The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutProject PacketCITY OF ORONO 2750 KELLEY PARKWAY ORONO, MN 55356- PERMIT NO.: 2010-00468 DATE ISSUED: 06/14/2010 ADDRESS PIN LEGALDESC (952) 249-4600 FAX: (952) 249-4616 : 1635 BORNS POINT RD : 17-117-23-11-0006 : REG. LAND SURVEY NO. 0565 : LOT 000 BLOCK 000 PERMIT TYPE : ESCROW FEE -OTHER PROPERTY TYPE : RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION TYPE : ESCROW FEE -OTHER NOTE: THIS ESCROW PAYMENT OF $2500.00 WAS PAID FOR ON 6/17/2009 FOR ZONING APPLICATION 09-34 17 ENTERED INTO PERMIT WORKS ON 6/14/2010 APPLICANT MOSELEY, STEPHEN & SUSAN 1635 BORNS PT RD WAYZATA, MN 55391- OWNER MOSELEY, STEPHEN & SUSAN 1635 BORNS PT RD WAYZATA, MN 55391- AGREEMENT AND SWORN STATEMENT The work fo r which this permit is issued shall be performed according to the approved plans and specifications, app li cable City approvals, and the State Building Code. This permit is for only the work described and does not grant permission for additional or related work wh ich requires separate permits. All provisions oflaws a nd ordinances governing this type of work shall be compied with whether or not specified herein . Thi s permit will expire and become null and void if construction authorized is not commenced within 180 days of the date of issuance, or if construction is suspended for a period of 180 days at any time after work has commenced. The app licant is re sponsible for assu rin g all required inspections are requested in conformance with the State Building Code. This permit may be revoked at an y time for due cause. Applicant Permitee Signature Date ESCROW FEE -OTHER TOTAL Issued By Signature SEP ARA TE PERMITS REQUIRED FOR WORK OTHER THAN DESCRIBED ABOVE. Date 2,500.00 2,500 .00 Date Item Description: 09-3417, Stephan & Susan Moseley, 1635 Sohns Point Road, Variances Application Summary: The owners request average lakeshore setback and lakeshore setback variances to construct additions and add a half-story to the existing house. The request also includes hardcover variances to allow 26.36 percent in the O to 75 percent zone where 25.44 percent exists and no hardcover is allowed and to relocate and change the nature of nonconforming hardcover in the 75 to 250 foot zone where 34.82 percent exists, 32.50 percent is proposed, and 25 percent is the maximum allowed. Planning Commission Recommendation On July 20, 2009, the Planning Commission voted 4 -3 to approve the proposal in accordance with the staff recommendation. The Planning Commission requested the plans be revised to show the proposed deck relocated to the south side of the house off of the kitchen, the patios and sidewalks should be converted to pavers for improved permeability, the garage stall should be moved streetward 4 feet and the retaining wall shortened accordingly. Additionally the significant trees on the property should be protected by a covenant. Planning Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the variances consistent with the Planning Commission recommendation and engineer approval of the revised plans. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Staff to draft a Resolution approving or denying the variance~. -()o, CITY OF ORONO 2750 Kelley Parkway P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 952.249.4600 TO: Stephen & Susan Moseley 1635 Bohns Point Road Wayzata, MN 55391 TYPE OF APPLICATION: DATE OF MEETING: Variances August24,2009 ZONING FILE: 09-3417 NOTICE OF COUNCIL ACTION DATE OF NOTICE: August 25, 2009 COPIES: VOTE: 3 FOR 0 AGAINST Motion: To approve per the findings and conditions of the resolution previously mailed to you. Please arrange to sign the original resolution at the City Offices (Monday through Friday, 8:00 to 4:30). All persons with an interest in the property must sign the resolution. Variance approval is limited to the extent shown on approved plan and as noted in the approval resolution. Changes in approved plans are subject to further review by the City. Variance approval expires one year after date of approval. A building permit must be obtained no later than August 24, 2010. If you desire certified copies of the official Council minutes, they are available from the City Clerk after review and approval by the City Council. If you have questions please call Melanie Curtis, Planning & Zoning Coordinator, at 952.249.4627. MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, August 24, 2009 7:00 o'clock p.m. ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT *4. 09-3417 STEPHEN & SUSAN MOSELEY, 1635 BORNS POINT ROAD -VARIANCES - RESOLUTION NO. 5860 Bremer moved, Franchot seconded, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 5860, a Resolution Granting Variances to Municipal Zoning Code Sections 78-1279 and 78-1288, for the property located at 1635 Bohns Point Road. VOTE: Ayes 3, Nays 0. *5. 09-3421 JAMES AND JACQUELINE NEVE, 4060 DAHL ROAD -SETBACK VARIANCE Bremer moved, Franchot seconded, to direct Staff to draft a resolution approving a side setback variance for the property located at 4060 Dahl Road. VOTE: Ayes 3, Nays 0. 6. 09-3427 AL SERAN, 4099 IDGHWOOD ROAD -VARIAN CE RENEWAL Mr. and Mrs . Al Seran, Applicants, were present. Curtis stated the applicants have requested that the City Council waive the public hearing at the Planning Commission level. Hardcover variances and side setback variances were granted last June and expired this past June . They were unaware that the variances had expired . The applicants have requested that the City Council hold the public hearing at the next City Council meeting. Al Seran stated he was surprised when he went to get his building permit that the variances had expired and that he had thought the approval was good for two years . Seran stated he would like to get started on his project as soon as possible before wintertime, but that if he has to reappear before the Planning Commission and then the City Council , it would cause him to miss his deadline . Seran noted he also has some medical conditions and that he would like to have this taken care of as soon as possible. Seran noted a tree has fallen on the garage and that he would like to have that removed and rebuilt. He has met with all of his neighbors within 150 feet and discussed this project with them personally and they had no objections at the Planning Commission meeting . Murphy noted that the action required by the City Council tonight is to approve moving this forward to the next City Council meeting and to waive the public hearing at the Planning Commission level. Murphy asked whether anything has changed with the applicant's plans. Seran stated when the City originally approved his neighbor 's application, it depicted a drain tile on that property, which was never installed . Mrs. Seran noted the City Engineer had stated that the concept of routing the road drainage along the west property line is workable. It appears that the adjacent property does not have the swale that was part of its approved grading plan . There was an 8-inch and a 4-inch drain tile under the swale. These drain tiles have been plugged or removed so the applicant's property receives all of the road drainage . Staff is trying to determine the status of the drain tile. Mr. Seran noted that drain tile was never installed. PAGE 6 oflO SCAI\JNE /~35 £3_{JIJ/J~ //zJ1i-r-f k:c/, ...,, 11111111'111111111111 Doc No T 4693235 Certified, filed and/or recorded on 10/6/09 4:30 PM Office of the Registrar of Titles Hennepin County, Minnesota Michael H. Cunniff, Registrar of Titles Jill L. Alverson, County Auditor and Treasurer Deputy 33 Pkg ID 574855 Doc Name: Resolution Document Recording Fee Document Total Existing Certs 815043 $46.00 $46.00 New Certs This cover sheet is now a permanent part of the recorded document. ", I A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTIONS 78-1279 & 78-1288 FILE NO. 09-3417 CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL 5 8 6 0 NO. ______ _ A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTIONS 78-1279 & 78-1288 FILE NO. 09-3417 \VHEREAS, Stephan Moseley and Susan Moseley, husband and wife (hereinafter "the applicants") are the owners of the property located at 1635 Bohns Point Road within the City of Orono (hereinafter the "City") and legally described as follows: Tract B, Registered Land Survey No. 565, files of the Registrar of Titles, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter the "property"); and WHEREAS, the applicants have made application to the City of Orono for a variance to Orono Murdcipal Zoning Code Section 78-1279 to allow reconstruction of the existing home's first level including a higher ceiling, a gabled roof with living space within 75' of the OHWL of Lake Minnetonka where a 75' structural setback must be met; and WHEREAS, the applicants have made application to the City of Orono for a variance to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-1279 to allow reconstruction of the existing home's first level including a higher ceiling, a gabled roof with living space and a garage addition with living space above ahead of the average lakeshore setback; and WHEREAS, the applicants have made application to the City of Orono for a variance to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-1288 to allow 25.47% hardcover within the 0-75' setback zone where 0% is allowed and 24.64% currently exists; and to allow 32.5% hardcover within the 75'-250' setback zone where 25% is normally allowed and 34.8% currently exists in conjunction with additions to the existing home. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File 09-3417. Page 1 of 5 CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL 5 8 6 0 NO. ___ _;_. __ _ 2. The property is located in the LR-lB One Family Lak:eshore Residential Zoning District which requires a minimum lot area of 1.0 acre and a minimum lot width of 140'. 3. The Planning Commission reviewed this application at a public hearing held on July 20, 2009 and voted 3-4 to recommend approval of variances based on the following findings: a. The property contains 20,037 s.f. in area and has 117' in width. b. The lot is substandard in area and a residence has existed on the property for many years. c. There is no additional land available to bring the lot width or lot area into conformity. d. At 14% structural coverage proposed the proposed plan meets the structural lot coverage limitation of 15%. e. The home expansions are outside of the 0-75' setback area. f. Rather than rebuilding further from the lake, removing numerous trees, and disturbing more of the property the applicants have proposed to utilize the existing home location. The proposed structure complies with side yard and street yard setback requirements. g. The applicants will agree to filing a protective covenant in order to protect the significant trees on the property. h. Pavers will be utilized for the patios and sidewalks for increased permeability. 4. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendation of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicants and the public, 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 Page 2 of 5 CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 5 8 6 Q . hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicants, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicants; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent •Of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a variance to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-1279 to allow reconstruction of the existing home's first level including a higher ceiling, a gabled roof with living space and within 75' of the OHWL of Lake Minnetonka where a 75' structural setback must be met; and a variance to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-1279 to allow reconstruction of the existing home's first level including a higher ceiling, a gabled roof with living space and a garage addition with living space above ahead of the average lakeshore setback; and a variance to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-1288 to allow 25.47% hardcover within the 0-75' setback zone where 0% is allowed and 24.64% currently exists; and to allow 32.5% hardcover within the 75' -250' setback zone where 25% is normally allowed and 34.8% currently exists in conjm1ction with additions to the existing home, subject to the following conditions: 1. Council approval is based on the site plan submitted by the applicants and annotated by City staff, attached to this Resolution as Exhibit A. Any amendments to the site plan which are not in conformity with City codes will require farther Planning Commission and City Council review. 2. Hardcover in the 0-75' zone shall not increase above the level of 2,342 s.f. or 25.47% Hardcover in the 75-250' zone shall be limited to 3,497 s.f. or 32.5% per the proposed plan and hardcover allowance summary as depicted on Exhibit A. Applicants are advised that any future requests to increase hardcover or change the nature of existing/approved hardcover shall require City approval, and increases in hardcover will not likely be approved without concurrent reduction in. existing hardcover. 3. ADDITIONAL SURVEYS REQUIRED: a. A foundation survey is required to be submitted prior to commencement of framing; and b. An As-Built grading plan verifying compliance with the building permit, stormwater management, grading and drainage plans shall be submitted prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the residence. The As-Built survey Page 3 of 5 CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 5 8 6 Q will also reflect the accurate configuration deck as constructed around the existing 20" maple tree. 4 .. , The0 ·building plans subrn.itted for building"permit wilL be reviewed. to ensure compliance with the City's building height and number of stories regulations. 5. The sidewalks and patios shall be converted to pavers to improve permeability per the submitted plans. 6. Due to the close proximity to the lake, the home shall make use of a color palette that blends into the surroundings so as to reduce its visual impact as viewed from the lake. 7. Should further investigation into the quality of the foundation reveal a need for significant repairs the City Council shall review and either approve of the repairs in order for the project to continue or require modifications to the variances as granted. 8. Applicants shall remove all plastic or fabric liner material from the decorative landscape beds on the property to ensure their permeability as non-hardcover surfaces. 9. Required removals of structure and hardcover to be removed shall be completed prior to the footing inspection for the addition. 10. Authorities granted by this resolution nm with th'3 property not ,vith the applicants, but are permissive only and must be exercised by obfaining a building pennit for the new construction within one year of the date of Council approval, or the variance will expire on that date (August 24, 2010). 11. 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. 12. The undersigned applicants have read, understand and hereby agree to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of the applicants and the applicants' heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agree to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Page 4 of 5 CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF T~ CITYOCOUNCI L NO. 0 8 6 . Adopted by the Orono City Council on the 24th day of August 2009. STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN This instrument was acknowledged before me this I tr-~ay of":£ f"Jlx.1'}'1 CPtt;\2009 by Stephan Moseley, husband of Susan Moseley. RACHEL DODGE NOTAR: ~UBUC -MINNESOTA My Comm1ss1on Expires Jan. 31, 2010 STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN Notary Public This instrument was acknowledged before me this 1~1:;_y of ~ /~l)it;,)2009 by Susan Moseley, wife of Stephan Moseley. Notary Public Page 5 of 5 \l r:xmfzr1r ~ A ,," (9-Ull)l,J(US.il) (UV/ EXISTING HOUSE {~35..7) CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY FOR STEPHEN P. MOSELEY 9.l.f.----:..--· --=- -- OF TRACT B, R.L.S. NO. 565 HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA 4- w w a w w 1111111111111111111111111 111111111111111111111111 ' 11111111111111111111111 11111111111111111111111 S C A L E IN F E E T (9'2.al LAKE MINNETONKA "tr:§:>" I :!:>•O, J s O "."''' TRAC II \ I \ \ I \ \ 1m.11 \ ' CRYSTAL BAY \ \ \_(U·l.4) LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PREMISES : Tract 8, Registered Land Survey No. 565, files of Registrar of Titles, Hennepin County, Minnesota. denot.es iron marker (908.J) : denotes existing spot elevation, mean sea level datum [[!Q]] : denotes proposed spot elevation, mean sea level datum --917--; denotes existing contour line, mean sea level datum -{g@--: denotes proposed contour line, mean sea level datum Bearings shown ore based upon an assumed datum. This survey shows the boundaries of the above described property, the location of an existing house, all visible "hardcover", trees, topography, and the proposed location of several proposed additions thereon. It does net purport to show any other improvements or encroachments, SCACE ""'"°' '"" '"'""'"" R NBERG ASSOCI TES INC I' h,,.by mt,fy th0 t th ",,,,,., we,'"'"'' by m,, 1 1-2a-og i<EV~O GARAGE. UOVE PROPOSED CECi< G O & A ' . ~!g~~:~~d m6Jtr~~1n!~e:,i~(O~~"~nt:~~~~r °:d~r dr~~ DRAWN I 2 6-10-og "CO!T10NAL CRAOES SHOWN ON flETA!NltlG WALL. SLT FENCE AOOEO $CONSULTING ENGINEERS, LAND SURVEYORS, & SITE PLANNERS lows of the Stote of M1nnesolo. I C!-ECKED ·t 445 NORTH WILLOW DRIVE, LONG LAKE, MN 55.356 I 952-47.3-4-141 IMork S Gronberg Minnesota Licsnse Number 12755 ~ IIAtE ll--+-09 """"· l»-13'1 09-1:lll ) ~t, ;;~ ~~ ~:::\ ►~ c.n 00 °' 0 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The undersigned, being duly qualified and appointed City Clerk of the City of Orono, Minnesota, certifies that I compared the foregoing resolution adopted at the meeting of the Orono City Council on August 24, 2009, with the original thereof on file in my office, and the same is a correct transcription thereof. WITNESS my hand officially as such City Clerk and the Corporate seal of the City this 10th day of September , 2009. City Clerk Date Application Received: 6/17/09 Date Application Considered as Complete: 6/17/09 60-Day Review Period Expires: 10/17/09 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Department Approval: \f\f\ (} Name: Melanie Curtis \ \J" Administrator Approval: Title: Planning & Zoning Coordinator Date: 20 Au~t 2009 Item No. Agenda Section: Item Description: 09-3417, Stephan & Susan Moseley, 1635 Sohns Point Road, Variances Zoning District: Lot Area: Lot Width: List of Exhibits: LR-1 B (1 acre) 0.46 acre 117 feet Exhibit A -Revised Plan Exhibit B -Resolution per Council direction Exhibit C -Council Action Notice Exhibit D -Restrictive Covenant for Protection of Significant Trees Exhibit E -City Engineer Comments Exhibit F -Draft Council Minutes of August 10, 2009 Application Summary: This application was before the Council at their August 10th meeting. The application was discussed and the draft minutes from that meeting are attached. The applicants are requesting 0-75' & 75'-250' hardcover variances, average lakeshore setback and lake setback variances in order to remove the first floor, reconstruct the first floor with 9' ceilings and construct a gabled roof with dormers above, and an addition to the existing home's footprint. The applicant's revised plans have been approved by the City's engineer and a protective covenant for the trees has been submitted. The applicants' revised plan shows replacement of the sidewalk and patio areas with pavers for improved permeability. Conditions have been included in the Resolution that address the color palette as well as the application coming back before the Council should significant repairs to the foundation be necessary. Planning Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the variances per the attached Resolution. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Approve or amend the attached Resolution. ;: i {931.4) LAKE CRYSTAL BAY DESIGNED REVISION DA TE DESCRIPTION 1 7-28-09 REVISED GARAGE, MOVE PROPOSED DECK DRAWN 2 8-10-09 ADDITIONAL GRADES SHOWN ON RETAINING WALL, SLT FENCE ADDED EXISTING HOUSE 0,, I (939.4) "o ri:0 I o'S~'---J s '---TR,.,.-. '\ l"'- (~9) : • ' A\..; ! l,, \ \ \ \ \ (937.1) CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY FOR STEPHEN P. MOSELEY (935.7) 9.l4-.._ ---------- EXISTING HOUSE #1645 -- OF TRACT B, R.L.S. NO. 565 HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA ~ W O W ~ 1 1111111111111111111111111r 11111111111111111111111i 1 1 _ 11111111111111111111111n 1111111111111111111111m S C A L E IN F E E T LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PREMISES : Tract 8, Registered Land Survey No. 565, files of Registrar of Titles, Hennepin County, Minnesota. o : denotes iron marker (908.3) : denotes existing spot elevation, mean sea level datum !910.81: denotes proposed spot elevation, mean sea level datum --917--: denotes existing contour line, mean sea level datum ~: denotes proposed contour line, mean sea level datum Bearings shown are based upon an assumed datum. This survey shows the boundaries of the above described property, the location of an existing house, all visible "hardcover", trees, topography, and the proposed location of several proposed additions thereon. It does not purport to show any other improvements or encroachments. ~ I hereby certify that this survey was prepared by me, SCALE 17) registered Civil Engineer and Land Surveyor under the SCALE CONSULTING ENGINEERS, LA.ND SURVEYORS, & SITE PLANNERS or under my direct supervision, and that I am a duly NOT TO ~I U. laws of the State of Minnesota. 