly of a line running from a point on f the Northerly line of Lot 4, distant 30.5 feet Westerly from the Northeast corner thereof to the Southwest corner of Lot 4, and all of Lots w 5 and 6, Ilighwood Lake Minnetonka, and an existing house, garage and hardcover thereon. It does not purport to show any other improvements or encroachments. For purposes of tr'is survey ! the ',uuthwesterly corner of said lot 4"has been assumed to be a point on the Westerly line l N frrr of said lot distant 220 feet Southerly from the Northwesterly corner of said lot, and which point s"ems to fit existing lines Of occupation Mi/1iN �N, and old iron markers set previously by other surveyors. oN�q a COFFIN & GRONBERP INC. ar ron u erg L Ic• ` Engineers, Land Surveyors and Planners N• 1 Scale 1" = 30' Date 7-6-88 o Iron Marker 'b O G 0' to I CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY FOR Einar Hagberg of Lot 4, Auditors Subdivision No. 362 Hennepin County, Minnesota p.,,r Grtw Nowee use Pcr. P4 waeol I o qr' niw ,yAt tero+f* war- +r•=7v.f .I srI••..er s,.w rpN.t - fe. q.iG.t le.. lL l+�a.arir. 3' n J `4 !o - SfW jA . eQ 1 � �• \ \ �,e `I 1 a \ m � Q 4. n D \ IY R,.X �,o p,�.r✓' � tea./ i 1 1 hereby certify that this is a true and correct representation of a survey of the boundaries of Lot 4, Auditor's Subdivision No. 362, 1 according to existing monumentation for said Auditor's Subdivision, and of all existing buildings, hardcover, and a proposed storage garage thereon. It does not purport to show any other improvements or encroachments. COFFIN L GRONBERG, INC. t Scale: 1" = 301 -4, Date : 9-8-88 o: Iron Par 'ker� n ^ c. o. ITS 1 ' Engineers, Land Surveyors, Planners R Long Lake, Minnesota s \ F `150 CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY FOR Einar Hagberg of Lot 4, Auditors Subdivision No. 362 Hennepin County, Minnesota �+wr Area I/,sfV—" Per. sr'-anr• ., fw V.A. t � 7/ee �a - r 3L7% via:,rN.wrr- ars•.n°r fi.t `41� - �% \ 2 a :•` 'F M'O � \ Fi 0 JL .6 l R.'K rf,yo p�.Y✓ � �ffi \ �1 1F.1 • �fl U^ J l �•_�•� ' - 1 hereby certify that this is a true and correct representation of a survey of the boundaries of Lot 4, Auditor's Subdivision No. 362, according to existing monumentation for said Auditor's Subdivision, and of all existing buildings, hardcover, and a proposed storage garage thoraon. It does not purp.irt to show any other improvements or encroac'lments. COFFIN L GRONBERG, INC. Scale: - 30' �,� 4/ .�—„�f�.... Date 9-8-88 l V ar ron erg n. lc.—Ro 14/bb 0: Iron Marker Engineers, Land Surveyors, Planners Long Lake, Minnesota l;'