1---D-AT_E_-I 8-8-09 $GRONBERG & ASSOCIATES, INC. CHECKED:=============================================================================.::: 445 NORTH WILLOW DRIVE, LONG LAKE, MN. 55356 JOB NO. l---+----11---------------------------------1 952-473-4141 Mark S. Gronberg Minnesota License Number 12755 09-138 09-138 A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTIONS 78-1279 & 78-1288 FILE NO. 09-3417 WHEREAS, Stephan Moseley and Susan Moseley, husband and wife (hereinafter "the applicants") are the owners of the property located at 1635 Bohns Point Road within the City of Orono (hereinafter the "City") and legally described as follows: Tract B, Registered Land Survey No. 565, files of the Registrar of Titles, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter the "property"); and WHEREAS, the applicants have made application to the City of Orono for a variance to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-1279 to allow reconstruction of the existing home's first level including a higher ceiling, a gabled roof with living space within 75' of the OHWL of Lake Minnetonka where a 75' structural setback must be met; and WHEREAS, the applicants have made application to the City of Orono for a variance to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-1279 to allow reconstruction of the existing home's first level including a higher ceiling, a gabled roof with living space and a garage addition with living space above ahead of the average lakeshore setback; and WHEREAS, the applicants have made application to the City of Orono for a variance to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-1288 to allow 25.47% hardcover within the Q,.75' setback zone where 0% is allowed and 24.64% currently exists; and to allow 32.5% hardcover within the 75' -250' setback zone where 25% is normally allowed and 34.8% currently exists in conjunction with additions to the existing home. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File 09-3417. Page 1 of 5 2. The property is located in the LR-lB One Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District which requires a minimum lot area of 1.0 acre and a minimum lot width of 140'. 3. The Planning Commission reviewed this application at a public hearing held on July 20, 2009 and voted 3-4 to recommend approval of variances based on the following findings: a. The property contains 20,037 s.f. in area and has 117' in width. b. The lot is substandard in area and a residence has existed on the property for many years. c. There is no additional land available to bring the lot width or lot area into conformity. d. At 14% structural coverage proposed the proposed plan meets the structural lot coverage limitation of 15%. e. The home expansions are outside of the 0-7 5' setback area. f. Rather than rebuilding further from the lake, removing numerous trees, and disturbing more of the property the applicants have proposed to utilize the existing home location. The proposed structure complies with side yard and street yard setback requirements. g. The applicants will agree to filing a protective covenant in order to protect the significant trees on the property. h; Pavers will be utilized for the patios and sidewalks for increased permeability. 4. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendation of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicants and the public, 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 Page 2 of 5 hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicants, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicants; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a variance to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-1279 to allow reconstruction of the existing home's first level including a higher ceiling, a gabled roof with living space and within 75' of the OHWL of Lake Minnetonka where a 75' structural setback must be met; and a variance to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-1279 to allow reconstruction of the existing home's first level including a higher ceiling, a gabled roof with living space and a garage addition with living space above ahead of the average lakeshore setback; and a variance to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-1288 to allow25.47% hardcover within the 0-75' setback zone where 0% is allowed and 24.64%. currently exists; and to allow 32.5% hardcover within the 75'-250' setback zonewhere 25% is normally allowed and 34.8% currently exists in conjunction with additions to the existing home, subject to the following conditions: 1. Council approval is based on the site plan submitted by the applicants and annotated by City staff,· attached to this Resolution as Exhibit A. Any amendments to the site plan which are not in conformity with City codes will require further Planning Commission and City Council review. 2. Hardcover in the 0-75' zone shall not increase above the level of 2,342 s.f. or 25.47% Hardcover in the 75-250' zone shall be limited to 3,497 s.f. or 32.5% per the proposed plan and hardcover allowance summary as depicted on Exhibit A. Applicants are advised that any future requests to increase hardcover or change the nature of existing/approved hardcover shall require City approval, and increases in hardcover will not likely be approved without concurrent reduction in existing hardcover. 3. ADDITIONAL SURVEYS REQUIRED: a. A foundation survey is required to be submitted prior to commencement of framing; and b. An As-Built grading plan verifying compliance with the building permit, stormwater management, grading and drainage plans shall be submitted prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the residence. The As-Built survey Page 3 of 5 will also reflect the accurate configuration deck as constructed around the existing 20" maple tree. 4. The building plans submitted for building permit will be reviewed to ensure compliance with the City's building height and number of stories regulations. 5. The sidewalks and patios shall be converted to pavers to improve permeability per the submitted plans. 6. Due to the close proximity to the lake, the home shall make. use of a color palette that blends into the surroundings so as to reduce its visual impact as viewed from the lake. 7. Should further investigation into the quality of the foundation reveal a need for significant repairs the City Council shall review and either approve of the repairs in order for the project to continue or require modifications to the variances as granted. 8. Applicants shall remove aUplastic or fabric liner material from the decorative landscape beds on the property to ensure their permeability as non-hardcover surfaces. 9. Required removals of structure and hardcover to be removed shall be completed prior to the footing inspection for the addition. 1.0. Authorities granted by this resolution run with the property not with the applicants, but are permissive only and must be exercised by obtaining a building permit for the new construction within one year of the date of Council approval, or the variance will expire on that date (August 24, 2010). 11. 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. 12. The undersigned applicants have read, understand and hereby agree to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of the applicants and the applicants' heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agree to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Page 4 of 5 Adopted by the Orono City Council on the 24th day of August 2009. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Property Owner( s) STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN James M. White, Mayor This instrument was acknowledged before me this_ day of _____ , 2009 by Stephan Moseley, husband of Susan Moseley. STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN Notary Public This instrument was acknowledged before me this_ day of _____ , 2009 by Susan Moseley, wife of Stephan Moseley. Notary Public Page 5 of 5 T ii r;;tm101r A ($l><) CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY FOR STEPHEN P. MOSELEY OF TRACT B, R.L.S. NO. 565 HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA -~ W W O W W 1111111111111111111111111 111111111111111111111111 j 111111111111111111111111 111111111111111111111111 S C A L E F E E T LAKE MINNETONKA CRYSTAL BAY ~" 'o,:::::::_~< . ..-- c'' " ri: Ci Y}~•'J ~--~ _'. s 'im,, TPAt., Ii {iJl.O) "----. ~\\, <=~\ ~\\ \(93·<.♦) ~.,'.\, HOUSE #1645 LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PREMISES Tract 8, Registered Land Survey No. 565, files of Registrar of Titles, Hennepin County, Minnesota. denotes iron marker {908.J) : denotes existing spot elevation, mean sea level datum [[IQ]] denotes proposed spot elevation, mean sea level datum ~-917--: denotes existing contour line, mean sea !eve! datum --@QI}--· denotes proposed contour line, mean sea 1evel datum Searings shown are based upon an assumed datum. This _survey shows the boundaries of the above described property, the 1ocot1on of an existing nouse, all visible "hardcover", trees, topography, and the proposed location of several proposed additions thereon. lt does nor purport to show any other improvements or encroachments 7-28-09 I REV!SED GARAGE, MOVE PROPOSEO OECi<: E & J I C • ;~g1~~~;:d m2'1v~ 1 rf;;in!tre~~~io~~n~ 11t;~~:~r °:d~r d~~~ GRONB RG ASSOCIATES N I, heceby ceddy tho{ <h,s samy wos pceoocod by mo SCALE NOT TO SCAU O>,lE 8-\0-09 I ADDITIONAL GRADES SHOWN ON RETAINING WALL, SlLT f'ENCE ADDEO $CONSULTING ENGINEERS, LAND SURVEYORS, &: SITE PLANNERS lows of the Slate of M1nnesoto I cH:cKED 1 445 NORTH WILLOW DRIVE, LONG LAKE, MN 55356 I I I 952-473-4141 8-6-09 JOO NO. •Mork S Gronoer1 M1nnesoto L,cense Nurrber 12755 011-138 011-138 ~~ ;!~ ~~ ~ :j ~~ CITY OF ORONO 2750 Kelley Parkway P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 952.249.4600 TO: Stephen & Susan Moseley 1635 Bohns Point Road Wayzata, MN 55391 Ex. 111/iT G ZONING FILE: 09-3417 NOTICE OF COUNCIL ACTION DATE OF NOTICE: August 11, 2009 COPIES: TYPE OF APPLICATION: Average Lakeshore and Lakeshore Setback Variances DATE OF MEETING: August10,2009 VOTE: 5 FOR 0 AGAINST Motion: To approve per the Staff recommendation. Revised plans must be approved by the City Engineer before placement on the Council's agenda for final approval. Applicant's next scheduled meeting is tentatively scheduled as: Monday, August 24th City Council Meeting -Meeting starts at 7:00 pm If you desire certified copies of the official Council minutes, they are available from the City Clerk after review and approval by the City Council. If you have questions please call Melanie Curtis, Planning & Zoning Coordinator, at 952.249.4627. (reserved for recording) DECLARATION OF RESTRICTIVE COVENANT THIS DECLARATION OF RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS (the "Declaration"), is made this l::iJ_ day of .. :;;; L j , 7,.i)O 'J, by the undersigned paiiies, representing all of the owners in fee of the larr8 hereinafter described, lying in Hennepin County, Minnesota. WHEREAS, /'{_/4,i. c2b.72h;::_=;J /~;;;,Yaar4 the fee owners of real prope1iy legally described on the attached Exhibit A; and \ I..,\ WHEREAS, property owners have applied to\thJCity of Orono for a Variance to construct additions to the existing home; and WHEREAS, the undersigned parties desire to impose upon and subject said land to ce1iain covenants, conditions, restrictions and reservations for the benefit of preserving significant trees upon said land and its present and future owners; WHEREAS, the significant trees are legally identified and described on the attached Exhibit B; and NOW, THEREFORE, the undersigned parties hereby declare, impose upon, create and establish the following covenants, conditions and restrictions upon the property: 140097 1. PROHIBITION ON USES. A. Constructing, installing, or maintaining anything made by man, including but not limited to buildings, structures, walkways, clothes line poles, and playground equipment within the drip line of a tree, that has the potential to damage the significant trees. B. Cutting or removing significant trees. Removing dead trees, trimming trees to maintain health, removing diseased trees, and removing selected trees approved by the City when required to allow sunlight to penetrate a limited areas on the property, may be undertaken. C. Excavation or filling when these activities may contribute to damage or loss of protected trees. 2. RUN WITH THE LAND. The covenants and restrictions set forth in this Declaration shall run with the land, shall be recorded with Hennepin County against the title to the land, and shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the City and the Declarants named herein, their successors, heirs, and assigns, and any other person or entity at any time hereafter who shall become the owner of the land. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, as of the day and year first hereinabove written, the Declarants have executed this Declaration. CITY OF ORONO By: ----------------- James M. White, Mayor By: 0/"Ji~~ 5#;~/~~l~:c,?--~.'~ ---- William Wells, City Administrator 140097 2 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) )ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of ____ _ __ , by James M. White and by William Wells, respectively the Mayor and City Administrator of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation, on behalf of the corporation and pursuant to the authority granted by its City Council. Notary Public ST A TE OF MINNESOTA ) )ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 2. q day of Ju. l :J 2.001, by Sfeph~ a-rtd .Su_S-CU\--/vf ose Ley , husband and wife. I~:~~~~~~~, N~~g~ BARBARA G. SILUS u NOTARY PUBLIC-MINNESOTA ~ My Commission Expires Jan. 31, 2013 THIS INSTRUMENT DRAFTED BY: CAMPBELL KNUTSON, P.A. Professional Association 317 Eagandale Office Center 1380 Corporate Center Curve Eagan, Minnesota 55121 Sw!Nf 140097 3 ~kt', EXHIBIT A Tract 8, Registered Land Survey No. 565, files of Registrar of Titles, Hennepin County, Minnesota. 140097 4 T ii LAKE MINNETONKA CRYSTAL BAY ( ...... )W(~l/:,,, ~":>·,. \'·, \.'\~~- " n (rn)' 0\'\., ~"'" ~, 7-2d-09 ~('l~[U GARAGE, MO'I[ PRUf'O::ilD DECK --_..:. __ ~O-D9 _ ,1,QQ1T:GN"'l GRAOES S1-<CWN. ON. f1£T,1,1t~NG WALL, SiLT f~NCE "-00£0 . ~•J.<.,) -·, ··-TRAd C -~/ ~. \ HOUSE #1645 CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY FOR STEPHEN P. MOSELEY OF TRACT B, R.L.S. NO. 565 HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA ! I 40 20 0 20 40 11•Illlm~mmmmnmnn111;;~.~ S C A L IN F E t: T LEGAL OESC'R!PT!ON OF PREMISES Tract B, f~egis_tered Land "?urvey No. 565, tile!:l ot Registrar at Titles, Hennepm County, Minnesota. denotes iron rnor1<er (90d.J) denotes eAisting spot elevation, rneon ::;ea le1,el ;:J<Hum [[IQ]] denotes proposed spot elevation. 1111:!0n seo level .:latum 917 de1hJ\es t:lxisting contour llflt', n11:::on sea level dot1,n·, __..r-~-i--jcnottls proposed contour lino:;, rruwr, seo level Jatu111 BeO! 1ngs sho,.,.n oro= Dosed upon an ::i:::.surnea :.lo turn. fhis survey shows the boundone::; of tt1e obove described property, thi:: •ocation ot an c,.istini,i nou~e. afl visible "r,ardcovi::r", tree:,, top0gr..iµtiy, ond the prcpos,;;:d location ot sevi::ra! proposed additions tnereon. !t -Joes :,a\ purport to shoN any other i1nprovernents or enc1 0dc!',rn~n\s. J • ""J1::it11,,.Cl Ci~,I tnq1ntlllf ()ml l.unQ Sui..i 1 " .. nd,ir tht! SCAl.i; N>T to sc.,u: CONSULTING ENGINEERS, LAND SURVEYORS. & SITE PLANNERS • ., 01 11'" ""'" "' M,ooe,olo $GRONBERG & ASSOCIATES INC I',;•::~;, ~;"~,;;',°',;~;;,;;;~;'.',o",t11:::.•("'.:,'. :',:~• c,cc,;oJ I --_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-:_-_-_-_-:_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-:_-_-:_-:_-_-_-_-_-_-_-:_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_--f-f 445 NORT,; MILLOW DlllVE. LONG LAKE, MN ,5300 IMIE a-.--09 ""'"'· l»-138 1------------------------------cl 952 -471-414 I 1 MuO< S Gronc.ir1_ Minne::ioto Lu;en:•c N ... moer t.!7~~ l»-IJ8 S0)? ~@ -\~ ~~ 2335 Highway 36 W St. Paul, MN 55113 Tel 651-636-4600 Fax 651-636-1311 www.bonestroo.com August 10, 2009 Ms. Melanie Curtis Planning and Zoning Coordinator City of Orono Post Office Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Re: 1636 Bohns Point Road File No. 000139-09000-1 Plat No. 09-3417 Dear Melanie: #eonestroo We have reviewed the grading plan for the construction of a new house addition dated 8-10-09. The applicant has also submitted stormwater calculations dated 8-19-09. The plan includes raising the existing driveway approximately 4.5 feet near the planned addition. We have the following comments with regards to engineering matters: • The stormwater calculations submitted show that the proposed modifications to the house rooflines will direct a portion of the existing hardcover's runoff away from 1629 Bohns Point Road. Runoff flows to the east to a low point in the driveway then to the north and on to the neighboring property. However, these flows will be slightly less than the existing conditions. • Given the decreased volume and rate of stormwater directed to the neighboring property, we find these plans acceptable from an engineering standpoint. If you have any questions please call me at (651) 604-4894. Yours very truly, Bonestroo Darren Amundsen Cc: Tom Kellogg u tPI UJJ /\JvlL-A:u (~H/4~ l l O t ,u)() 4 'fXh,~T r- 4. #09-3417 STEPHEN AND SUSAN MOSELEY, 1635 BOHNS POINT ROAD- VARIANCES Sue Moseley, Applicant, and Ben Hillston, Architect, were present. Curtis stated the applicants are requesting average lakeshore setback and lakeshore setback variance to construct additions and add a half-story to the existing house. The request also includes hardcover variances to allow 26.36 percent in the 0-75 percent zone where 25.44 percent exists and no hardcover is allowed and to relocate and change the nature of nonconforming hardcover in the 75-250 foot zone where 34.82 percent exists, 32.50 percent is proposed, and 25 percent is the maximum allowed. The Planning Commission at its July meeting voted 4-3 to approve the proposal in accordance with the staff recommendation. The Planning Commission requested the plans be revised to show the proposed deck relocated to the south side of the house off of the kitchen, the patio and sidewalks should be converted to pavers for improved permeability, the garage stall should be moved streetward four feet, and the retaining wall shortened accordingly. Additionally, the significant trees on the property should be protected by a covenant. Staff recommends approval of the variances consistent with the Planning Commission recommendation and revised plans. Moseley stated their architect attempted to design plans that would comply with the City's rules and regulations as much as possible and they then met with Staff to ensure that their plans were in compliance wherever possible. One of their goals is to preserve as many of the trees as possible. Moseley stated their project improves the existing residence and neighborhood and betters fits in with the character of the neighborhood. The neighbors are in support of the project. White asked what changes have been made to the plans since the Planning Commission meeting. Curtis stated the garage has been moved forward four feet, which has resulted in the shortening of the retaining wall and reducing the hardcover slightly. Another change is the elimination of the deck off of the great room and moving it to the other side of the house. In addition, the applicant has agreed to change the existing patio to permeable pavers but the driveway would remain as is based on the recommendation of the City Engineer. Moseley noted the hardcover on the lot overall has decreased. McMillan asked whether there are any contingencies planned in the event there are major issues found with the foundation. Curtis stated it would depend on what the degree of repair would be. Bremer commented that typically a minor repair is not something that the Council would need to see but that any significant repairs would need to come back before the City Council. Moseley stated they are relying on their engineer's opinion as it relates to the foundation. Bremer asked whether the Council would be able to review the revised plans prior to approving the resolution. Curtis indicated Staff did receive the revised plans today but that the City Engineer has not yet had an opportunity to review the plans. Kellogg stated one of the main issues with the property is proper drainage and drainage to the north. Moseley commented their current roof is a butterfly roof and by changing it to a peak roof, that would actually help the drainage flow the other way. Murphy noted on Exhibit A the existing houses on either side of this property are set back considerably from this residence and that another story would be added to the structure, which will raise the roofline. Moseley pointed out they are adding a half-story. Murphy asked how the sight line for the neighbor to the north would be impacted and whether that neighbor is in favor of the project. Moseley indicated there are a number of arborvitaes that help screen the property and that the neighbor is aware of the project and is in favor of it. Curtis stated she did speak with the neighbor at 1639 Bohns Point, which is located to the north, and that his initial concern was with the location of the deck, which has now been eliminated. Curtis stated that neighbor has not raised any other concerns. Moseley indicated they did e-mail all the documents they have provided to the City to the neighbor also for his review. Murphy stated the City unfortunately has had problems with issues being encountered with existing foundations once work has commenced and that he would prefer to see the revised plans prior to approving the resolution. White requested the applicants consider utilizing neutral based colors for the home given the close proximity to the lake. Moseley stated they did requestthat their architect design an addition that would update their property and fit in with the rest of the neighborhood but be minimally intrusive. McMillan stated this normally would be an opportunity to get a structure out of the 0-7 5 foot zone but that it is a hardship to relocate the house given the trees and other issues with the lot. McMillan noted this house has been grandfathered in. Bremer moved, Murphy seconded, to direct Staff to draft an approval resolution granting average lakeshore setback and lakeshore setback variances to construct additions and add a half-story to the existing house, and to grant hardcover variances, for the property located at 1635 Bohns Point Road, subject to review and approval of the revised plans by Staff and the City Engineer. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. Date Application Received: 6/17/09 Date Application Considered as Complete: 6/17/09 60-Day Review Period Expires: 10/17/09 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Date: 20 August 2009 Item No. Department Approval: Administrator Approval: Agenda Section: Name: Melanie Curtis Title: Planning & Zoning Coordinator Item Description: 09-3417, Stephan & Susan Moseley, 1635Bohns Point Road, Variances Zoning District: Lot Area: Lot Width: List of Exhibits: RR-1 B (1 acre) 0.46 acre 117 feet Exhibit A -Revised Plan Exhibit B -Resolution per Council direction Exhibit C -Council Action Notice Exhibit D -Restrictive Covenant for Protection of Significant Trees Exhibit E -City Engineer Comments Exhibit F -Draft Council Minutes of August 10, 2009 Application Summary: This application was before the Council at their August 10th meeting. The application was discussed and the draft minutes from that meeting are attached. The applicants are requesting 0-75' & 75'-250' hardcover variances, average lakeshore setback and lake setback variances in order to remove the first floor, reconstruct the first floor with 9' ceilings and construct a gabled roof with dormers above, and an addition to the existing home's footprint. The applicant's revised plan$ have been approved by the City's engineer and a protective covenant for the. trees has been submitted. The applicants' revised plan shows replacement of the sidewalk and patio areas with pavers for improved permeability. Conditions have been included in the Resolution that address the color palette as well as the application coming back before the Council should significant repairs to the foundation be necessary. Planning Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the variances per the attached Resolution. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Approve or amend the attached Resolution. MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, August 10, 2009 7:00 o'clock p.m. ( 'JJLJC COMMENTS, Continued) increas he speeds on that road. Wolverton stated in his opinion that is not a valid reas0 the road. / White asked ifhe wo like to see striping down the sides, down the mi Cr both. White directed the City Engineer to look at h review . ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S *3. #09-3414 KATHY~ PATRICK MIDDLETON, 720 TO VARIANCES -RESO IJfION NO. 5857 Murphy moved .,Bremer seconded, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 5857, a Resolution ~nting Variances t unicipal Zoning Code Sections 78-330, 78-1279, and 78-1403, for the propbr.ty locate 720 Tonkawa Road. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. 4. #09-3417 STEPHEN AND SUSAN MOSELEY, 1635 BOHNS POINT ROAD - VARIANCES Sue Moseley, Applicant, and Ben Hillston, Architect, were present. Curtis stated the applicants are requesting average lakeshore setback and lakeshore setback variance to construct additions and add a half-story to the existing house. The request also includes hardcover variances to allow 26.36 percent in the 0-75 percent zone where 25.44 percent exists and no hardcover is allowed and to relocate and change the nature of nonconforming hardcover in the 75-250 foot zone where 34.82 percent exists, 32 .50 percent is proposed, and 25 percent is the maximum allowed. The Planning Commission at its July meeting voted 4-3 to approve the proposal in accordance with the staff recommendation. The Planning Commission requested the plans be revised to show the proposed deck relocated to the south side of the house off of the kitchen, the patio and sidewalks should be converted to pavers for improved permeability, the garage stall should be moved streetward four feet, and the retaining wall shortened accordingly. Additionally, the significant trees on the property should be protected by a covenant. Staff recommends approval of the variances consistent with the Planning Commission recommendation and revised plans. Moseley stated their architect attempted to design plans that would comply with the City's rules and regulations as much as possible and they then met with Staff to ensure that their plans were in compliance wherever possibl e. One of their goals is to preserve as many of the trees as possible. Moseley stated their project improves the existing residence and neighborhood and betters fits in with the character of the neighborhood . The neighbors are in support of the project. PAGE2 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, August 10, 2009 7:00 o'clock p.m. (4. #09-3417 STEPHEN AND SUSAN MOSELEY, 1635 BOHNS POINT ROAD Continued) White asked what changes have been made to the plans since the Planning Commission meeting. Curtis stated the garage has been moved forward four feet, which has resulted in the shortening of the retaining wall and reducing the hardcover slightly. Another change is the elimination of the deck off of the great room and moving it to the other side of the house. In addition , the applicant has agreed to change the existing patio to permeable pavers but the driveway would remain as is based on the recommendation of the City Engineer. Moseley noted the hardcover on the lot overall has decreased. McMillan asked whether there are any contingencies planned in the event there are major issues found with the foundation. Curtis stated it would depend on what the degree of repair would be. Bremer commented that typically a minor repair is not something that the Council would need to see but that any significant repairs would need to come back before the City Council. Moseley stated they are relying on their engineer 's opinion as it relates to the foundation. Bremer asked whether the Council would be able to review the revised plans prior to approving the resolution. Curtis indicated Staff did receive the revised plans today but that the City Engineer has not yet had an opportunity to review the plans. Kellogg stated one of the main issues with the property is proper drainage and drainage to the north. Moseley commented their current roof is a butterfly roof and by changing it to a peak roof, that would actually help the drainage flow the other way. Murphy noted on Exhibit A the existing houses on either side of this property are set back considerably from this residence and that another story would be added to the structure , which will raise the roofline . Moseley pointed out they are adding a half-story. Murphy asked how the sight line for the neighbor to the north would be impacted and whether that neighbor is in favor of the project. Moseley indicated there are a number of arborvitaes that help screen the property and that the neighbor is aware of the project and is in favor of it. Curtis stated she did speak with the neighbor at 1639 Bohns Point, which is located to the north, and that his initial concern was with the location of the deck, which has now been eliminated. Curtis stated that neighbor has not raised any other concerns . PAGE3 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, August 10, 2009 7:00 o'clock p.m. (4. #09-3417 STEPHEN AND SUSAN MOSELEY, 1635 BOHNS POINT ROAD, Conti,iued) Moseley indicated they did e-mail all the documents they have provided to the City to the neighbor also for his review. Murphy stated the City unfortunately has had problems with issues being encountered with existing foundations once work has commenced and that he would prefer to see the revised plans prior to approving the resolution. White requested the applicants consider utilizing neutral based colors for the home given the close proximity to the lake. Moseley stated they did request that their architect design an addition that would update their property and fit in with the rest of the neighborhood but be minimally intrusive. McMillan stated this normally would be an opportunity to get a structure out of the 0-75 foot zone but that it is a hardship to relocate the house given the trees and other issues with the lot. McMillan noted this house has been grandfathered in. Bremer moved, Murphy seconded, to direct Staff to draft an approval resolution granting average lakeshore setback and lakeshore setback variances to construct additions and add a half-story to the existing house, and to grant hardcover variances, for the property located at 1635 Bohns Point Road, subject to review and approval of the revised plans by Staff and the City Engineer. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. #09-3418 DENNIS BATTY ON BEHALF OF BROOK INVESTMENT GROUP, LLC, 425 SHORELINE DRIVE -COMMERCIAL SITE PLAN /)'- rook Investment Group, and Irfan Habib, Property Owner, was present./ Curtis noted this app 1 tion appeared before the Planning Commission at its July me -t5:ng. The applicant is requesting approval oft ·r proposal to enlarge the existing commercial build: · with additions to each end. The request includes seve / The applicant is requesting the followin ariances: / 1. Building setback. A setback of 29 feet from Ke~;t(:enue right-of-way is proposed for the east 2. 3. 4. addition when the required setback is 35 fe~etback of O feet from the west property line is proposed for the upper level of the we7cl'ftion ~n the required setback is 35 feet. Parking Spaces. The plan h.as ab9µt'80 percent of the ~,spaces required by code. The plan is short 32 spaces. / "' /' ~1,-,t, Parking lot setbacks/etback variances are requested for both parkin0 ~expansions. Structure setb¢, The upper trash enclosure is proposed to have a 3.5 foots back from Kelly Avenue w~en'a 20-foot setback is required. The lower trash enclosure is propos to have a 0 foo~~}ba:'ck from the west property line when a 5-foot setback is required. Both are -~d to _,,, PAGE4 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING July 20, 2009 6:30 o'clock p.m. LOREN BUTTERFIELD, 3925AA WATERTOWN ROAD, CONTINUED) It was the cons sus of the Planning Commission that a Rural Oasis Study not be require on this application. Kempf asked if the gree ouse is currently in operation. Butterfield indicated it is not ut that the landscaping portion is. Kempf asked if a business is bein perated from the property. Butterfield indicated there is. / / / / Kempf noted a CUP would be required for e business and asked whether Mr. Butterfield intends to continue to run the business following the sub ·vision . / Butterfield stated they would be leasing the land in he subdivision until the business is closed. Kempf stated he would like to see the business opelatio cease as part of the subdivision once the lots are sold. Curtis stated the City would require a resolJ1i on revoking the c ditional use permit upon redevelopment of the property. Once a pr , perty is redeveloped, 1 does allow the City to review the CUP. Curtis noted that Lot 2 could be remove , from the CUP or the CUP ould be eliminated upon redevelopment of the property. Kempf asked when that would ta e effect. Curtis indicated it would lik y be when the final plat was approved but that sh :would need to review that issue with the city att ey . Curtis stated she did inform the applicant of that ·ssue this afternoon. Kempf asked when t trunk and park fees w ould need to be paid. Curtis stated at t time the final plat is filed with the county, the fees would need to be pa · Leskinen m ed, Rice seconded , to recommend approval of Application #09-3416, 3925 atertown Road, gra ting of preliminary plat approval subject to the recommendations of Staff and t City Engine and subject to Outlot C being widened to 50 feet and upgraded to a private road to servic all three lots. VOTE: Ayes 7, Nays 0. 4. 09-3417 STEPHEN & SUSAN MOSELEY, 1635JlOHNS POINT ROAD, VARIANCES , 7:33 P.M. -8:03 P.M. Susan Moseley, Applicant, was present. Curtis stated the applicants are requesting average lakeshore setback, lakeshore setback, and structural coverage variances to construct additions and add a half-story to the existing house . The request also PAGE7 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING July 20, 2009 6:30 o'clock p.m. (#09-3417 STEPHEN & SUSAN MOSELEY, 1635 BORNS POINT ROAD, CONTINUED) includes hardcover variances to have 26.36 percent in the Oto 75 percent zone where 25.44 percent exists and no hardcover is allowed and to relocate and change the nature of nonconforming hardcover in the 75-250 foot zone where 34.82 percent exists, 32.50 percent is proposed, and 25 percent is the maximum allowed . The existing first floor would be removed and replaced by a level with 9-foot ceilings and a gable roof with dormers . There would be living space under the roof. Peak height would increase from about 13 feet to 32 feet, defined height from 13 feet to 30 feet. A 744 square foot addition would be placed on the east side of the house. It would contain three garage stalls with living space above. The level of the new garage floor would be halfway between the existing lower level and first floor level. The main entry would be relocated from the south wall to the east wall of the house and a 48 square foot entry porch added. A 120 square foot deck would also be added. The existing house and the proposed additions are forward of the average lakeshore setback. Most of the existing house is within the 75-foot lake setback. The proposed deck is within the lake setback. The additional story is partially within the lake setback. The proposed garage addition and entry porch are not in the lake setback. Hardcover in the 75-250 foot zone is currently 25.44 percent, which is all nonconforming. The proposed deck would add 120 square feet of structural hardcover. Removal of 55 square feet of non-structural hardcover is proposed in conjunction with relocation of the entry. Hardcover in the 75-250 foot zone is currently 34.82 percent. The entry porch and approximately 60 square feet of the garage addition would convert square feet of non-hardcover to structural hardcover. The sidewalk to the entry porch would add 49 square feet of non-structural hardcover. The remainder of the garage addition would be converted to non-hardcover to result in a 250 square foot reduction in hardcover in this zone. A variance is required to relocate or change the nature of non-conforming hardcover. The Planning Commission should consider issues relating structural coverage, lakeshore setback, average lakeshore setback, and hardcover. Planning Staff recommends the following: 1. Denial of the structural coverage variance. 2. Denial of the lakeshore and average lakeshore setback and hardcover variances to allow the deck. 3. Approval of a hardcover variance for the retaining wall in the 0-7 5 foot zone only to the extent necessary after shifting the third garage stall east six feet and increasing the slope of the ramp area as much as is reasonable. 4. Approval of the lakeshore and average lakeshore setback variances as well as the changes in the location and nature of nonconforming hardcover in the 75-250 foot zone to allow the garage, entry porch and half story additions. Staff further recommends the following conditions on the variances: PAGES MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING July 20, 2009 6:30 o'clock p.m. (#09-3417 STEPHEN & SUSAN MOSELEY, 1635 BORNS POINT ROAD, CONTINUED) 1. The significant trees on the property being protected by a covenant. 2. The new main level and half-story being constructed on the existing foundation and lower level walls. 3. No increase in storm water runoff rate to the property to the north. Moseley stated the house was built in 1949 and is one of the original houses on Bohns Point but needs to be upgraded. The property has a number of old trees that add to the character of the neighborhood. They would like to upgrade the house by adding an upper level and garage, which would also enhance the neighborhood. Moseley noted she did receive a letter from Planner Turner regarding the deck and a variance being required. Their architect is proposing to remove a portion of the driveway and a stoop area, which would reduce the hardcover by 293 square feet. Kempf noted there is a difference between structural coverage and hardcover. Curtis stated a property owner is allowed 15 percent structural coverage and that Planner Turner's analysis found that the deck was above a certain grade, which requires it to be considered as structural coverage and requires a variance. Moseley stated the deck does not access the kitchen and was constructed to help accommodate a fireplace that was added. Moseley asked if the deck is added by the stoop, whether that would require a structural vanance. Curtis asked if the deck would require a railing. Moseley indicated it would not. Curtis stated that type of deck would then not require a structural variance but would be counted as hardcover. Kempf asked the applicant to illustrate the location of the deck that she is now proposing. Moseley indicated the location of the deck on the overhead and stated the deck would have access off of the kitchen. Kempf stated that would eliminate the need for a structural coverage variance. Chair Kempf opened the public hearing at 7:38 p.m. There were no public comments regarding this application. Chair Kempf closed the public hearing at 7:38 p.m. PAGE9 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING July 20, 2009 6:30 o'clock p.m. (#0 9-341 7 STEPHEN & SUSAN MOSELEY, 1635 BORNS POINT ROAD, CONTINUED) Kempf noted that Staff has suggested shifting the garage, which would help eliminate a portion of the retaining wall. Curtis stated if the garage is shifted forward, then portions of the retaining wall that extend lakeward could be removed. Moseley indicated their architect was attempting to break up the garage structure and that the eight feet is not necessary. Curtis commented it would be aesthetically pleasing to break up the three garage stalls and that eight feet is a considerable break. Kempf noted the Planner's report states that pervious paving is not an option and asked what area that is referring to. Curtis stated she does not know what that is referring to exactly but that it is possible it relates to the driveway. Kempf stated his feeling is that whenever a house is constructed within the 0-75 foot zone, every hardcover area should be converted to pervious whenever possible, and that he would make the recommendation that it be pervious material. Moseley asked what those materials would be. Kempf indicated pervious materials would help absorb some of the runoff and slow the rate of runoff into the lake. Kempf stated pervious pavers allow the water to soak into the ground rather than go into the lake. Kempf asked whether the applicant has any letters from their neighbors. Moseley stated the neighbor to the north has been out of town and that their lot is fairly well secluded from that property. Moseley indicated if they are allowed to retain the trees, the adjoining properties should not be able to see the structure. Kempf asked whether the applicants are in favor of a covenant to protect the trees. Moseley indicated they are in favor of the covenant. Bennett asked whether an evaluation has been done on the health of the trees. Bennett recommended the trees be protected during construction and expressed concern that the trees could possibly die as a result of the construction. Moseley stated in her view the pine trees are not the more valuable trees and that the hardwood trees are the ones they would like to protect. Bennett indicated she is concerned about both the evergreens and the hardwood trees. PAGE 10 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING July 20, 2009 6:30 o'clock p.m. (#09-3417 STEPHEN & SUSAN MOSELEY, 1635 BOHNS POINT ROAD, CONTINUED) Moseley stated by staying with the current foundation , they should not be disturbing the ground as much. Rice asked whether any hardcover was eliminated as part of this application . Moseley stated they are proposing to eliminate a portion of the driveway. The stone walkway is existing and serves as an access to the lake. Curtis illustrated the walkway on the overhead . Curtis asked whether they could walk on the grass to access the lake . Moseley indicated there is a definite difference in the elevation in that area and that the stone walkway consists of some one-foot wide stones set in the ground and is not a full sidewalk. Curtis illustrated some photographs of the property. Curtis stated some of the stairs are necessary to access the lake but that in her view a portion of the walkway may not be. Bennett stated she has some concern given the home being located entirely in the 0-75 foot zone and that she does not feel it is in the best interests of preservation of the lake to increase the hardcover in that zone . Bennett stated she would like to see as much as possible being done with this project to help with the runoff. Bennett stated in her view a three car garage is not a necessity given the close proximity to the lake. Kempf stated he takes into consideration the character of the neighborhood and that the existing house does not fit in with the rest of the neighborhood. Kempf stated the current house is basically a cabin . Bennett stated she does not feel that a two-car garage and a smaller house would be a hardship. Bennett noted that the branches of the trees would also be in the way of the construction and would need to be trimmed back. Moseley stated it may appear that way from the photographs but that the limbs do not hang over the house . Moseley pointed out they are proposing a half-story. Given the value of the land, a three-car garage would not be considered a luxury. Leskinen noted the bulk of the addition is being constructed over current hardcover consisting of the driveway, and that her impression of the design that is being proposed is well done in terms of upgrading the home to meet the other homes in the neighborhood without razing the existing house and starting over. Bennett stated in her opinion there could be other options considered. Rice indicated she is in agreement with the comments of Commissioner Bennett given the location of the house in the 0-75 foot zone. Curtis stated the addition would be located within the average lakeshore setback. PAGE 11 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING July 20, 2009 6:30 o'clock p.m. (#09-3417 STEPHEN & SUSAN MOSELEY, 1635 BORNS POINT ROAD, CONTINUED) Kempf commented he understands the concerns of Commissioners Bennett and Rice but that given the character of the rest of the neighborhood, this house is not excessive. Schoenzeit noted the addition is not located on the lakeside of the home and that in his view the proposed addition is reasonable given the neighborhood. Bennett stated given the mass of the proposed structure versus what currently exists, changes could be made to bring the structure more into compliance. Kempf concurred the overhang is very close to the lakeshore. Kempf moved, Schoenzeit seconded, to recommend approval of Application 309-3417, Stephen and Susan Moseley, 1635 Bohns Point Road, granting of a variance to the average lakeshore setback and a variance to the lakeshore setback, subject to relocating the garage stall to eliminate a portion of the retaining wall, elimination of the lower deck, require pervious paving for all sidewalk and patio hardcover wherever possible, and to require a covenant be put into place to protect the existing trees. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 3, Bennett, Rice, and Kang opposed. Kang indicated she was not in favor of the application given the close location of the structure to the lake and the negative impact it would have on the lake. Kang encouraged the applicants to reduce the hardcover and structural coverage as much as possible. 09-3418 DENNIS BATTY ON BEHALF OF BR 34 SHORELINE DRIVE, COMMERCIAL SITE PL P.M. K INVESTMENT GROUP, LLC, 342 WITH VARIANCES, 8:03 P.M. -9:2 Dennis Ba Architect, and Irfan Habib, Property er, was pre nt. Curtis noted this plication appeared before th lanning Commission reviously as a cone t plan. The applicant is reques · g approval of their prop sal to enlarge the existing c ercial buildi g with additions to each end. The request include several variances. Staff notes this applicant s not cha ed from the concept application and that is aff s feeling that what is being proposed is si ly to much for this site. There is no space for ade ate parking or landscaping. If there are not e gh parking spaces, customers will park in the 3 6 Shoreline Drive parking lot, on Kelly Avenue, n or in the Lund's parking lot. The pavement fKell Avenue is only 28 feet wide, not wide enough r on-s eet parking. There may be congestion drivers lo for a parking space. Eventually busine es may mo e or close if the parking is inadequ e. The site pla shows a deficiency of 23 parkin spaces. Landscaping, espe ·any adjacent to a street, 1 important to creatin n attractive commercial are . Trees, in particular, ha many environmental benefit Not only do the provide shade, filter the air, an buffer noise, a rece innovation is to have the runoff fro parking ar s flow into landscaped areas plante with trees. The andscaping, especially the trees, absorb he runo . The majority of the proposed landsca d areas ar minimal and are too small to sustain the plan erials for any length of time. PAGE 12 Date Application Received: 6/17/09 Date Application Considered as Complete: 6/17/09 60-Day Review Period Expires: 10/17/09 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Department Approval: ~ A Name: Melanie Curtis IV l Administrator Approval: Title: Planning & Zoning Coordinator Date: 5 August 2009 Item No. Agenda Section: Item Description: 09-3417, Stephan & Susan Moseley, 1635 Sohns Point Road , Variances Zoning District: Lot Area: Lot Width: List of Exhibits : RR-1 B (1 acre) 0.46 acre 117 feet Exhibit A -Revised plans and survey per Planning Commission recommendation Exhibit B -Revised Hardcover Calculation Worksheets Exhibit C -PC Action Notice dated 7 /21 /09 Exhibit D -PC Memo & Exhibits of 7/20/09 Exhibit E -Draft Planning Commission Minutes of 7/20/09 Exhibit F -60-Day Extension Exhibit G -Neighbor Comments Application Summary: The owners request average lakeshore setback and lakeshore setback variances to construct additions and add a half-story to the existing house. The request also includes hardcover variances to allow 26 .36 percent in the O to 75__pereeffl zone where 25.44 percent exists and no hardcover is allowed and to relocate and change the nature of nonconforming hardcover in the 75 to 250 foot zone where 34.82 percent exists, 32 .50 percent is proposed , and 25 percent is the maximum allowed. Planning Commission Recommendation On July 20, 2009 , the Planning Commission voted 4 -3 to appr Qve the proposal in accordance with the staff recommendation. The Planning Commission requested the plans be revised to show the proposed deck relocated to the south side of the house off of the kitchen, the patios and sidewalks should be converted to pavers for improved permeability , the garage stall should be moved streetward 4 feet and the retaining wall shortened accordingly. Additionally the significant trees on the property should be protected by a covenant. Planning Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the variances consistent with the Planning Commission recommendation and revised plans . COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Direct Staff to draft a Resolution to approve or deny the variances. . ... ., I I «---~-=-=--~:.=:._~:::.!::.l::::~~-..:::.~:::::.:_:::e..:::::::.._I --~-.,.__ ___ .:::.:...V_-_ 7..:._7__;:;_A-,t~J;.=12.t,::::....::~::..:..V,___;;e:.e_=--=?l)=.:...:..~=-------------:·~'H~ ,? Al ti /., • . _____ ,,.._p__,.::0 ...... f>,Z.O.Pb~~P. -c..>l'"rc:-' ,A'Ol?n-1, ; ··=.:~::.:.:t,;:t:;;.Tjb,;t{;."f~·-.. ·:.::..:.:.:.::.:::.~--··. ---ll,<------t---· -- ·-·----------,---• r I I I, . I 1'----i1--- 'I I 1 ,, ·. il I ;[ I ··\· . __ _...._,...,,., ..... ,~,-~·-·-·· --··--·l==========::=====~~-~-~-';;.:_;;11~-t¥:::::::::::'.:::::~======t=== ---·. ·---. ··-········ :·- •' '-----·--·-.,,.··-·. ........... ~. ·• ' '••-· . ..:...:... , I . ~ L . -..... ··{ ·-·.:· . .r:-. _ .. •:;, ,'·:•· ¥-•·---~------~--.. -...,_~----·----... ~, ... ,.. ··-· •'• ..... ·: ',•. •• J !. ! . •, .. , ... ~· .... . , . -~ :' .· ·re.-e:vt~--ZtZi•C~ ··G ~. lsi, oA. c. .,._E;,g~~-..{-.~f't)Sa> ::t&~:-. -. ;_t=;~~r, ~-~~ .. ;...:i,3*~,:_it5e:~:~~~ --· ··-Nt<OIT.: ----------· . ----·--·. -1 0- ·~ . . 3 '":e/Zl)f.'O~i:;> ~·.~t.<)0-.:?. ___ \ii;.~t4:T f. .. ~rt>~ ==i~-c-~(.;l»~ . _, . :c. ..• .Ext~'T. ':t'Of> OF ::::::-W;¢.;:~ia..-· -·:· . ____________ ·....;:..-:,___'..;.'41''' ·, <...<..•· 1(....-('-~. ~--• It:.:.-,~ -'i.-'?0. . ··-· .. ·-····· -··1" ....,:...if-:--:--....,_---~-~-----++----;___L-Ja-1. ~ ( I r I I l _., . -· •H•~-l••······x:s··· . .. .... .. i· , j . . · . ... ,.,_. •• , J . .. •', ... ·•:, .. .·• ,·• I ~1 I I I. if-j ----+--1----------------l--1 1 i I . i I :1 1-·--·-·--·--··-•--·-------•·----· ···-····-· ... I; . 1 . I :·. I I ' I I .... ~· I I . . I ·------·-.. :.:-: ·.·-·. · ... ··• ---··---· ·.·J·-·.i .·:•·.1· .• _...;;.;.._--i--------··--'··•·'·: ...• ·.:·· ... ,. ·--··---•··•·----- -,AY-=,,!!.Nl'.)c,-.J· -~xi~--r;-'-~--:--:-:taft.t.,~IN6:;-:-' t:'rZ:CPOPt:::r;::> . . -~~~r::::~:~=_::~~~-~,:•.:"'.~;~~~:/~·_:::?.=~~:?~?~.l?.(~;~·•··:• ; : _: .. . \: ... . .. . . ~·f I', • .,~. ·,• ~ ' .. [·. ··-· . ' . ~-· ~.,.., ·-----------. --... -~ . ,. -----.-----------------------·-------·---····~'""·--·• . ~1e-\ltS~. -,, Z."7 ~ <='<=\ . . ' ·· .. -.:,., ... . ... .,.ut. •····----·--· ---·--·--•--····--·-·•·-·····~-------··----·---···---------------'-"----------·---:--·--·-~--.. ·-···::-···-----·--·.,--... ~ i· 1S-..7c:>"t ~--/----OJ~a.blQ · .. D£Jg.r::tk. --~--------~----------,---------------------------...:.......----------------------···--·--···------·-------'--------- » 1/ ' l j i ! i I ·1 I I f ./ i ·. · .. Ji. T .. T 1\ I I I. ,. · ·1 I 1 ~ (2,A-t-';:>'e:,0 ~ ----/~-: 1--;-I l "\ ---7 ~.1>0-iz.,at;L . ----·-···"··-· c,A'a.N:>.e ) 1 , \ · \.\ 1 1 / \_ 1 __ '2r-.:io P:~B.:. ......•.. . · Aeomor-l _/ ! / ,1 / __ ~ \ 1 --··--•· ·'-oQttlo;s~.:r··:::.-:::.: .•.. :. _______ : ... : ... -_;. --. \ I I ; //---I! \ \ \ ~----=···---:.:.~ :......:._~ __ : ·-' --------/ : \ t_ ·I [ I ,1 , ,'-w \ · l, r' JI i{ . . ) . . - I . I I I > I i -=-;_w~ / ! l \L __ 1_ L -L. ✓, i\! ~<'.-'TJJJZ.12_.:, __ I / I ...... ·•). . ' : Ln==F=tr=tf=ih ,~P=9F=JF9f91~=tt=,==tf==t ,. --1--r---11-it- ----. • . I • . . ' .......... .... ... .. .. .,. ..... .., . ·-' -' .. -···· ..... -···.·· .. ·:.~~=··~··-:~ .. --::,·~.-·· .. , ... ,.-,.-..... ,, ...... _ ........ ·· ... ·.· ·-··-~-----·"'--"· ............ -·· ~-.. -.... -,_.. .. .,...,. ---··-··-·, .. ··---·---------·--- . r-·, ,.,;J.F .. ..::j]. 1 i 4 ,. . _. ❖ '?,~1-i~."1 . . = 11' 1.1,/r;. W,7 ~ A'M &,Oy. I~ -:::. 1f? \1,1 c;:; ::: ,~ 4-!i~ -t,~ -::. ll ... ·. ., . , .... ~ ., .. .,, ,. .. · ... ···-. ----. . . --,:·.. . -.:-:~~.}!.tb..T,.~ ... L-~\Ja~rz.~c.---rtJtz.~ «~---~----~» :-~Le~~!? 4A~~ A!7P.'~'~N . ·:·.-· ;i:. . --:---~/. P~Or'b~e;.p 'l'{\::.Vl !ftt;rr"F-Y I • __ J1L.A'P..Dl11a~A i.; . -:21'-117. ~Vl::l-.-~vlt-c·~~ r.~p '(.' r • ,.· l ':'•.;'.' .... .,. i • ,. 1 • . .. -· ~~Y)f?#.~-. -· '-····-" '"',· . . . . .,•• .... ,w' ·_ •• ·.;,.,, I J I ..Af:e~~~ ~'no,f,,t ~ ~~-r, . :-.J.~T~!~W~"J.v.,._1-4 --6P-·~'114 ·~td..~· -~-eiN?l'..~ptio~ ~· .. ~~l'--~~ ~~:~AINI~· I l I ,ml:\-· n====11-,1t=====11·. i l · . ' I• . ,' ... , .· , •.. ,..,___ ~==#11===1Ml====lr . . . I I . . -··-· --...---- -··· . ·;, . ··.•.: •·,\· ..... ., .. ., ..........•.. " ...... . £xl~ .. ·.PU!l. : . .. -e~--....... · Lr-· . ···· · :, . ~tS'i~lf>~r't>~WO;~is ... I· to ~ . ,. ... ... I 0-- . D-'-.' . ~-,.Y --·-.... -~ _, . ~ . --·---------- --------------.p12c::rp-o-s1=:D ,;,;;;re:'='-r·7·L/4;.~e:-··--e:ce..vA-r'"'\~KJ-· ._:. -··· ... ---···· · · ., · · · -·· ---· ··--·•-·-·-----·------·-·-·--·•--.. Ve,11:; .. t '-o u ···--~-·--··--· ····•-············--·----------. ·-·---·--··-----.. · -·-····-----------· -··---·-·· ---··-... -•··------···--·-··-·------------·--- 128-'1\"!.E.~ -,, '2--Z: • O<{ . --.. .. . ( . . " . . . . ..... i . ' " ... ,. .... -----------· ......... .. . -·-----.. ·-·-------···----·"-·"·-----··--·-----.. ··--·-----·-·-··------··"{;;-, i:5.-.,··z:;,1·-·-------·~-•··---· .. ····•-··•···---····" --------··---··---___ ..... ~0 __ ?z.0 ___ f2c, bJbl __ '2 ___ ~c?..l NT ~.l:27 __ d~bJ_c2 · · ~-/2.-t3:E::------'----·---····--•-.. ·--•-•-~-··-•-· ............ -. .......... M .. t?.. £f !-... ... "t.. .... _ --··--•·---· .. ___ .. ----··---" ... · ....... ·--··· ......... ·----·---····-·---•---·--·----·--·-··--·---·-····----··---·----·--------·-· 1 ., ... ,,,., -:. _\a,t\~'T. .. S,-. ~E.t?-- =w.:~--::::W~t>F. ~ .. ·.•,:. ~P.o_-$..~~--. . fQ!_.t,tl~ti't:SCK,. '~-. • .. I l"IW\='O~P' j,ptt t.tH~ f:.J..11W{ f;~ . ,. , ...... ,. I f>IU>Pc::>S&:) R.At":>~t:;, 14;6". W!~_C,A1'2.~~e, .AP.t,rptlt-{ tl'l,<.1.1!>~ ~NI!-il-l1C.l4!1$):>~ ·• ~ •, . .( 12/i,z. I II . , 10-e, -G:(.G .. -· • >Qt,>AC,,....;,-.-»-,: ~ .,,,., ..... _ _., ..,, ,,--:. r·r 1<-1.4.v.7~ ..... ~-•r--:-. ~~ <1AtU,4.e. . . ·=<t ·-..!. b_C,,ALJ!:.... ... --------····-·--···:..... ........... _._,, __ .: ... :· ...... . -·---.. ---....... -+-!: -~ .. ·-----........... -;--.--··I --·;=~~-=-· p ~o-p-~s.-e:.-·p---~A~<ST--"E--c·e:_"\7,A"-rl··~---K)~·:·~-·---··--:~.--__..,.-----o it .4 1 6' &' t<>\ ·..z.o . -...... _ -··----: ___ ----~----... -... V~--'~-t r_.o_,, --.·---·-----------:~--·----·---------·-------'----:----,----------------·--'-----------"·--....... -....... ......... -.... -·----·-----·--"··---.. --..... . I ............ -···. ........ -.,------·--------.:......---·-------------·------------~-------·---·--~'.-~----.,·---·"·--·---------,-··• .............. -.. --.·----------.. -··---·-z!?~i'._~o~·z..,,,::.~~=-t ....... ., ....... _ .. ___ ,.,,~.--·---·-·· •··-----·-·-----·------···•· I :! ·~-----···· ........ _L<a_h-.Sz------'-'-'0c1_ld~-~~_frJ-T Rt2-~~.~-a----·~-N-Y-<o:.J:.. --................... •---------------···-- i -! ·-----------------------------•--.--------.. ·•-•"· ;--·-"· ................ -.•--···---·--............ ----··· ., ... ·j ~z:;_';.\j:j .,,. .... -~ ., I .2 ................. ---·· ....... ·--·-··· ,t•-·•--!L-----::;;-'2_2_i.o __ ll -----,,r.-a.'· ____ <:i.,,,._· ·~_.__•_t>'~' ,,___ L /~' .. : ... ·' . '··••' .· .··. ~ -:.. f: (!" ~XL~&~---.....···----- ?:?:C:@:QJD~--·-·-·-_···--_---:_-·-=··•··--· ..... ,, .. ·•···· ..... --.... ..,__.~-~ ~~1011 . , ... ,, .. -------------.......... --------- -------·-·····--······ --......... -·~·····----•. . . .... . 12-s.-J-1 ,e.o 7 1 '2 --,, oe, &?' LS 1 6q . Nr=i.JQt.. ,, •, . 7 --... -··-···--· .. ---..... ---·-··-· -······--· .......... , ___________ :.--~ --·-----·------·~---· I \ \ \ ; ' 0 0 . -· -----..................... _ .. ,_ 0 0 A S~tJ N\ W A\J 'f!::.¥lA6. 'e. \-tW&e. ~t:,.'1"' £?Al,k.. t..z N~ O· r~~-=-;;;~~~,.l ~%-,-~\--,. . ~ttv.ar.vgE: . ,. , ~ . A~kl~~~--~ .•. -.-~-,....r.. .---~-•·, i;:~~~i~:f?.: .. :· . 1.,...-,.. ·•. -t,>t,~·- 0, ... .;_ ·~-;. ------- j ·o '•'. ~·. ..... .-·--.... OH•H•·-•• --. . ·----· ~ ., .. : . : --~--... ~--.. -~---· \. .:..-: ...... ,. . ... . :-... , . . .......... . ··.J:·::: .... , .... ,.~ -••¥ •• , ... . ·--------·---•"'"'"·'·"··· . .. :---MAc~-~lMd.-~v~e....~ .. ---··· .. ----. ___ -zo_,?_'?O·~t= ~--l~~o . .....:=,: ___ °300'1,._<Gf:=. ____ _:t:_~16:r,., s,:~c,1",cJlte.-------~-.i o 74-: ~~ :· ·. ---p-jwp-j)·4,~~~'1'()'{t:~.= .. Gf-~j; .. ~t= M.A:K· ' / ---,--· -----: .. -~·-·-·• '"t"o,At-. _ -:::.;.oos •. ~F.:_ ..... . .. M ,,.,~,-... , ........ .._. .. , ...... ~ • •, · ~Klf"Jll?.&:>.V.~~---10..~~-Z~.~-7t>l-lt:.-~ ·. . I ~-w ~t= )( _;zt;i.,lo .. -~~~~·~:~ .. ~~-?~ it= · -. ·•··----·--··· .. · ..... -. -........ .,.--.. ··---------·····-··-··--·-·· ··q_·_. o._ . 0 . . . A S>V N\ ~ ,A:\/ e.tzM c:. l-\ ov&e ~~-r £?A0c., L.1Ne, \ ""'l"-----==--,....., ---===--==--- -o· 0 ~?J;.( G~ott~c.,1/.J~ 0 --·····----·-----... -.-.::- 0 o- .o· ' 1 ---' . ,, .. ' , __..: \ -------------·-_\.___ _____ . _pGN,.,.t::c~....,;$~--------- • • , I --------:------------fllf-.-.J~ j __ . _. -..,,------•--.-------------------~;;;;J"-1 ..s.6::...·1_--=I~:....• __,Z=4::i..'~3£ _______ .. ---h~~-eut;I_..:,____-· ______ _ _____ , _ll_;;::::..,..,.. _ .. 1_. /;:/,_··r,!?'-'-l;,._l -----------··--·----------···----all!:.'.\t_,.,.1c..Q ••. -=r.~.z..,_~,-- r <p (;.., e lf;?/ t a, or ' ' rw~c.; e:owN~D thlf -~-Q..,,._t ___ as_tJ __ ~-a--_--_-~~---=-----'-N r-e:-_· ··D·£.·------- (931.4) (930.8) $J(931.2) (930.8) \ POND 932 (932.5) ...... LAKE MINNETONKA (933.8) \ CRYSTAL BAY \::'"' \(931.9) DESIGNED REVISION DA TE DESCRIPTION (934.4) EXISTING HOUSE (935.9) (937.1) (935.7) HOUSE #1645 ------- BLACKTOP G ROADWAY 942 CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY FOR STEPHEN P. MOSELEY -- ----- OF TRACT B, R.L.S. NO. 565 HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA 40 20 0 20 40 ~llllllllllllllllllllllljjlllll/1111111111111111111~ / _ 11111111111111111111111111_ Jlllllllllllllllllllllrn S C A L E IN F E E T LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PREMISES Tract B, Registered Land Survey No. 565, files of Registrar of Titles, Hennepin County, Minnesota. o : denotes iron marker (908.3) : denotes existing spot elevation, mean sea level datum 1910.81 : denotes proposed spot elevation, mean sea level datum --917--: denotes, existing contour line, mean sea level datum ~: denotes proposed contour line, mean sea level datum Bearings shown are based upon an assumed datum, This survey shows the boundaries of the above described property, the location of an existing house, all visible "hardcover", trees, topography, and the proposed location of several proposed additions thereon, It does not purport to show any other improvements or encroachments, SCALE 1"•20' EXHIBIT A DRAWN r---;t-7--2-8--09-t-RE-VI-SED-G-AR-AG-E,_M_ov_E -PR-OP-OS_ED_OE-CK------------------1 tt7~~~ ~~ ~~N~Rf LA! ~~~~!t ! s~~ ;L}N~E?; I hereby certify that this survey was prepared by me, or under my direct supervision, and \hat I am a duly registered Civil Engineer and Land Surveyor under the lows of the State of Minnesota. --D-AT-E---1 -C-HE-C-KE-D➔ 445 NORTH WILLOW DRIVE, LONG LAKE, MN. 55356 952-473-4141 6-6-09 JOB NO. nC-1'>:R. S-rEPHE:"1 /Vlo,;ElEY' C°-1'7-09 Ti?ACT t5 '-2?-09 HAR~ER CALCULATION WORKSHEET e.L/5_ No, S'65 SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75' 75-250' 250-500' · 500-1 Council EXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZONE Exhibit 8 A. House \~ZO EK1$TING,ir X = S.F. -~OVS'E Length Width kt:J'f -48 X = S.F. C~€.t11 r ;:-~f(. X = s F 2 t' F '71/~~ NI( ,ti C: · · ($'vf 8' ") B. Garage X -S.F. C. Driveway X = S.F. X = S.F. D. Sidewalk 164-5iON€ WAL.I~ X = S.F.-A.NC> S"'Ct::P$ X = \ '2... S.F.'-STE'.PPIN~ 5fONf5 E .. Patio/Deck X = 4SO s.F.-Sro,-.,i:: Pt1no X = S.F. F. Landscape X = S.F. Underlain X = S.F. By Plastic X = S.F. G. Retaining t>B $TONE X = S.F.-R6'TAIN IH~ Walls W4~t.$' H. Other X = s:F. TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE 22bt> S.F. A TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE 9lCJS-'1195 S.F. B A 2266 + B X 100 = 21.~4 % PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House X = S.F. Length Width X = S.F. X = S.F. B. Garage X = S.F. C. Driveway X = S.F. X = S.F. WALll. TO D. Sidewalk. X = -55 S.F.-· Af34J.JOCW£0 SI X = S.F. E,,rn?ANC~ REM ov i D E. Patio/Deck \l. 0 X !(LO = -HJ 5: S.F. -PR.0Pt%£D X = S.F. Of:CK F. Landscape X = S.F. Underlain X = S.F. By Plastic X = S.F. G. Retaining X = + .16 8 F _ pg0Po5f:O Walls . ' l<.E"'fAtNlA~ llSt-16 .... 55 -+76" ,jvP,t,.l, -H. Other X = S.F. ---NET GAH,f TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE 2.2 66 1-7b Z34Z S.F. A TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE GJ1g5 S.F. B A 2.342.. .,. B C\l<::fS-X 100 = Z. s. 47 % C-17-09 ~ACT R 7-Z F-o') ko ct{,(,v&r ;:, HARDCOVER CAL~ION WORKSHEET 12'.L. S, No, S-6s;"' SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75' ~ 250-500' · 500-1000' EXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House B. Garage C. Driveway D. Sidewalk E .. Patio/Deck F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic G. Retaining Walls H. Other Length TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X A 314] + B PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House B. Garage C. Driveway D. Sidewalk. E. Patio/Deck F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic G. Retaining Walls H. Other Length 7,Q TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A 34q7 X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X + B Width l0.760 Width b.03 3741 -750 lO 160 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = 45_,,, E';<'.l~'T tN~ ___ '-___ S.F.-HOl.75£ ______ S.F. ______ S.F. ______ S.F. 3 ... SLA<:t(TOP -~~0_7___,,g __ S.F. O~t\JE'..WA,!f ______ S.F. STONE Vv'AL.1'-__ 1~6~3 ___ s.F. -ANo s-rEPS ______ S.F. ______ S.F. · _____ .....,S.F. ______ S.F. ______ S.F. ______ S.F. ______ S:F. 374] S.F. A 101 760 S.F. B X 100 = 5lj:. Bk % = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = + 7 /1 4 8 F _ PROPOSED __ __,':f:'.......,.,___ . . ADO!TIO""/ -----S.F. _t.._____..4:..:..8 __ S.F. -?ROl'D.5f."0 Po1iCH ______ S.F. \ \-,0 DR1\JtWAY ----'--'-. -'-'--·-S.F. -R£,AqJvE'.'O ____ -.--_S.F. +4S-S.F: .. PROPOSED \Jv'i-U ====-\-=lf====== S.F. -\//Al)( Aocs:o ______ S.F. ______ S.F. --'-____ S.F. _____ S.F. _____ S.F. PROPOSfD _+_l_CJ~-S.F. -QITAINtHG.· \/VAL.I.. --~?..-'S'O"---_ S.F. -NET LOS5 ---'---394..o..-7~-S.F. A __,l_,,_0,1--. 7,_,_.f.=0 __ $ .F. B x 100 = 31.S,'O % CITY OF ORONO 2750 Kelley Parkway PO Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 952.249.4600 TO: Stephen & Susan Moseley 1635 Sohns Point Road Wayzata, MN 55391 ZONING FILE #09-3417 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION DATE OF NOTICE: July 21, 2009 COPIES: TYPE OF REQUEST: Variances DATE OF MEETING: July 20, 2009 Planning Commission recommended as follows: Approval consistent with Staff recommendation. The plans should be revised to show the deck relocated to the location off of the kitchen as discussed, the third garage stall moved streetward and the retaining wall shortened accordingly and should incorporate pervious pavers wherever feasible . The applicants should also submit a covenant to which protects the significant trees on the property . Revised survey and plans should be submitted at least 2 weeks prior to placement on a City Council agenda for Staff review. VOTE: 4 FOR 3 AGAINST *Opposing Commissioners felt the plans could be revised to move existing structure and hardcover away from the lake. Applicant's next scheduled meeting is confirmed as: Monday, August 10th City Council Meeting -Meeting starts at 7:00 pm If you desire certified copies of the official Planning Commission minutes, they are available from the City Recorder after review and approval by the Planning Commission. If you have questions, please call Planning & Zoning Coordinator, Melanie Curtis at 952.249.4627. Date Application Received: 6/17 /09 Date Application Considered as Complete: 6/17 /09 60-Day Review Period Expires: 8/16/09 To: From: Date: Subject: Chair Kempf and Planning Commission Members Evelyn Turner, City Planner July 20, 2009 #09-3417 Susan and Stephen Moseley, 1635 Bohns Point Road -Variances -Public Hearing Zoning District: RR-1B (lacre) Lot Area: 0.46 acre Lot Width: 117 feet Application Summary: The owners request average lakeshore setback, lakeshore setback, and structural coverage variances to construct additions and add a half-story to the existing house. The request also includes hardcover variances to have 26.36 percent in the Oto 75 percent zone where 25.44 percent exists and no hardcover is allowed and to relocate and change the nature of nonconforming hardcover in the 75 to 250 foot zone where 34.82 percent exists, 32.50 percent is proposed, and 25 percent is the maximum allowed. Staff Recommendation: Planning Department Staff recommends approval of some but not all of the requests. Pertinent Zoning Ordinance Sections 78-1279 Lakeshore and Average Lakeshore Setback 78-1288 Hardcover List of Exhibits A. Application B. Hardship Documentation Form C. Submitted Hardcover Calculations D. AreaMap E. Photographs provided by Applicant F. Site/grading Plan G. Building Elevations and Plans H. City Engineer's Review Background The original house was constructed in 1949. It has two levels. The lower level is below grade but not far enough to be considered a basement. The second garage stall was added in 1967. In 1975 a hardcover and lake setback variance was granted (zoning application #8) to allow the garage stalls to be lengthened ( on the side away from the lake) by nine feet and an 09-3417 July 20, 2009 Page 2 of5 additional story added over the expanded garages. (There was no average lakeshore setback requirement at that time.) The house has vaulted ceilings with a shed roof (pitch 1: 12). Upper level sidewalls are 9 feet on one side and 7.5 feet on the other. The existing first floor would be removed and replaced by a level with 9 foot ceilings and a gable roof with dormers (pitch 12:16 and 12:12). There would be living space under the roof. Peak height would increase from about 13 feet to 32 feet, defined height from 13 feet to 30 feet. A 744 square foot addition would be placed on the east side of the house. It would contain three garage stalls with living space above. The level of the new garage floor would be halfway between the existing lower level and first floor level. The main entry would be relocated from the south wall to the east wall of the house and a 48 square foot entry porch added. A 120 square foot deck would also be added. LOT ANALYSIS WORSHEET Lot Area/Width: Required Actual Lot Area 1 acre 0.46 acre Lot Width 140 feet 117 feet Setbacks: Required Existing Proposed Lake 75' 25' 25' Rear (East) 30' 100' 80' North Side 10' 19.8 10' South Side 10' 38.1' 38.1' Structural Coverage: Allowed Existing Proposed 2,993s.f. 15% 2,097s.f. 10.51 % 3,009 s.f. 15.09% Hardcover: Hardcover Area in Zone Allowed Existing Proposed Zone Hardcover Hardcover* hardcover 0-75 9,195 s.f. 0 s.f. 2,339 s.f. 2,424 s.f. 0% 25.44 % 26.36% 75-250 10,760 s.f. 2,690 s.f. 3,747 s.f. 3,497 s.f. 25% 34.82% 32.50% Total for 19,955 s.f. 2,690 s.f 6,086 s.f. 5,921 s.f. Property Variances The existing house and the proposed additions are forward of the average lakeshore setback. Most of the existing house is within the 75 foot lake setback. The proposed deck is within 09-3417 July 20, 2009 Page 3 of5 the lake setback. The additional story is partially within the lake setback. The proposed garage addition and entry porch are not in the lake setback. With the additions structural coverage on the lot will be 12 square feet more than the permitted 15 percent. Hardcover in the Oto 75 foot zone is currently 25.44 percent or 9,195 square feet. All is non- conforming. The proposed deck would add 120 square feet of structural hardcover and the proposed retaining wall square feet. Removal of 5 5 square feet of non-structural hardcover is proposed in conjunction with relocation of the entry. Hardcover in the 75 to 250 zone is currently 34.82 percent or 10,760 square feet. The entry porch and approximately 60 square feet of the garage addition would convert square feet of non-hardcover to structural hardcover. The sidewalk to the entry porch would add 49 square feet of non-structural hardcover. The remainder of the garage addition would convert non- structural hardcover to structural hardcover. Enough of the driveway would be converted to non-hardcover to result in a 250 square foot reduction in hardcover in this zone. A variance is required to relocate or change the nature of non-conforming hardcover. Hardship Statement Applicant has completed the Hardship Documentation Form attached as Exhibit B, and should be asked for additional testimony regarding the application. Hardship Analysis In considering applications for variance, the Planning Commission shall consider the effect of the proposed variance upon the health, safety and welfare of the community, existing and anticipated traffic conditions, light and air, danger of fire, risk to the public safety, and the effect on values of property in the surrounding area. The Planning Commission shall consider recommending approval for variances from the literal provisions of the Zoning Code in instances where their strict enforcement would cause undue hardship because of circumstances unique to the individual property under consideration, and shall recommend approval only when it is demonstrated that such actions will be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Orono Zoning Code. Issues for Consideration Structural Coverage The issue of structural coverage was discussed with Mrs. Moseley and the designer early in the application process. It appears the designer may have not understood the deck would be considered structural coverage. To Staff it appears that 12 square feet could be easily be removed from the proposal. Lakeshore Setback Numerous variances have been granted to allow a nearly flat roof on a house within the lakeshore setback to be replaced with a pitched roof of house on the basis of the difficulty of maintaining a flat roof in Minnesota. Most have had some living space under the new roof. The Commission should consider if the additional vertical encroachment into the lak:eshore setback will be compatible with the surrounding area and the lak:eshore character. If the trees on the property are found to be a mitigating factor they could be protected by a covenant. 09-3417 July 20, 2009 Page 4 of 5 Average Lakeshore Setback The application includes a letter from the property owner to the south indicating no objection to the proposed additions. The applicants indicate they are attempting to reach the owner of the property to the north. A row of evergreen trees extends nearly the entire length of the north line of the property. Some are on this property; some are on the property to the north. Hardcover The increase in hardcover in the O to 75 foot zone should be evaluated as a variance. The Commission should consider if there are alternatives to the proposed hardcover. The new retaining wall is necessary to create a ramp to access the door on the rear of the third garage stall. If the front offset of this garage stall were reduced the length of the wall within the Oto 75 could be reduced or possibly eliminated. The usual argument for setback variances for decks is adjacency to the kitchen. Stairways from decks often provide lakeshore access from the upper level. Based on the floor plan shown on the designer's site plan the proposed deck is remote from the kitchen. No stairs are proposed. Currently the cantilevered area appears to be a three-season porch. This area would be opened up to the house and converted to year round living space. It appears to Staff that the deck is proposed to replace some of the functions of this porch. The hardcover changes in the 75 to 150 foot zone can be evaluated on a more practical basis in light of statutory limitations. Use of permeable pavement is not feasible. Staff is exploring other mitigation options. The driveway and some adjacent areas currently drain north to a swale on the adjacent property. The proposal would change drainage patterns. Notwithstanding the variance request, drainage calculations are required to demonstrate the rate of runoff to this property would not be increased. Are there any other issues or concerns with this application? Staff Recommendation Planning Staff recommends: A. Denial of the structural coverage variance. B. Denial of the lakeshore and average lakeshore setback and hardcover variances to allow the deck. C. Approval of a hardcover variance for the retaining wall in the retaining wall in the 0 to 75 foot zone only to the extent necessary after shifting the third garage stall east six feet and increasing the slope of the ramp area as much as is reasonable. (A revised plan with one-foot contours in this area will be required to demonstrate this.) D. Approval of the lakeshore and average lakeshore setback variances as well as the changes in the location and nature of non-conforming hardcover in the 75 to 250 foot zone to allow the garage, entry porch and half story additions. And Staff recommends the following conditions to the variances: 1. The significant trees on the property being protected by a covenant. 09-3417 July 20, 2009 Page 5 of5 2. The new main level and half-story being constructed on the existing foundation and lower level walls. 3. No increase in storm water runoff rate to the property to the north. City of Orono Variance Application Street Address: 2750 Kelley Parkway Orono, MN 55356 Main : 952-249-4600 fax : 952-249-4616 Mailing Address: P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323-0066 Application# IJ f'-3L/-I 1 Date Received : ~ It '1 Jo q , I Staff : Fee : $700 ~-------Renew a I: $350 --'----,----,....,.---,---,------,--,-- After -the-fact: $1,400 (double fee) Escrow Fee: $2 ,500 new home/ addition / new structure $ 600 other variance This application form must be completed in full. Applicant will be notified within 15 days as to the status of the application . Incomplete applications will not be placed on Planning Commission Agendas. PROPERTYINFORMATION: a n (J Site Address: /&c35= ~3 _____r::f_ :}\';I> Property Identification Number {PIN): Date Property Acquired (month/year): 1 t/Y □ Yes , I own the adjacent parcels. Zoning District: CK -/73 Name: Phone (tiome): Complete Address: City , State & ZIP Email : r>10t..5Et....e Fax: OWNER INFORMATl~(Complete legal name~ mari_ta~status required for~ach interested party) Name : ci/..$&) r I-"' )¥ Vf ¥-}ey ( r Hc>::s£UV ( .1'1-1 J__ Phone (home): ____________ Phone (work): r ____________ _ Complete Address : ......__JJ__ City ,, State & ZIP =~===/2=1f==1JDC-=~========================================= Email : C2' Fax: DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: Describe the request in detail (attach additional sheets if necessary): RECEIVED JUN 1 7 2009 CITY OF ORON O Last Updated : 5/11 /2009 #3417 REQUIRED SUBMITTAL$: All of the following information must be submitted by the application deadline date in order for your application to be processed. APPLICANT AND/OR OWNER: • Agree to provide all information required or requested by the Planning Department, • Agree to pay additional fees (staff time not covered in the original fee payment) and/or consultant expenses incurred in review of this application, and • Certify that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. The applicant and owner recognize that they are solely responsible for submitting a complete application being aware that upon failure to do so, the staff has no alternative but to reject it until it is complete or to recommend the request for denial of the request regardless of its potential merit. • Acknowledge the Escrow Agreement is completed and signed. • The Owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City Staff, consultants, agents, Commission and Council Members for purposes of investigation and verification of this request. • Applicant and/or Owner acknowledge they must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant and/or owner is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized representative attend in place of the applicant/owner and advise the City Planner assigned to your project. • Some or all of the information that you are asked to provide on this application is classified by State law as either private or confidential. Private data is information which generally cannot be given to the public but can be given to the subject of the data. Confidential data is information which generally cannot be given to either the public or the subject of the data. Our purpose and intended use of this information is to annually update our records and records of other governmental agencies required by law. If you refuse to supply the information, the a -B · not . e issued. Owner's Signatu Owner's Signatu Last Updated: 5/11/2009 RECEIVED JUN 11 2009 CITY OF ORONO City of Orono Pre-Application Meeting Form (This form is to be completed by a City Planner during your pre-application meeting .) For Office Use Only : Meeting Date/Time: City Planner: el t:, O,VV\ <; ·3 .o q / 4-PIYl PCDate_l -=------2-0_-o_c_/ __ _ What is the purpose of a pre-application meeting? Pre-application meetings aid the applicant in preparing a complete proposal , inform them of the procedures and requirements of the city code , and identify policies or regulations that create opportunities or problems for the proposal. PROPERTY INFORMATION : \ 2.i., C::.. i:1., I~ (}A. Site Address : :.::_;IJ,..._) L{)n Y\2) ---:P+ ~ Property Identification Number (PIN): Zoning District: ______ Size of Property : DE~CRIPTION OF REQUEST: ov'~erage Setback □ Side Yard Setback 0Hardcover 0 '-75 ' C3iiardcover 75 '-250 ' □ Rear Yard Setback □ Hardcover 250 '-500 ' □ Lot Coverage □ Lot Area □ Lot Width □ Other: o4e/Front Yard Setback □ Hardcover 500 '-1000 ' Applicant's Initials : HARDSHIP : Applicant and/or Owner has received the Hardship Documentation e--------.i-=--~ Form , understands it as it has been explained to them , and is aware that it must be Owner's ~ completed and submitted in conjunction with their formal variance application . Initials : W' Applicant 's ~ BILLS AND ESCROW: Applicant and/or Owner shall pay for consultant expenses Initials: ~ incurred in review of this application and/or additional staff time not covered in Owner's initial ap~lication fee , as well as provide an escrow in the amount of Initials : $ 'Z 6'0 D to guarantee payment of the above . OTHER INFORMATION: Applicant Signat Last Up date d : 5/11 /20 09 RECEIVE:D JUN 17 2009 ation will NOT be accepted without a pre-application meECrff 'a~~RONO City taff. Date: To: Orono City Council From: Pat and Kathy Halloran Re: Moseley's Proposed Addition RECEIVED JUL 7 4 2009 c,n, OF 0RONo We have briefly discussed with Sue and Steve Moseley their potential plan to expand their current dwelling. Apparently there are two scenarios for expanding their home. The first is to expand their existing footprint which would preserve many mature trees that provide beauty and privacy to the Moseley's and our property at 1645 Bohns Point Road. The other scenario described to us was destroying the existing structure and pushing any new house back away from the lake. The issue with this scenario is that apparently many of the existing mature trees will have to be removed. We would prefer to see the existing mature trees preserved if at all possible. Clearly, we can only speak to the physical beauty of the area~ we do not have any expertise in hardcover, engineering or other zoning concerns. Staff Note: The Hallorans own the house to the south, 16-1-5 Bohns Point Road. June 16, 2009 Steve Moseley 1635 Bohns Point Rd Wayzata MN, 55391 Re: Foundation Review 1635 Bohns Point Rd Wayzata, MN 55391 Energy I Water I Built-Environment Ulteig Project No. 09.01410 To Whom It May Concern: The purpose of this letter is to report the findings of a structural engineering review of the existing foundation of a single family residence to support the proposed remodel and addition of engineered attic trusses. ASSIGNMENT Ulteig Engineers has been retained to provide a structural engineering review of the existing foundation condition of a single family residence located at 1635 Bohns Point Road in Wayzata, MN as directed by the owner, Steve Moseley. BACKGROUND The homeowner is planning to tear off the existing first floor walls and roof and remodel the space with new attic trusses above with a bonus room built within the trusses. It is proposed that the entire existing foundation footprint of the building will have new trusses installed above. The City Building Department wishes to have an independent structural engineering review of the existing foundation condition to support the proposed remodel and addition. RECEIVED JUN 1 7 2009 CITY OF ORONO RECEIVED JUN I 7 2009 CITY OF ORONO www.ulteig.com ■ Tel 763-571-2500 • Fax 763-571-1168 • 5201 East River Road, Suite 308 ■ Minneapolis, MN 55421-1027 !00%EmployeeOW,ed · 3 41 Moseley Residence Ulteig Project No. 09.01410 June 16, 2009 Page2 OBSERVATIONS AND COMMENTS 1. The following information was obtained through a site visit by Nick Hanson, PE of Ulteig on Thursday, June 11, 2009 and architectural drawings submitted by Ben Nelson of NRDI dated June 8, 2009: a. The existing single family residence is a split-level structure with masonry foundation walls and wood framed superstructure. The residence is a walkout to the rear of the structure on the lake side. b. The two-stall, tuck-under garage has living quarters above at the front of the residence. Grade is approximately 3' -0" up from the slab at the rear garage wall. Grade is even with the slab to the right of the garage. The left wall is shared with the house. c. The existing foundation walls are constructed of 8" concrete masonry units around the perimeter of the garage and house. Maximum grade at the left side of the house appeared to be up 4 feet from the basement slab. The footing was not exposed or inspected. A majority of the interior foundation walls were covered with finished materials and not visible at the time of the site visit. d. A vertical crack approximately ¼" wide was noted at the rear garage foundation wall. The crack was reported to be in the location of a past expansion and appears minor in nature. e. A vertical crack approximately ¼" wide was noted at the right side of the garage foundation wall where no grade is present. The crack steps approximately two feet from the top of the wall down to grade. The crack appears minor in nature. f. The existing roof is built of rafter construction with different sloped roof pitches throughout the structure. g. Three existing steel beams span front to back and support the main level floor loadi ... ·tg. These beams cantilever out over the exterior foundation wall and support a porch at the main level. h. No geotechnical exploration has been performed or planned. Ulteig will use 1,500 pounds-per-square foot as an allowable soil bearing pressure unless noted otherwise. STRUCTURAL REVIEW 2. A structural review of the existing foundation wall condition as well as the future framing requirements of the proposed addition was completed. The existing foundation walls were found to be in adequate condition as described above to support the current Code requfred loading requirements. The preliminary, conceptual drawings submitted appear to induce RECEIVED JUN 1 7 2009 CITY OF ORONO 1 Moseley Residence Ulteig Project No. 09.01410 June 16, 2009 Page3 some point loads at various locations of the existing foundation walls. Once finalized architectural and final truss drawings are completed, these point loads should be evaluated and may require the existing walls to be solidly grouted in these areas. PROFESSIONAL OPINION 3. It is our professional engineering opmron that the existing foundation is structurally adequate to support the proposed addition noted above and will meet the requirements of the Code. GENERAL 4. The information, observations, and op1rnons stated in this report are based on the preliminary architectural drawings and the site visit noted above. The general contractor shall inspection the existing materials, observing all structural elements during construction to ensure the exposed and hidden materials are in adequate condition. If any structural element is found to be deteriorated or damaged, contact Ulteig immediately. 5. The observations and opinions expressed in this report were based on our professional engineering judgment and professional practice. 6. All work shall be done in accordance with this document, standard industry practices, and the requirements of the Code. 7. No other engineering was performed or requested for this project. It is recommended that Ulteig be consulted to assist in the point load analysis once final drawings have been completed. If you have any questions, please contact me. Sincerely, Ulteig Engineers Nick Hanson1 PE I hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly licensed professional engineer under the laws of the State of Mh,nes7!/Jµ; Nick Hanson Date: ___ """6 .... -1 .... 6...,-0'"'"9 ...... ____ _ Minnesota Registration No. 44774 RECEIVED JUN l 7 2009 CITY OF ORONO 4. HARDSHIP DOCUMENTATION FORM This form is a required submittal for ALL variance applicatlons. An application will not be considered complete or placed on any meeting agendas until this form is complete and submitted to the City. Minnesota State Statutes Section 394.27, Subdivision 7 requires that a hardship be demonstrated in order for a variance to be granted. The hardship must be unique to the property as variances run with the land and not the land owner. Personal and economic situations are not considered valid hardships. In order for an application to be heard by the Planning Commission and City Council a hardship having merit must be demonstrated. HOW 00 I PROVE A HARDSHIP? This form has 12 points outlining the basis City staff uses to determine if a hardship exists and how the variance will affect the surrounding community. To prove a hardship, address all the relevant points listed below and answer them as clearly as possible. Since you are requesting the code exception, you have the burden of proving that the variance is justified. The information the City receives is what is used in determining a denial or approval recommendation. If you leave something out it will not be considered. Please address each of these hardship criteria as they relate to the request, if they do not apply, write NIA in the space provided: 1. "The property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under conditions allowed by the official controls.v. Due to the lot size, configuration and driveway easement, it would be impossible to meet the aver setback line, surface square footage, and provide enough structural square footage for a lot of this value an• accommodate parking. 2. "The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his property not created by the landowner." This property is endowed with gorgeous mature trees creating a natural site barrier from the neighbors. A conforming structure would require removing 8 of the 11 one hundred plus year trees in that area of the lot. 3. "The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential ch.aracter of the locality." • It will not alter the character, if granted the new structure will conform to the character of the surrounding · architecture and neighborhood lakeshore ambiance created by the huge existing trees. 4. "Economic considerations alone shall not constitute an undue hardship if reasonable use for the property exists under the terms of the Zoning Chapter." -::it-U,_ bftn,J 5. "Undue hardship also includes, but is not limited to, inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Variances shall be granted for earth sheltered construction as defined in Minnesota Statutes, Section 116J.06, Subd. 2, when in harmony with this Chapter." t / .:,1 6. "The Board of Appeals and Adjustments or the Council may not permit as a variance any use that is not permitt d er this Chapter for property in the zone where the affected person's land is located." ---------------------------- The current assessed value is 1.6K (lot value). A standard ratio ofland value to structure is that the structure b, 3X the l'";d value (home value +land) + 4.8K. Sometimes with the lake lot prices the lot is ½ the total value. I; any even 1fthe lot value is $1_-6_ a good economic decision to build on this lot would be if you can build a total package (home +land) at a m1rumum of$3.2 If this is not possible, you investment· d3"4 Last Updated: 5/21/2009 RECEIVED 1 - 10 -JUN I 7 2009 7. "The Board or Council may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one-family dwelling as a two-family dwelling." , / . /1//;?- 8. "The special conditions applying to the structure or Jand in auestion are oeculiar to such property or immediately adjoining property." The neighbors would prefer the use of the current footprint preserving the staggered home locations for privacy and retention of the mature trees which screen their view of the house and maintains the current character of the land vs. a clear-cut barren lot. 9. "The conditions do not apply generally to other l~nc:I Qr $tnJctures in the d.istrictin whlcb §~gJand is located." The conditions are unique to the house due to the era in which it was built, the location of the footprint, and the trees. The existing home is a concrete block, flat roof contemporary home built in 1949. 1u. · ! tie granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property of the applicant." To build a home that more closely correlates to the assessed land value and one that is architecturally more consistent with the rest of the neighborhood. 11. "The granting of the proposed variance will not in any way impair health, safety, comfort, morals, or in any other r~ect be contrary to the intent of the Zoning Code." b/ft 12. ~The granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable hardship or difficulty." By granting our requested variances we will be preserving the unique character of the lot with the least disruptions to the neighbors and the ecology while blending in architecturally to the neighborhood. Hardship Statement Should you feel the hardship cannot fully be described in the above criteria, describe the unique hardship, practical difficulty or unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Ordinance requirements in the following lines (attach additional sheets if necessary}: Last Updated: 5/21/2009 -11 - RECEIVED JUN 1 7 2009 CITY OF ORONO Response to Hardship Variance Questions 1. Due to the lot size, configuration and driveway easement, it would be impossible to meet the average setback line, surface square footage, and provide enough structural square footage for a lot of this value And accommodate parking. 2. This property is endowed with gorgeous mature trees creating a natural site barrier from the neighbors. A conforming structure would require removing 8 of the 11 one hundred plus year trees in that area of the lot. 3. It will not alter the character, if granted the new structure will conform to the character of the surrounding architecture and neighborhood lakeshore ambiance created by the huge existing trees. 4. The current assessed value is 1.6K (lot value). A standard ratio of land value to structure is that the structure by 3X the land value (home value +land)+ 4.8K. Sometimes with the lake lot prices the lot is½ the total value. In any even if the lot value is $1.6 a good economic decision to build on this lot would be if you can build a total package (home +land) at a minimum of $3.2 If this is not possible, you investment is devalued. 5. NIA 6. NIA 7. NIA 8. The neighbors would prefer the use of the current footprint preserving the staggered home locations for privacy and retention of the mature trees which screen their view of the house and maintains the current character of the land vs. a clear-cut barren lot. 9. The conditions are unique to the house due to the era in which it was built, the location of the footprint, and the trees. The existing home is a concrete block, flat roof contemporary home built in 1949. 10. To build a home that more closely correlates to the assessed land value and one that is architecturally more consistent with the rest of the neighborhood. 11.NIA 12. By granting our requested variances we will be preserving the unique character of the lot with the least disruptions to the neighbors and the ecology while blending in architecturally to the neighborhood. RECEIVED JUN l 7 2009 CITY OF ORONO 341 s-rE PH FZt-,.l /VI 0'>El£'( '"PC. ,e:-~h1b1-r C.., 17-09 -ri?Acr B HAR~ER CALCULATION WORKSHEET e,L,S .. Nc?. 5'65' SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75' 75-250' 250-500' · 500-1000' EXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House \645 E><1$1INGr X = S.F.-~OVS'E Length Width X = S.F. X = S.F. B. Garage X -S.F. C. Driveway X = S.F. X = S.F. D. Sidewalk 164-8 $'fONt! WAL.I('. X = .F.--ANC> si:ePS X = \ 1. S.F."SiePPlr-fG; 510H€5 E. Patio/Deck X = 450 S.F.-S1"'oi--ll:. Pt1flD X = S.F. F. Landscape X = S.F. Underlain X = S.F. By Plastic X = S.F. G. Retaining bB S:DJN E X = S.F.-R6'T"AIN 11-/b,; Walls W4l--t.'$ H. Other X = s:F. TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE U3~ S.F. A TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE 91'15'" 9 I 9S" S.F. B A L3:, CZ + B X 100 = 'l.S.4~ % PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE ( \ A. House X = S.F. ~ Length Width X = S.F. X = S.F. "" B. Garage X = S.F. C. Driveway X = S.F. X = S.F. WALli.. TO D. Sidewalk. X = -ss-S.F.-· A6ANDONf0 s,oe: X = S.F. EN1aANct REMOVE'.0 E. Patio/Deck \l. 0 X ,o.o = -H'2..0 S.F. -fl~OPOS.£0 X = S.F. OfCll.. F. Landscape X = S.F. RE9itjfu X = S.F. X = S.F. JWN ~tlinl009 X = +2.0 8 F _ \>t<OP05£:0 Walls . . l<f-rAtN IO~ CITY OF ORONO 12.o+io -es ::: +ss-'-NJ:iL-l,... H. Other X s.F. ----NET GAr~, TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE ,J,q +BS'" 2..4-2.4 S.F. A TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE q1gs-$.F. B A "2..l+?..4 + B C\l95"" X 100 = 'Lb.¾ % S-rc'~l=N /Vf osAfy HARDCOVER CALg.u.L.a!ION WORKSHEET \\2AcT '5 12'. L. s; No; S-6 s-· SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75' ~ 250-500' ' 500-1000' EXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House B. Garage C. Driveway D. Sidewalk E. Patio/Deck F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic G. Retaining Walls H. Other Length TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X A 314-J + B PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House Length 7,0 B. Garage ' ____ _ C. Driveway D. Sidewalk. E. Patio/Deck F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic G. Retaining Walls H. Other ----- RECEIVED JUN 1 7 2009 CITY OF ORONO TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A 3497 X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X + B Width l0,7bQ Width 7 e b A-?,0 ' G.'ALt-+ 1747 -750 l0, 760 = = = = = = = = = = = = = 4 C") E;<1c;, tN~ ---=-....,-..:::'-__ S.F. -140IJ5£ _____ S.F. ______ S.F. ______ S.F. 3 ... BtAC.t(TO p _ _.'°""0"-7"'""2,...,._. --~:~: 0~11;E:wAy ------ STONE WN __ l,_,,bc....,:3~--S.F, -ANO $"r,IP5' ______ S.F. ______ S.F. _____ S.F. _____ S.F. _____ S.F. _____ S.F. 5 4 STONE ---=__,__ __ S.F. -ReTAINIH Vf~Ll..$" _____ s:F. 314.-J S.F. A 101 160 S.F. B x iOO = 54.1,2. % = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = PROPOSED _ _;_+_;,7__.4~4.___ s. F. -ADOl"f'I O i'f _____ S.F. _t...,___..4:..,:.B __ S.F. -?ROl'O.SfO Ft:>i:~CH _ ____ S.F. \ \lo ORt\JtV.JAY ----l-:-.:C_;:;___ ~:~: -. P:€,M Ovf'Q +4-5" S.F ... PROP05ED \1v'4L1'. _ _:__:.,.::c_. __ __ ..\-~lf-....__ __ S.F. -\I/Al..)( AOCEO _____ S.F. _____ S.F. _____ S.F. _____ S.F. _____ S.F. Pl<OPOSfD __ .J-._7_9.____ S.F. -{<ITAi NiH(:::,' WAU.. ---=2..::;;....:S'O==----S,F. -NE, LOSS _....::....3q.&f--'--"-/~_ S.F. A ___,l..,,_O,,_,. 1=t,-=-O __ S .F. B xiOO == 3'250 % Hennepin County Property M;:m Print Page 1 of 1 -p C. e. )(;,h e\., I r D Hennepin County Property Map -Tax Year: 2009 The data co ntained on this page is derived from a compilatio n of records and ma ps and may co ntain discrepancies that can only be disclosed by an accurate survey performed by a licensed 1and surveyor. The pe r imeter and area (squa re footage and acres) are approximat es an d may contain discrepa ncies. The information on this page sho uld be used for reference pu r poses only. Hen nepin County does not g uarantee the accu racy of mater ial here in conta in ed an d is not responsible fo r any m isuse or misrepresentation of this information o r its der ivatives. H Selected Parcel Data Parcel ID: Owner Name: Parcel Address: Property Type: Homestead : Area (sqft): Area (acres): A-T-B: Market Total: Tax Total: Date Printed: 7/16/2009 10:18:39 AM Current Parcel Date: 7/4/2009 Sale Price: Sale Date: Sale Code: http://gis .co .hennepin.mn. us/H CProperty Map/L ocator .aspx?P ID= 1 711723110006 7/16/2 009 l~ ~h~1)t--~n,e_ 2fYJJ. --Arc.h,-\tc,t, 8\\z.abeU't ~ -Pc e x.h1 bl 4-~ ~ ,, u ' € I • ) ~ g I --U) j i \ ~ ~ ~ ~ , I I • -~ ill LAKE 929.4 CONTOUR·········· LINE (930.8) -I I I I I ,g+ .. ······) -{9~,.s)./ I MINNETONKA rRv~rr Ar DAV (931.4) EXISTING HOUSE #1629 \ (937.1) \ \ \ (935.7) ----· ---PAVER DRIVEWAY ----93 4 ----------_.,,--------.---.. _1 __ _,.,,,,,,,..:::,.--~~-::::.:-::::.::-:::::-:--- BLACKiOP (:. ROADWAY ... _934-- EXISTING HOUSE #1645 BLACKTOP DRIVEWAY 94-2:------ HE] LEGAL DE Tract 8, I Registrar 0 (908.3: /910.8 '<$ \\J 2 % -1:• ~ 5 ~ ::r: 1\) 1~ ~z l .:i ~1 it\5 0 J ~t <{ ,_\\ 0 0 RECEIVED JUN 1 7 2009 CITY OF ORONO ... --------------- '.'II I 1,J \ . ()I ' ~ ! i-\, ' • I'\! ' -i .\.,,! I IS\ ! ~ ~!z -f-.. (ii 1~ ' I RECEIVED JUN 1 7 2009 CITY OF ORO'NO I l I I I. I I i ' l-----'----1-4---+, _-11 ·1 I I ~ ~ -'111) j \!) ¼ ~ N ~ <;) 341 ul i '-l J iii ;;, () J \ J 1" T 0 ~ ,'I \ ) " C) _, ~ I r " .. N ('I r -t E t' '4: ~ 0 Ill ~ ~ RECEIVED JUN 1 7 2009 CITY OF ORONO ~ \f\l .I 1 RECEIVEu: JUN 1 7 2009 C\TY OF ORONO "'li'' 1-b • 7 I i ~ i I 3 1 RECEIVED JUN 1 7 2009 CITY OF ORONO 1-'i? •:a,,1-----=-,,1--.b-";--1-,'-7,o I -.,. ! ' $;-,,: --._.)1 ,,, •,• . ; . '- I ' !I~ ~)" ~ ~ 2- () ~ ~ ~ '2: -:I'. () ~ 41 RECEIVED JUN 1 7 2009 CITY OF ORONO ' "- 1 I ltEl I . i I ! CJ ",,-ur---:: \,i ! -d,-'t~ ~!0~ ~-I I "-:::::. 4 RECEIVED JUN 1 7 2009 CITY OF ORONO \ I ii ii II ~-..;.-__ jb. =-= = = =-=JL _1_ /1"1 i"' 1 41 ~. RECEIVED . JUN 1 7 2009 ciTY OF ORONO •' i .•i• ~. ·-+· .~ .(:) I s1t I . I 3 1 June 22, 2009 Ms. Evelyn Turner Planner City of Orono Post Office Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Re: 1636 Bohns Point Road File No. 000139-09000-1 Plat No. 09-3417 Dear Evelyn: 2335 Highway 36 W St. Paul, MN 55113 Tel 651-636-4600 Fax 651-636-1311 www.bonestroo.com -#eonestroo We have reviewed the grading plan for the construction of a new house addition dated 6-6-09. The plan includes raising the existing driveway approximately 4.5 feet near the planned addition. We have the following comments with regards to engineering matters: • Raising the driveway will cause runoff to flow to the east to a low point in the driveway then to the north and on to the neighboring property. This runoff should be managed on-site to the lake. • Alternatively, since the runoff appears to fairly well managed on the neighboring property, the applicant may wish to consider obtaining a drainage easement from 1629 Bohns Point Road and proceed with the current grading plan. • The proposed retaining wall is over four feet in height near the proposed garage. An engineered design and details should be provided for all retaining walls greater than 4 feet in height, or for tiered walls whose horizontal separation is less than two times the height of the wall. • The applicant will need to provide a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan as required by Orono's Land Use Code Chapter 79, Section 79-7(c). If you have any questions please call me at (651) 604-4894. Yours very truly, Bonestroo r--------\_ )-_) ~ Darren Amundsen Cc: Tom Kellogg 4. 09-3417 STEPHEN & SUSAN MOSELEY, 1635 BOHNS POINT ROAD, VARIANCES, 7:33 P.M. -8:03 P.M. Susan Moseley, Applicant, was present. Curtis stated the applicants are requesting average lakeshore setback, lakeshore setback, and structural coverage variances to construct additions and add a half-story to the existing house. The request also (#09-3417 STEPHEN & SUSAN MOSELEY, 1635 BOHNS POINT ROAD, CONTINUED) includes hardcover variances to have 26.36 percent in the Oto 75 percent zone where 25.44 percent exists and no hardcover is allowed and to relocate and change the nature ofnonconforming hardcover in the 75-250 foot zone where 34.82 percent exists, 32.50 percentis proposed, and 25 percent is the maximum allowed. The existing first floor would be removed and replaced by a level with 9-foot ceilings and a gable roof with dormers. There would be living space under the roof Peak heightwould increase from about 13 feet to 32 feet, defined height from 13 feet to 30 feet. A 744 square foot addition would be placed on the east side of the house. It would contain three garage stalls with living space above. The level of the new garage floor would be halfway between the existingJ<?wer level and first floor level. The main entry would be relocated from the south wall to the east wall of the house and a 48 square foot entry porch added. A 120 square foot deck would also be added. The existing house and the proposed additions are forward of the average lakeshore setback. Most of the existing house is within the 7 5-foot lake setback. The proposed deck is within the lake setback. The additional story is partially within th~ lake setback. The proposed garage addition and entry porch are not in the lake setback. · · Hardcover in the 75-250 foot zone is currently 25.44 percent, which is all nonconforming. The proposed deck would add 120 square feet ofstructutathardcover. Removal of 55 square feet of non-structural hardcover is pr:oposed in cop.junction wit4 reJociation of the entry. Hardcover in the 75-250 foot zone is currently34.82 pervent. The entry porch ang approximately 60 square feet of the garage addition would convert square feet of non-hardcover to structural hardcover. The sidewalk to the entry porch would add 49 sqqarefeet ofnon-structu:ralhardcover. The remainder of the garage addition would be converted to non-hardcover to result in a 250 square foot reduction in hardcover in this zone. A variance is required to relocate or change the nature of non-conforming hardcover. The Planning Commission should consider issues relating structural coverage, lakeshore setback, average lakeshore setback, and hardcover. Planning Staff recommends the following: 1. Denial of the structural coverage variance. 2. Denial of the lakeshore and average lakeshore setback and hardcover variances to allow the deck. 3. Approval of a hardcover variance for the retaining wall in the 0-75 foot zone only to the extent necessary after shifting the third garage stall east six feet and increasing the slope of the ramp area as much as is reasonable. 4. Approval of the lakeshore and average lakeshore setback variances as well as the changes in the location and nature of nonconforming hardcover in the 75-250 foot zone to allow the garage, entry porch and half story additions. Staff further recommends the following conditions on the variances: (#09-3417 STEPHEN & SUSAN MOSELEY, 1635 BOHNS POINT ROAD, CONTINUED) 1. The significant trees on the property being protected by a covenant. 2. The new main level and half-story being constructed on the existing foundation and lower level walls. 3. No increase in storm water runoff rate to the prop~rty to the north. Moseley stated the house was built in 1949 and is one of the original houses on Bohns Point but needs to be upgraded. The property has a number of old trees that add to the character of the neighborhood. They would like to upgrade the house by adding an upper level and garage, which would also enhance the neighborhood. Moseley noted she did receive a letter from Planner Turner regarding the deck and a variance being required. Their architect is proposing to remove a portion of the driveway and a stoop area, which would reduce the hardcover by 293 square feet. Kempf noted there is a difference between structural coverage and hardcover. Curtis stated a property owner is allowed 15 percent structural coverage and that Planner Turner's analysis found that the deck was above a certain grade, which requires it to be considered as structural coverage and requires a variance. Moseley stated the deck does not access the kitchen and was constructed to help accommodate a fireplace that was added, Moseley.asked if the deck is added by the stoop, whether that would require a structural variance. Curtis asked if the deck would require a railing. Moseley indicated it would not. Curtis stated that type of deck would then not require a structural variance but would be counted as hardcover. Kempf asked the applicantto illustrate the location of the deck that she is now proposing. Moseley indicated the location of the deck on the overhead and stated the deck would have access off of the kitchen. Kempf stated that would eliminate the need for a structural coverage variance. Chair Kempf opened the public hearing at 7:38 p.m. There were no public comments regarding this application. Chair Kempf closed the public hearing at 7:38 p.m. (#09-3417 STEPHEN & SUSAN MOSELEY, 1635 BOHNS POINT ROAD, CONTINUED) Kempf noted that Staff has suggested shifting the garage, which would help. eliminate a portion of the retaining wall. Curtis stated if the garage is shifted forward, then portions of the retainingwall that extend lakeward could be removed. Moseley indicated their architect was attempting to break up the garage structure and that the. eight feet is not necessary. Curtis commented it would be aesthetically pleasing to break up the three garage stalls and that eight feet is a considerable break. Kempf noted the Planner's report states that pervious paving is not an option and asked what area that is referring to. Curtis stated she does not know what that is referring to exactly butthat it is possible it relates to the driveway. Kempf stated his feeling is that whenever a house is constructed within the 0-75 foot zone, every hardcover area should be converted to pervious whenever possible, and that he would make the recommendation that it be pervious material. Moseley asked what those materials .would be. Kempf indicated pervious materials would help abisorb some of the runoff and slow the rate of runoff into the lake; Kempf stated pervious pavers allow the water to soak into the ground rather than go into the lake. Kempf asked whether the applicant has any letters from their neighbors. Moseleysta,ted the neighbor to the north has been out of town and that their lot is fairly well secluded from that property. Moseley indicated if they are allowed to retain the trees, the adjoining properties should not be able to see the structure. Kempf asked whether the applicants are in favor of a covenant to protect the trees. Moseley indicated they are in favor of the covenant. Bennett asked whether an evaluation has been done on the health of the trees. Bennett recommended the trees be protected during construction and expressed concern that the trees could possibly die as a result of the construction. Moseley stated in her view the pine trees are not the more valuable trees and that the hardwood trees are the ones they would like to protect. Bennett indicated she is concerned about both the evergreens and the hardwood trees. (#09-3417 STEPHEN & SUSAN MOSELEY, 1635 BOHNS POINT ROAD, CONTINUED) Moseley stated by staying with the current foundation, they should not be disturbing the ground as much. Rice asked whether any hardcover was eliminated as part of this application. Moseley stated they are proposing to eliminate a portion of the driveway. The stone walkway is existing and serves as an access to the lake. Curtis illustrated the walkway on the overhead. Curtis asked whether they could walk on the grass to access the lake. Moseley indicated there is a definite difference in the elevation in thatarea and that the stone walkway consists of some one-foot wide stones set in the ground and is not a full sidewalk. Curtis illustrated some photographs of the property. Curtis stated some of the stairs are necessary to access the lake but that in her view a portion ofthe walkway may not be. Bennett stated she has some concern given the home being located entirely in the 0-75 foot zone and that she does not feel it is in the best interests of preservation of the lake to increase the hardcover in that zone. Bennett stated she would like to see as much as possible being done with this project to help with the runoff. Bennett stated in her view a three car garage is not a necessity given the close proximity to the lake. Kempf stated he takes into consideration the character of the neighborhood and that the existing house does not fit in with the rest of the neighborhood. Kempf stated the current house is basically a cabin. Bennett stated she does not feel that a two,-car garage and a smaller house would be a hardship. Bennett noted thatthe branches of the trees would also be in. the way of the construction and would need to be trimmed back. Moseley stated it may appear that way from the photographs but that the limbs do not hang over the hop:se, Moseley pointed out they are proposing a half-story. Given the value of the land, a three-car garage would not be considered a luxury. Leskinennoted the bulk of the addition is being constructed over current hardcover consisting of the driveway, and.that her impression of the design that is being proposed is well done in terms of upgrading the home to meet the other homes in the neighborhood without razing the existing house and starting over. Bennett stated in her opinion there could be other options considered. Rice indicated she is in agreement with the comments of Commissioner Bennett given the location of the house in the 0-75 foot zone. Curtis stated the addition would be located within the average lakeshore setback. (#09-3417 STEPHEN & SUSAN MOSELEY, 1635 BOHNS POINT ROAD, CONTINUED) Kempf commented he understands the concerns of Commissioners Bennett and Rice but that given the character of the rest of the neighborhood, this house is not excessive. Schoenzeit noted the addition is not located on the lakeside of the home and that in his view the proposed addition is reasonable given the neighborhood. Bennett stated given the mass of the proposed structure versus whafcurrently exists, changes could be made to bring the structure more into compliance. Kempf concurred the overhang is very close to the lakeshore. Kempf moved, Schoenzeit seconded, to recommend approyal of Application 309-3417; Stephen and Susan Moseley, 1635 Bohns Point Road, granting of a.variance to the average lakeshore setback and a variance to the lakeshore setback, subject to relocating the garage stall to eliminate a portion of the retaining wall, elimination of the lower deck, require perv'iou~ paving for all sidewalk and patio hardcover wherever possible, and to require a covenant be put intQ place to protect the existing trees. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 3, Bennett, Rice, and Kang opposed~ Kang indicated she was not in favor of the application given the close location of the structure to the lake and the negative impact it would have on the lake. Kang encouragedthe applicants to reduce the hardcover and structural coverage as much as possible, CITY of ORONO August 5, 2009 Stephen & Susan Moseley 1635 Sohns Point Road Wayzata , MN 55391 Street Address: 2750 Kelley Parkway Orono , MN 55356 SUBJECT: Zoning Application #09-3417 Municipal Offices Mailing Address : P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay , MN 55323 -0066 State law provides that Cities shall make decisions on zoning requests within 60 days from the date of application , and that this review period may be extended by notification to the applicant. Your application 's 60-day review period would end on August 21 , 2009 . As this application will not have a resolution by the City Council for final approval until after August 24 t h potentially , the C ity is exercising an extension . Therefore, this letter is your notification that the 60-day review period has been extended an additional 60 days to Oc t ober 19, 2009. Please call me at 952 .249.4627 should you have any questions . Sincerely, City of Orono "· Melanie Curtis Planning & Zoning Coordinator Telephone (952) 249-4600 • Fax (952) 249 -4616 www.ci.orono .mn.us To: Orono City Council From: Pat and Kathy Halloran Re: Moseley's Proposed Addition We have briefly discussed with Sue and Steve Moseley their potential plan to expand their current dwelling. Apparently there are two scenarios for expanding their home. The first is to expand their existing footprint which would preserve many mature trees that provide beauty and privacy to the Moseley's and our property at 1645 Bohns Point Road. The other scenario described to us was destroying the existing structure and pushing any new house back away from the lake. The issue with this scenario is that apparently many of the existing mature trees will have to be removed. We would prefer to see the existing mature trees preserved if at all possible. Clearly, we can only speak to the physical beauty of the area-we do not have any expertise in hardcover, engineering or other zoning concerns. Melanie Curtis From: Melanie Curtis Sent: To: Thursday , August 06 , 2009 4:22 PM 'ssmoseley@msn .com' Cc: Mark Gronberg; Evelyn M. Turner Subject: FW: 09-3417 1636 Sohns Point Road 8-6-09 Attachments: image001 .jpg; 09-3417 1636 Sohns Point Road 08 -06-09.pdf; 093417 .pdf Susan Attached are the City Engineer's comments regarding your most recent survey dated 7 /28/09. It contains the same comments as for the previous plan as these were not addressed in the revision. These comments must be addressed prior to final approva l by the City Council. Also attached is the Staff report for Monday night's City Council meeting. See you Monday at 7 pm. Let me know if you have any questions. Melanie Meurnie CitRTis I 1i 952.249.4627 I mcurtis@ci.orono.mn .us From: Amundsen, Darren T [mailto:Darren.Amundsen@bonestroo.com] Sent: Thursday, August 06, 2009 3:35 PM To: Melanie Curtis Cc: Tom Kellogg Subject: 09-3417 1636 Bohns Point Road 8-6-09 This is the same letter as last time. No comments were addressed unless they are working on a drainage easement/agreement with the neighbors. Darren Amundsen, PE Associate Tel 651-604-4894 Cell 651-775-5623 darren.amundsen@bonestroo.com #Bonestroo 2335 Highway 36 W St. Paul, MN 55113 Tel 651-636-4600 Fax 651-636-1311 www.bonestroo .com EFFECTIVE APRIL 27, NORTHERN ENVIRONMENTAL AND BONESTROO MERGED, offering comprehensive services in engineering, planning, and environmental science . 1 233 5 Highway 36 W St. Paul, MN 55113 Tel 651-636-4600 Fax 651-636-1311 www.bonestroo.com August 6, 2009 ,#eonestroo Ms. Melanie Curtis Planning and Zoning Coordinator City of Orono Post Office Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Re: 1636 Bohns Point Road File No. 000139-09000-1 Plat No. 09-3417 Dear Melanie: We have reviewed the grading plan for the construction of a new house addition dated 7-28-09. The plan includes raising the existing driveway approximately 4.5 feet near the planned addition. We have the following comments with regards to engineering matters: • Raising the driveway will cause runoff to flow to the east to a low point in the driveway then to the north and on to the neighboring property. This runoff should be managed on-site to the lake. • Alternatively, since the runoff appears to fairly well managed on the neighboring property, the applicant may wish to consider obtaining a drainage easement from 1629 Bohns Point Road and proceed with the current grading plan. • The proposed retaining wall is over four feet in height near the proposed garage. An engineered design and details should be provided for all retaining walls greater than 4 feet in height, or for tiered walls whose horizontal separation is less than two times the height of the wall. • The applicant will need to provide a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan as required by Orono's Land Use Code Chapter 79, Section 79-7(c). If you have any questions please call me at (651) 604-4894. Yours very truly, Bonestroo Darren Amundsen Cc: Tom Kellogg MlAIJffn it,--~(ll,,fu,{ v1,. ~ a,{ l [W · o.f1 ~ T7J Ll_ , -7r· -~ 4rruvf1,AIU ~ .·11 ¼fb~ ~ , 1 /JVV?_amG b'}t1 fNNL~, re,rn~ aw?/lUWKJ V • a -ptv&A-; Date Application Received: 6/17/09 0,t,t,,{~ ,-~ cltft ffM / vi{1;r~7-1~ ~ tS11 ~ Date Application Considered as Complete: 6/17/09 ~ .--~ f/f,_ tf'f,,W t(6 60-Day Review Period Expires: 8/16/09 U · To: Chair Kempf and Planning Commission ~e,ill~~ • µo ~{ :::::~ rvw~1 -1. Mf w ~ Evelyn Turner, City·Planner /teJ.uff / [fife!' ~~ ~ . From: Date: . ~~~ July 20, 2009 L{-.,-?J = (t/20 V-IA~ fJ.,A/1 ~ flJV' Subject: #09-3_417 Susan and Stephen Moseley, 163 siohns Point Road ,,_µ.. If[ ,.A· t-11 f t'~J -Variances . -~ .. Public Hearing ~ ~ ~ Zoning District: RR-1 B ( 1 acre) Lot Area: 0.46 acre Lot Width: 117 feet Application Summary: The owners request average lakeshore setback , lakeshore setback, and structural coverage variances to construct adaitions and add a half-story to the existing house. The request also includes hardcover variances to have 26.36 percent in the Oto 75 percent zone where 25.44 percent exists and no hardcover is allowed and to relocate and change the nature of nonconforming hardcover in the 75 to 250 foot zone where 34.82 percent exists, 32.50 percent is proposed, and 25 percent is the maximum allowed. Staff Recommendation: Planning Department Staff recommends approval of some but not all of the requests. Pertinent Zoning Ordinance Sections 78-1279 Lakeshore and Average Lakeshore Setback 78-1288 Hardcover List of Exhibits A. Application B. Hardship Documentation Form C. Submitted Hardcover Calculations D. AreaMap E. Photographs provided by Applicant F. Site/grading Plan G. Building Elevations and Plans H. City Engineer 's Review Background +~~ (}-#~. >J ~/,, ~-pl( ~~ V7kV100f f ~ The original house was constructed in 1949. It has two levels. The lower level is below grade but not far enough to be considered a basement. The second garage stall was added in 1967. In 1975 a hardcover and lake setback variance was granted (zoning application #8) to allow the garage stalls to be lengthened ( on the side away from the lake) by nine feet and an ........ 09-3417 July 20, 2009 " Page2 of5 additional story added over the expanded garages . (There was no average lakeshore setback ·requirement at that time.) The ho u se has vaulted ceilings with a shed roof (pitch 1: 12). Upper level sidewalls are 9 feet on one side and 7.5 feet on the other. The existing first floor would be removed and replaced by a level with 9 foot ceilings and a gable roof with dormers (pitch 12:16 and 12:12). There would be living space under the roof. Peak height would increase from about 13 feet to 32 feet, defined height from 13 feet to 30 feet. A 744 square foot addition would be placed on the east side of the house. It would contain three garage stalls with living space above. The level of the new garage floor .would be halfway between the existing lower level and first floor level. The main entry would be relocated from the south wall to the east wall of the house and a 48 square foot entry porch added. A 120 sq!-lare foot deck would also be added. LOT ANALYSIS WORSHEET Lot Area/Width· . Required Actual Lot Area 1 acre 0.46 acre Lot Width 140 feet 117 feet Setbacks: Required Existing Proposed Lake 75' 25' 25' Rear (East) 30' 100 ' 80 ' North Side 10 ' 19.8 10' South Side 10' 38 .1' 38 .1' Structural Coverage: Allowed Existing Proposed 2,993s.f. 15% 2,097s.f. 10 .51 % 3,009 s.f. 15 .09% Hardcover-. Hardcover Area in Zone Allowed Existing Proposed Zone Hardcover Hardcover* hardcover 0-75 9,195 s.f. 0 s.f. 2,339 s.f. 2,424 s.f. 0% 25.44 % 26.36% 75-250 10,760 s.f. 2 ,690 s.f. 3,747 s.f. 3,497 s.f. 25% 34.82% 32.50% Total for 19,955 s.f. 2,690 s.f 6,086 s.f. 5,921 s.f. Property Variances The existing house and the proposed additions are forward of the average lakeshore setback. Most of the existing house is within the 75 foot lake setback. The proposed deck is within _1 09-3417 July 2 0, 2009 Page 3 of 5 the lake setback. The additional story is partiall y within the lake setback. The proposed garage addition and entry porch are not in the lake setback. With the..additions structural coverage on the lot will be 12 square feet ore thari the permitted 15 percent. Hardcover in the 0 to 7 5 foot zone is currentl y 25 .44 percent or 9 ,195 square feet . All is non- conforming. The proposed dee would add 120 square feet of structural hardcover an a t e proposed retaining wall square feet. Removal of 55 square feet of non-structural hardcover is propo sed in conjunction with relocation of-t he entry. Hardcover in the 75 to 250 zone is currently 34.82 percent o 10 ,760 square feet. The entry porch ancl approximately 60 square feet of the garage addition would convert square feet of non-hardcover to struc ural hardcover. The sidewalk to the entry porch would add 49 square feet of non-structural hardcover. The remainder of the garage addition would convert non- structural hardcover to structural hardcover. Enough of the driveway would be converted to non-hardcover to result in a 250 square foot reduction in hardcover in this zone. A variance is required to relocate or change the nature of non-conforming hardco ver. Hardship Statement Applicant has completed the Hardship Documentation Form attached as Exhibit B , and should be asked for additional testimony regarding the application. Hardship Analysis In considering applications for variance, the Planning Commission shall consider the effect of the proposed variance upon the health, safety and welfare of the community, existing and anticipated traffic conditions, light and air, danger of fire, risk to the public safety, and the effect on· values of property in the surrounding area. The Planning Commission shall consider recommending approval for variances from the literal provisions of the Zoning Code in instances where their strict enforcement would cause undue hardship because of circumstances unique to the individual property under consideration, and shall recommend approval only when it is demonstrated that such actions will be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Orono Zoning Code. Issues for Consideration Stru ctural Covera ge Th e issue of structural coverage was discussed with Mrs. Moseley and the designer early in the application process. It appears the designer may have not understood the deck would be considered structural coverage . To Staff it appears that 12 square feet could be· easily be removed from the proposal. Lakeshore Setback Numerous variances have been granted to allow a nearly flat roof on a house within the lakeshore setback to be replaced with a pitched roof of house on the basis of the difficulty of maintaining a flat roof in Minnesota. Most have had some living space under the new roof. The Commission should consider if the additional vertical encroachment into the lakeshore setback will be compatible with the surrounding area and the lakeshore character. If the trees on the property are found to be a mitigating factor they could be protected by a covenant. ./ 09-3417 July 20, 2009 • Page 4 ofS Average Lakeshore Setback The application includes a letter from the property owner to the south indicating no objection to the proposed additions. The applicants indicate they are attempting to reach the owner of the property to the north. A row of evergreen trees extends nearly the entire length of the north line of the property. Some are on this property; some are on the property to the north. Hardcover The increase in hardcover in the O to 75 foot zone should be evaluated as a variance. The Commission should consider if there are alternatives to the proposed hardcover. The new retaining wall is necessary to create a ramp to access the door on the rear of the third garage stall. If the front offset of this garage stall were reduced the length of the wall within the Oto 75 could be reduced or possibly eliminated. The usual argument for setback variances for decks is adjacency to the kitchen. Stairways from decks often provide lakeshore access from the upper level. Based on the floor plan shown on the designer's site plan the proposed deck is remote from the kitchen. No stairs are proposed. Currently the cantilevered area appears to be a three-season porch. This area would be opened up to the house and converted to year round living space. It appears to Staff that the deck is proposed to replace some of the functions of this porch. The hardcover changes in the 75 to 150 foot zone can be evaluated on a more practical basis in light of statutory limitations. Use of permeable pavement is not feasible. Staff is exploring other mitigation options. The driveway and some adjacent areas currently drain north to a swale on the adjacent property. The proposal would change drainage patterns. Notwithstanding the variance / request, drainage calculations are required to demonstrate the rate of runoff to this property would not be increased. Are there any other issues or concerns with this application? Staff Recommendation Planning Staff recommends: A. Denial of the structural coverage variance. B. Denial of the lakeshore and average lakeshore setback and hardcover variances to allow the deck. C. Approval of a hardcover variance for the retaining wall in the retaining wall in the 0 to 75 foot zone only to the extent necessary after shifting the third garage stall east six feet and increasing the slope of the ramp area as much as is reasonable. (A revised plan with one-foot contours in this area will be required to demonstrate this.) D. Approval of the lakeshore and average lakeshore setback variances as well as the changes in the location and nature of non-conforming hardcover in the 75 to 250 foot zone to allow the garage, entry porch and half story additions. And Staff recommends the following conditions to the variances: 1. The significant trees on the property being protected by a covenant. 09-3417 July 20, 2009 Page 5 of5 2. The new main level and half-story being constructed on the existing foundation and lower level walls. 3. No increase in storm water runoff rate to the property to the north. jTEPH~I /VI 05;f l£( c-~7-09 T1?ACT t5 -2?-09 HAR~ER CALCULATION WORKSHEET e.L,S .. N<), % SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75' 75-250' 250-500' · 500-1000' EXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House \l z.o E'.><151INGr X = s.F.-µovs-e Length Width ~~jJ' -18 X = S F CA.€.()/ r FPI<. X = S' F. 2 ' t' F 1711~~ 1-/,( ,v ~ · · (t'n 8' ') B. Garage X -S.F. C. Driveway X = S.F. X = S.F. D. Sidewalk X = 164-SF 5iON[ WAL.Ii · · -A.NC> S"tt:P$ X = \ 1.. S.F,'-srr.rp(.)1i,.tGi 5'fONf5 E .. Patio/Deck X = 450 S.F.-S'l"0r--lf. Ptlfl D X = S.F. F. Landscape X = S.F. Underlain X = S.F. By Plastic X = S.F. G. Retaining bB $:fONf X = S.F.-R6tAINO·I~ Walls WAL-t.$' H. Other X = s:F. TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE 22 {;(; S.F. A TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE 9195"' C/195 S.F. B A 2266 + B X 100 = 21-.t4 % PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House X = S.F. Length Width X = S.F. X = S.F. 8. Garage ' X = S.F. C. Driveway X = S.F. X = S.F. WALIL TO D. Sidewalk. X = -5S S.F.-ABAt-.1t>cwEO SI X = S.F. ENJ~ANC!;'. RtMov;-:D E. Patio/Deck \l o X ,o. 0 = +1'15. S.F. -f>i<:OPQ;.ft) X = S.F. 01:ClL F. Landscape X = S.F. Underlain X = S.F. By Plastic X = S.F. G. Retaining X + .J6 pgoP0 5€'.0 = S.F.-!<~ :;t\ ~ Walls --r,; -/N.1, llSt-16-55 -+76' VV/J,l,l,.. -H. Other X = s.F. 'NET GAr r---1 TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE 2.266 1-7b 2342. S.F. A TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE C.)t q 5"" q1gs-S.F. B A 2.342. + B X 100 = ZS.47 % /V( OStl.EY c-17-09 ~Ac, R 7-Z ,?-o? /f/o rt',(,v&r ;) HARDCOVER CAL9,l.l.8JION WORKSHEET \(, L. S., No, S-6 S"' SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75' ~ 250-500' ' 500-1000' EXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House B. Garage C. Driveway D. Sidewalk E. Patio/Deck F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic G. Retaining Walls H. Other Length TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X A 314-J + B PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House length 7.Q 8. Garage ' _____ _ C. Driveway D. Sidewalk. E. Patio/Deck F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic G. Retaining Walls H. Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A '341:tJ . X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X + B Width (0.76O • Width 1741 --ZSO \0 760 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = 452 E;<1~, tN~ ____ .;;__ __ S.F.-HOIJ5E ______ S.F. ______ S.F. ______ S.F. 3 .. SLA~l<'.iOP _ __.=0'---1-'--'S~. __ S.F. 0·"11J ;:!:\vAw S.F. ,.. ,_ , I ------s TONE \/II 41..1£. __ lw,bc...,:3:___ __ s. F. -ANO $"\ £ P5 ______ S.F. ______ S.F. · _____ S.F. _____ S.F. _____ S.F. _____ S.F. ______ s:F. 374] S.F. A 101 i60 S.F. B X 100 = 54, QL. % = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = PROPOSED _...:..+_.;;7--14:4--1-_ S. F. -AD0ITI O,.,, _____ S.F. _+-'------14:-"'-8 __ S.F. -?R0l'O.Sf"O Po,ici-i _ _____ S.F. \ \io DRI\JtWAY __ -_L-,. ~-·-S · F · -Af,AI O v E'CI _________ S.F. +4-5" S.F~ ... PROP05£D \!v'l<-U =--=--=--+..:.....~ ..... lf~---_-_-_-S.F. -WAL)( AOCEO _____ S.F. _____ S.F. _____ S.F. _____ S.F. ______ S.F. PROPOSED __ -1-_l_Cf~-S.F. -t<ITAINIHG, VvAU.. ---=L=..:~O:ec____ S.F. -NE, LOS5 --=--394_,__7-"--_ S.F. A _l,_,,0+1 1={,=0"'------S.F. B x 100 = Tl.SO % CERTIFICATE OF MAILING STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) ss. ) CITY OF ORONO ) I, Monica Fadness, of the City of Orono, Hennepin County, Minnesota, do hereby certify that a Notice of Public Hearing concerning the matter of #09-3417, was mailed to the attached list of property owners. In Witness Whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and seal this 9th day of July, 2009. Monica Fadness CITY OF ORONO 2750 Kelley Parkway, P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Phone (952) 249-4600 Fax (952) 249-4616 NOTICE The Planning Commission will hold public hearings in the Orono Council Chambers at 2780 Kelley Parkway on Monday , July 20 , 2009, beginning at 6:30 p.m. on the matter of reviewing the following land use applications : 09-3407 Vitali Bychkovski on behalf of Elena Ovsyannikova, 3409 Eastlake Street, LR-1A zoning district , requests creek setback , side yard setback and hardcover variances and a conditional use permit for filling within the floodplain in order to construct a new detached garage on the property . The new garage is proposed to be constructed 3' from the side lot line where a 1 0' setback is normally required, a 40 ' setback from the creek where a 75 ' setback is normally required. Hardcover is proposed to decrease within the 0-75 ' setback from 63 .25% to 50 .16% where 0% is normally allowed and is proposed to decrease by 7 square feet within the 75-250' resulting in 49 .16% where 49 .70% currently exists and 25% is normally allowed . 09-3411 David Fox , on behalf of William Fox Trustee , 1095 Ferndale Road West, LR-1A zoning district , requests a conditional use permit for filling within the 100 year floodplain , and a number of variances in order to construct a new residence on the property. The following variances are requested: an average lakeshore setback variance to locate the house ahead of the average lakeshore setback; hardcover variances -24% in the 0-75 ' zone where 0 is allowed and 27.5% currently exists and 14 .8% within the 75 '-250 ' zone where 25% is normally allowed and 14.4% currently exists ; and a lake setback variance in order to construct the new residence as close as 32 ' from the OHWL where a 75 ' setback is normally required . Additionally, a CUP to fill a portion of the floodplain where the house will be constructed is also requested. 09-3414 Patrick and Kathleen Middleton, 720 Tonkawa Road, LR-1 B zoning district, request an average lakeshore setback and a side setback variance to construct a second story on the existing residence as .well as a structural coverage variance to add an entry porch. 09-3416 Loren V . Butterfield , 3925 Watertown Road , RR-1A zoning district , requests a preliminary plat in order to subdivide Lot 1, Block 1, Babysbreath Heights to create one additional buildable 5 acre lot. 09-3417 Susan and Stephen Moseley, 1635 Sohns Point Road, RR-1 B zoning district, request structural coverage , lakeshore s.etback, and avecag.e_ lakes.hare s.etback_ \ladances to _ construct a garage addition and add a half-story to the existing house . The request also includes hardcover variances to have 26 .36 percent in the Oto 75 percent zone where 25.44 percent exists and no hardcover is allowed and to have 32 .50 percent hardcover in the 75 to 250 zone where 34.82 percent exists and 25 percent is the maximum allowed. 09-3418 Dennis Batty on behalf of Brook Investment Group LLC , 3421 to 3435 Shoreline Drive, B-1 zoning district , requests commercial site plan approval to enlarge the existing commercial building with additions to each end. The proposal includes structural coverage , hardcover, parking lot setback and building setback variances as well as a variance to the number of required parking spaces . All persons wishing to be heard are encouraged to attend this meeting. This is not a final agenda and is subject to change prior to the hearing. Written comments are accepted and should be submitted to the City of Orono by July 14, 2009 if possible. Interested persons may review the application at City offices. For an appointment, please call (952) 249-4620. To be published in the Sun Sailor on July 10, 2009 Posted at: Orono City Offices Crystal Bay Post Office Long Lake Post Office Navarre Post Office City of Orono By: Planning Commission Melanie Curtis, Planning Coordinator 2 2335 Highway 36 W St. Paul, MN 55113 Tel 651-636-4600 Fax 651-636-1311 www.bonestroo.com June 22, 2009 Ms. Evelyn Turner Planner City of Orono Post Office Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Re: 1636 Bohns Point Road File No. 000139-09000-1 Plat No. 09-3417 Dear Evelyn: ,#eonestroo We have reviewed the grading plan for the construction of a new house addition dated 6-6-09. The plan includes raising the existing driveway approximately 4.5 feet near the planned addition. We have the following comments with regards to engineering matters: • Raising the driveway will cause runoff to flow to the east to a low point in the driveway then to the north and on to the neighboring property. This runoff should be managed on-site to the lake. • Alternatively, since the runoff appears to fairly well managed on the neighboring property, the applicant may wish to consider obtaining a drainage easement from 1629 Bohns Point Road and proceed with the current grading plan. • The proposed retaining wall is over four feet in height near the proposed garage. An engineered design and details should be provided for all retaining walls greater than 4 feet in height, or for tiered walls whose horizontal separation is less than two times the height of the wall. • The applicant will need to provide a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan as required by Orono's Land Use Code Chapter 79, Section 79-7(c). If you have any questions please call me at (651) 604-4894. Yours very truly, Bonestroo Darren Amundsen Cc: Tom Kellogg CITY of ORONO Susan and Stephen Moseley 1635 Bohns Point Road Wayzata MN 55391 Street Address: 2750 Kelley Parkway Orono, MN 55356 SUBJECT: Zoning Application #09-3417 Municipal Offices Mailing Address: P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323-0066 The City of Orono is required to notify you within fifteen (15) business days as to the status of your application for a Variances for property located at 1635 Bohns Point Road. Our preliminary review indicates that your application is complete. However, you may wish to submit statements from the adjacent property owners confirming their preference for your proposed additions instead of a new house constructed behind the average lakeshore setback. If these statements are received before July 14 they would be included in the Planning Commission packet. The application now includes a structural coverage variance since the top of the deck railing will be more than six feet above existing grade. This brings structural coverage to 3,009 square feet or 15.09 percent. Your grading has been sent to the City Engineer at Bonestroo for review. You and your surveyor will receive a copy of the Engineer's comments by email or fax. If revisions are required they should not be submitted until after the Planning Commission meeting so any changes the Commission requests· can be incorporated into the revision. The revised plan must be submitted at least two weeks before the City Council meeting. Your application is scheduled to be heard by the Planning Commission on Monday, July 20, 2009. The meeting begins at 6:00 p.m. Please make sure that you or your representative is available to attend the meeting. You will be mailed a staff report regarding your application prior to the meeting date agenda. It will also be posted on the City's website (www.ci.orono.mn.us) on Friday afternoon before the meeting. Your application is tentatively scheduled to be considered by the City Council on August 10, 2009. Remember to post the public notice sign ten to 14 days before the Planning Commission meeting. Please call me at 952-249-4623 should you have any questions. Telephone (952) 249-4600 • Fax (952) 249-4616 www.ci.orono.mn.us Hennepin County Property M ::in Print Page 1 of 1 Hennepin County Property Map -Tax Year: 2009 The data contained on this page is de ri ved from a compilation of records and maps and may contain discrepancies that can only be disclosed by an accu rate survey performed by a licensed land surveyor. Th e perimeter and area (squa re footage and acres) are a pproximates and may contain discrepancies. The information on this page should be used for refe ren ce pu rposes onl y . Hen nepin County does not guaran tee the accuracy of material herein co ntained and is not responsible for any misuse or misrepresentation of this information o r its derivatives. ~------------------------::::::::========---------------_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_--_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_~ H Selected Parcel Data Parcel ID: 17-117-23-11-0006 Owner Name: S P MOSELEY & S P MOSELEY Parcel Address: 1635 BOHNS POINT RD, ORONO, MN 55391 Property Type: RESIDENTIAL LAK Homestead: HOMESTEAD Area (sqft): 20630 Area (acres): 0.47 A-T-B: TORRENS Market Total: $1,651,000.00 Tax Total: $16,759.84 1629 -------------------~ -----38 -------------\- -------\\ 38 Date Printed: 6/3/2009 3:58:36 PM Current Parcel Date: 5/4/2009 Sale Price: $391,125.00 Sale Date: 08/1993 Sale Code: WARRANTY DEED \ I, \ \\ I http ://gis.co '.hennepin.mn.us/HCPropertyMap/Locator.aspx?PID=l 711723110006 6/3/2009 Date: To: From: June 18, 2009 Tom Kellogg City of Orono 2750 Kelley Parkway P.O .. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 (952) 249-4600 Fax: (952) 249-4616 Evelyn Turner 952-249-4623 eturner@ci.orono.mn.us Subject: Review of Grading Plan 09-3417 Susan and Stephen Moseley 1636 Bohns Point Road -Variances for Garage and Half-Story Addition Please review the enclosed grading plan. The information about grades for the existing driveway is scanty. I suspect it drains north to the swale on the adjacent property. Also enclosed are photographs of the existing house and plans for the addition. Would this be an appropriate location to use permeable pavement for the driveway? This is scheduled for the July 20 Planning Commission meeting. Please respond by June 29. H Hennepin County Mailing Label Map I Provided By: Taxpayer Services Department For more information contact : Hennepin County GIS Divi sion 300 South 6th Street Minneapolis, MN 55487 gis . info@co. hennepin .mn . us Map Comments : 1-Type Comments Here - ;' ----------------...._ __ ..... _ _,>·······------ ·, ' ', ........ ____ ------~---· ------ SJ n .,·········---..,.-·· ...... -· ... __ . .-· Print Date: 6/8/2009 Map Scale: 1" = 128' Buffer Size: 150 feet __ .. / .1 -7 _] Map Legend : ,□ Wat.er Parle Parcel Buffer Region Selected Parcels Ill 1 1 (d) -Major Roads Minor Roads J I -_ j RECEIVED JUN 1 '! 2009 CITY OF ORONO #3417 LAND USE APPLICA.I!QN ESCRq~ Ap_aEEMENT Application #_O__.'i_ -_,:-!:>_::f.,_1_~ _.__ /_ AGREEMENT made this _jJ__ day of l \ H\..9-, 20.cB_, by and between the CITY OF ORONO, a Minnesota municipal corporation ("City") and ___________________ _ Skfl:Wn '+-swaV'i moseJ.-eLt / [a corporation -optiona~ ("Owner"). Recitals 1. Owner has filed Zoning Application # c,q -3 'i 17 formally requesting the City to review plans for 9 r-nreq .e., And 1 ~ ~ ~d 11.t (I"\ located at I L;, 3 S"' ________l'--. v::L:_ B:> 1 v\ \-Ko Aci the "Subject Property") as more fully shown and described on Exhibit "A" attached hereto. 2. Owner requests the City to review said plans which requires City approval including ____ _ V ~ I r-wtte...S 3. The City is willing to commence its review of the application and incur costs associated with said review only if the Owner establishes an escrow to ensure reimbursement to the City of its costs. NOW THEREFORE, THE PARTIES AGREE AS FOLLOWS: 1. DEPOSIT OF ESCROW FUNDS. Contemporaneously with the execution of this Escrow Agreement, the Owner shall deposit $ "2.l soO with the City. All accrued interest, if any, shall be paid to the City to reimburse the City for its cost in administering the escrow account. 2. PURPOSE OF ESCROW. The purpose of the escrow is to guarantee reimbursement to the City for all out-of-pocket costs the City has incurred (including planning, engineering, or legal consultant review) or will incur in meeting with the ~wner, ~vie~g the plans, and preparing agenda packet material for City Council review of application # C? -_s.4 l_j_ . Eligible expenses shall be consistent with expenses the Owner would be responsible for under a zoning and subdivision application. 3. MONTHLY BILLING. As the City receives consultant bills for incurred costs, the City will in turn send a bill to the Owner. Owner shall be responsible for payment to the City within 30 days of the Owner's receipt of bill. 4. DISBURSEMENT FROM ESCROW ACCOUNT. In the event that the Owner does not make payment to the City within the timeframe outlined in #3 above, the City may draw from the escrow account without further approval of the Owner to reimburse the City for eligible expenses the City has incurred. The City shall notify the Owner of such draw and the nature of the expense for which the reimbursement is being made. If the Escrow amount falls below 75% of the original escrow amount the Owner shall deposit additional sums as directed by the City, or the City shall discontinue all review. 5. CLOSING ESCROW. The Balance on deposit in the escrow, if any, shall be returned to the Owner when the review has been completed. 6. CERTIFY UNPAID CHARGES. If the project is abandoned by Owner, or if the eligible expenses incurred by the City exceed the amount in escrow, the City shall have the right to certify the unpaid balance to the subject property pursuant to Minn. Stat. §§ 415.01 and 366.012. CITY: CITY OF ORONO By G2iB ~ Its: fi ,..,u,,...,~ ~ r4,..~ ... Its: _____________ _ RECEIVED JUN l 7 2009 341 EXHIBIT "A" LEGAL DESCRIPTION Trtl(_1 B KLS 5ioCS- HU1!1Vf1V\ Co rll I'\ RECEIVED JUN 1 7 2009 CITY OF ORONO #341 RUN DATE: 6/8/2009· 38 17-11 7-23 11 0002 G K NEWMAN JR & M M C NEWMAN 1655 SOHNS POfNT RD GRAYDON K NEWMAN JR MICHELLE M C NEWMAN 1655 SOHNS POINT RD ORONO MN 5539 1 38 17-117-23 11 0006 S P MOSELEY & S P MOSELEY 163 5 SOHNS POINT RD STEPHEN P & SUSAN P MOSELEY 163 5 SOHNS POfNT RD WAYZATAMN 5539 1 38 17-11 7-23 11 00 11 G K NEWMAN JR & M M C NEWMAN 38 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED GRAYDON K NEWMAN JR MJCHELLE M C NEWMAN 1655 SOHNS POfNT RD ORONO MN 5539 1 HENNEPIN L •~J NTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM (PROPERTY O',, •• t.RS LIST) 38 17-11 7-23 11 0003 R L ROVICK & CJ ROVJCK 1625 SOHNS POINT RD ROGER L & CAROL J RO VICK 1625 SOHNS POfNT RD WAY ZATA MN 55391 38 17-117-23 11 0007 P J & K A HALLORAN TRUSTEES 1645 SOHNS POfNT RD PATRICK & KATHLEEN HALLORAN 1645 SOHNS POfNT RD WAYZATA MN 5539 1 38 17-11 7-23 11 00 12 G K NEWMAN JR & M M C NEWMAN 38 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED GRAYDON K NEWMAN JR MJCHELLE MC NEWMAN 1655 SOHNS POINT RD ORONO MN 5539 1 TATION OF INFORMATIO N 38 17-117-23 11 0005 RANDALL A GREEN 1629 SOHNS POfNT RD RANDALL A GREEN 1629 BONHS POfNT RD ORONO MN 5539 1 38 17-11 7-23 11 0008 G K NEWMAN JR & M M C NEWMAN 38 ADDRESS UNASS IGNED GRAYDON K NEWMAN JR MICHELLE MC NEWMAN 1655 BOHNS POfNT RD ORONO MN 5539 1 PAGE: I RECEIVED JUN I 7 20 09 CITY OF ORONO #3417